Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38087293›Full record

ReviewJournal of hematology & oncology2023

Considerations for the design of antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) for clinical development: lessons learned.

Alfonso López de Sá, Cristina Díaz-Tejeiro, Elisa Poyatos-Racionero, Cristina Nieto-Jiménez, Lucía Paniagua-Herranz, Adrián Sanvicente, Emiliano Calvo, Pedro Pérez-Segura, Víctor Moreno, Francisco Moris and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. [Clinical Progress and Prospects of Antibody-drug Conjugates in Advanced NSCLC].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Antibody-drug conjugate engineering: from design to efficacy and safety.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2025
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Alfonso López de Sá *Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), and CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain.
Cristina Díaz-Tejeiro *Experimental Therapeutics in Cancer Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Madrid, Spain.
Elisa Poyatos-RacioneroCancerappy S.L., 48950, Erandio, Biscay, Spain.
Cristina Nieto-JiménezExperimental Therapeutics in Cancer Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Madrid, Spain.
Lucía Paniagua-HerranzExperimental Therapeutics in Cancer Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Madrid, Spain.
Adrián SanvicenteExperimental Therapeutics in Cancer Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), Madrid, Spain.
Emiliano CalvoSTART Madrid-HM Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal (CIOCC), Early Phase Program, HM Sanchinarro University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Pedro Pérez-SeguraMedical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), and CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain.
Víctor MorenoSTART Madrid-Fundación Jiménez Díaz (FJD) Early Phase Program, Fundación Jiménez Díaz Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Francisco MorisCancerappy S.L., 48950, Erandio, Biscay, Spain.
Alberto OcanaMedical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria San Carlos (IdISSC), and CIBERONC, Madrid, Spain. alberto.ocana@salud.madrid.org.

Funding

CRIS Cancer Foundation AOF.C01CRISInstituto de Salud Carlos III PI19/00808
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have emerged as a novel therapeutic strategy that has successfully reached patient treatment in different clinical scenarios. ADCs are formed by an antibody against a specific tumor-associated antigen (TAA), a cytotoxic payload, and a chemical linker that binds both. To this regard, most efforts have been focused on target identification, antibody design and linker optimization, but other relevant aspects for clinical development have not received the necessary attention. In this article using data from approved ADCs, we evaluated all characteristics of these agents, including payload physicochemical properties, in vitro potency, drug antibody ratio (DAR), exposure-response relationships, and clinical development strategies. We suggest that compounds with best options for clinical development include those with optimal payload physicochemical properties and cleavable linkers that would lead to a bystander effect. These modalities can facilitate the development of ADCs in indications with low expression of the TAA. Early clinical development strategies including changes in the schedule of administration with more frequent doses are also discussed in the context of an efficient strategy. In conclusion, we highlight relevant aspects that are needed for the optimal development of ADCs in cancer, proposing options for improvement.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsImmunoconjugatesNeoplasmsAntibodiesHumansAntibodiesAntineoplastic AgentsImmunoconjugates

Identifiers

PMID38087293
PMCPMC10717055

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.