ReviewFrontiers in immunology2020
Specificity of the T Cell Response to Protein Biopharmaceuticals.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical MAPPs: a personalized healthcare-driven assay for the direct identification of potential T cell epitopes in patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Article
- Beyond Efficacy: Ensuring Safety in Peptide Therapeutics through Immunogenicity Assessment.Journal of peptide science : an official publication of the European Peptide Society · 2025Review
- A Phase-Appropriate Risk Assessment Strategy in Support of the Safety of Peptide and Oligonucleotide-Related Impurities.The AAPS journal · 2025Article
- Anti-Drug Antibody Response to Therapeutic Antibodies and Potential Mitigation Strategies.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- T cell assays for non-clinical immunogenicity risk assessment: best practices recommended by the European Immunogenicity Platform.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- The TNFα-binding domain of the therapeutic antibody adalimumab elicits CD4 T-cell responses in rheumatoid arthritis patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Assessment of antigen-specific T cell recall responses in non-human primates using a composite AIM assay.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- The self-reactive FVIII T cell repertoire in healthy individuals relies on a short set of epitopes and public clonotypes.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Untoward immune effects of modern medication.Journal of biomedical research · 2023Article
- Tuning the Envelope Structure of Enzyme Nanoreactors for In Vivo Detoxification of Organophosphates.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Expanding the MAPPs Assay to Accommodate MHC-II Pan Receptors for Improved Predictability of Potential T Cell Epitopes.Biology · 2023Article
- Conformational Stability and Denaturation Processes of Proteins Investigated by Electrophoresis under Extreme Conditions.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Pegylation Reduces the Uptake of Certolizumab Pegol by Dendritic Cells and Epitope Presentation to T-Cells.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Drug and Chemical Allergy: A Role for a Specific Naive T-Cell Repertoire?Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The anti-drug antibody (ADA) response is an undesired humoral response raised against protein biopharmaceuticals (BPs) which can dramatically disturb their therapeutic properties. One particularity of the ADA response resides in the nature of the immunogens, which are usually human(ized) proteins and are therefore expected to be tolerated. CD4 T cells initiate, maintain and regulate the ADA response and are therefore key players of this immune response. Over the last decade, advances have been made in characterizing the T cell responses developed by patients treated with BPs. Epitope specificity and phenotypes of BP-specific T cells have been reported and highlight the effector and regulatory roles of T cells in the ADA response. BP-specific T cell responses are assessed in healthy subjects to anticipate the immunogenicity of BP prior to their testing in clinical trials. Immunogenicity prediction, also called preclinical immunogenicity assessment, aims at identifying immunogenic BPs and immunogenic BP sequences before any BP injection in humans. All of the approaches that have been developed to date rely on the detection of BP-specific T cells in donors who have never been exposed to BPs. The number of BP-specific T cells circulating in the blood of these donors is therefore limited. T cell assays using cells collected from healthy donors might reveal the weak tolerance induced by BPs, whose endogenous form is expressed at a low level. These BPs have a complete human sequence, but the level of their endogenous form appears insufficient to promote the negative selection of autoreactive T cell clones. Multiple T cell epitopes have also been identified in therapeutic antibodies and some other BPs. The pattern of identified T cell epitopes differs across the antibodies, notwithstanding their humanized, human or chimeric nature. However, in all antibodies, the non-germline amino acid sequences mainly found in the CDRs appear to be the main driver of immunogenicity, provided they can be presented by HLA class II molecules. Considering the fact that the BP field is expanding to include new formats and gene and cell therapies, we face new challenges in understanding and mastering the immunogenicity of new biological products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.