ArticlemAbs
A competitive binding-mass spectrometry strategy for high-throughput evaluation of potential critical quality attributes of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.
Article in mAbs. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-Translational Modifications in Protein Therapeutics: Importance and Analytical Tools.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Assessing the Impact of CDR Deamidation and Isomerization on mAb Target Binding Using Affinity-Resolved 2D-SEC-SCX-MS Analysis.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2025Article
- Developments in Ion Exchange Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry for the Characterization of Intact Proteins and Proteoforms.Journal of separation science · 2025Review
- Analytical strategies for identification and quantitation of heterodimers in co-formulated monoclonal antibody cocktails by native SEC-MS.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Affinity-Resolved Size Exclusion Chromatography Coupled to Mass Spectrometry: A Novel Tool to Study the Attribute-and-Function Relationship in Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Addressing challenging impurities in fusion proteins: A comprehensive review and cost-effective strategy for HCP and low molecular weight species control.Biotechnology progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have a propensity to host a large number of chemical and enzymatical modifications that need to be properly assessed for their potential impact on target binding. Traditional strategies of assessing the criticality of these attributes often involve a laborious and low-throughput variant enrichment step prior to binding affinity measurement. Here, we developed a novel competitive binding-based enrichment strategy followed by mass spectrometry analysis (namely, competitive binding-MS) to achieve high-throughput evaluation of potential critical quality attributes in therapeutic mAbs. Leveraging the differences in target binding capability under competitive binding conditions, the criticality of multiple mAb attributes can be simultaneously evaluated by quantitative mass spectrometry analysis. The utility of this new workflow was demonstrated in three mAb case studies, where different post-translational modifications occurring within the complementarity-determining regions were successfully interrogated for their impact on antigen binding. As this workflow does not require prior enrichment (e.g., by forced degradation or liquid chromatography fractionation) of the variants, it is particularly valuable during the mAb candidate developability assessment, where fast turn-around time is highly desired to assist candidate selection.
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.