ArticleThe AAPS journal2022
When to Extend Monitoring of Anti-drug Antibodies for High-risk Biotherapeutics in Clinical Trials: an Opinion from the European Immunogenicity Platform.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Breast Cancer: Navigating Innovations, Overcoming Resistance, and Shaping Future Therapies.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Immunogenicity risk assessment for tailored mitigation and monitoring of biotherapeutics during development: recommendations from the European Immunogenicity Platform.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Development and implementation of a gyrolab-based generic anti-drug antibody assay for antibody-drug conjugates in cynomolgus monkey studies.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 16 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The determination of a tailored anti-drug antibody (ADA) testing strategy is based on the immunogenicity risk assessment to allow a correlation of ADAs with changes to pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety. The clinical impact of ADA formation refines the immunogenicity risk assessment and defines appropriate risk mitigation strategies. Health agencies request for high-risk biotherapeutics to extend ADA monitoring for patients that developed an ADA response to the drug until ADAs return to baseline levels. However, there is no common understanding in which cases an extension of ADA follow-up sampling beyond the end of study (EOS) defined in the clinical study protocol is required. Here, the Immunogenicity Strategy Working Group of the European Immunogenicity Platform (EIP) provides recommendations on requirements for an extension of ADA follow-up sampling in clinical studies where there is a high risk of serious consequences from ADAs. The importance of ADA evaluation during a treatment-free period is recognized but the decision whether to extend ADA monitoring at a predefined EOS should be based on evaluation of ADA data in the context of corresponding clinical signals. If the clinical data set shows that safety consequences are minor, mitigated, or resolved, further ADA monitoring may not be required despite potentially detectable ADAs above baseline. Extended ADA monitoring should be centered on individual patient benefit.
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.