ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2024
A First-in-Human Randomized Study to Assess the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Neutralization Profile of Two Investigational Long-Acting Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibodies.
Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long COVID: current research and future directions.Infectious diseases & immunity · 2025Review
- HPLC-MS/MS-based quantification of human monoclonal antibodies targeting SARS-CoV-2 in the presence of endogenous SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in human serum.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCOVID-19 remains a significant risk for the immunocompromised given their lower responsiveness to vaccination or infection. Therefore, passive immunity through long-acting monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) offers a needed approach for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Our study evaluated safety, anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity, nasal penetration, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of two half-life-extended investigational mAbs, AER001 and AER002, providing the first demonstration of upper airway penetration of mAbs with the LS-modification.
methodsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase I study enrolled healthy adults (n = 80) who received two long-acting COVID mAbs (AER001 and AER002), AER002 alone, or placebo. The dose ranged from 100 mg (mg) to 1200 mg per mAb component. The primary objective was to describe the safety and tolerability following intravenous (IV) administration. Secondary objectives were to describe PK, anti-drug antibodies (ADA), neutralization activity levels, and safety evaluation through 6 months of follow-up.
resultsThe majority (97.6%) of the reported adverse events (AE) post administration were of grade 1 severity. There were no serious adverse events (SAE) or ADAs. AER001 and AER002 successfully achieved an extended half-life of 105 days and 97.5 days, respectively. Participants receiving AER001 and AER002 (300 mg each) or AER002 (300 mg) alone showed 15- and 26-fold higher neutralization levels against D614G and omicron BA.1 than the placebo group 24 h post-administration. Single 300 or 1200 mg IV dose of AER001 and AER002 resulted in nasal mucosa transudation of approximately 2.5% and 2.7%, respectively.
conclusionAER001 and AER002 showed an acceptable safety profile and extended half-life. High serum neutralization activity was observed against D614G and Omicron BA.1 compared to the placebo group. These data support that LS-modified mAbs can achieve durability, safety, potency, and upper airway tissue penetration and will guide the development of the next generation of mAbs for COVID-19 prevention and treatment.
trial registrationEudraCT Number 2022-001709-35 (COV-2022-001).
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.