Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36136544›Full record

ReviewToxins2022

Antibodies as Snakebite Antivenoms: Past and Future.

Wilmar Dias da Silva, Sonia A De Andrade, Ângela Alice Amadeu Megale, Daniel Alexandre De Souza, Osvaldo Augusto Sant'Anna, Fábio Carlos Magnoli, Felipe Raimondi Guidolin, Kemily Stephanie Godoi, Lucas Yuri Saladini, Patrick Jack Spencer and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxins, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Conserved Enzymatic Peptides inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wilmar Dias da SilvaImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Sonia A De AndradeBiopharmaceuticals Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Ângela Alice Amadeu MegaleImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2593-4363
Daniel Alexandre De SouzaBiopharmaceuticals Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Osvaldo Augusto Sant'AnnaImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Fábio Carlos MagnoliImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Felipe Raimondi GuidolinImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Kemily Stephanie GodoiImmuchemistry Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Lucas Yuri SaladiniLaboratory of Structure and Function of Biomolecules, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.
Patrick Jack SpencerNuclear and Energy Research Institute, São Paulo 05508-000, Brazil.
Fernanda Calheta Vieira PortaroLaboratory of Structure and Function of Biomolecules, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9582-4699
Instituto Butantan · BRNuclear Engineering Institute · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Snakebite envenomation is considered a neglected tropical disease, affecting tens of thousands of people each year. The recommended treatment is the use of antivenom, which is composed of immunoglobulins or immunoglobulin fragments obtained from the plasma of animals hyperimmunized with one (monospecific) or several (polyspecific) venoms. In this review, the efforts made in the improvement of the already available antivenoms and the development of new antivenoms, focusing on snakes of medical importance from sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, are described. Some antivenoms currently used are composed of whole IgGs, whereas others use F(ab')2 fragments. The classic methods of attaining snake antivenoms are presented, in addition to new strategies to improve their effectiveness. Punctual changes in immunization protocols, in addition to the use of cross-reactivity between venoms from different snakes for the manufacture of more potent and widely used antivenoms, are presented. It is known that venoms are a complex mixture of components; however, advances in the field of antivenoms have shown that there are key toxins that, if effectively blocked, are capable of reversing the condition of in vivo envenomation. These studies provide an opportunity for the use of monoclonal antibodies in the development of new-generation antivenoms. Thus, monoclonal antibodies and their fragments are described as a possible alternative for the production of antivenoms, regardless of the venom. This review also highlights the challenges associated with their development.

Indexed as

AntiveninsSnake BitesAnimalsAntibodies, MonoclonalHumansImmunoglobulin FragmentsSnakesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntiveninsImmunoglobulin Fragmentsantibodiesantivenomantivenom designneglected tropical diseasesnake bitesvenom

Identifiers

PMID36136544
PMCPMC9503307
OpenAlexW4294234214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.