ArticleThe AAPS journal2024
Development and Validation of a Cell-Based Binding Neutralizing Antibody Assay for an Antibody-Drug Conjugate.
Article in The AAPS journal, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Neutralizing Antibody Activity in Clinical Studies: Use of Surrogate Measurements Instead of Stand-alone Assays.The AAPS journal · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Performance of Two Automated Anti-drug Antibodies Assays for Infliximab and Adalimumab Without Acid Dissociation.The AAPS journal · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The utilization of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) has gained considerable attention in the field of targeted cancer therapy due to their ability to synergistically combine the specificity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and the potency of small molecular drugs. However, the immunogenic nature of the antibody component within ADCs warrants the need for robust immunogenicity testing, including a neutralizing antibody (NAb) assay. Since the mechanism of action (MOA) of the ADC is to first bind to the target cells and then release the payload intracellularly to kill the cells, the most relevant NAb assay format would be a cell-based killing assay. However, in this paper, we present a case where a cell-based killing assay could not be developed after multiple cell lines and NAb-positive controls (PC) had been tested. Surprisingly, contrary to our expectations, all NAb PCs tested exhibited an increased killing effect on the target cells, instead of the expected protective response. This unexpected phenomenon most likely is due to the non-specific internalization of drug/NAb complexes via FcγRs, as an excessive amount of human IgG1 and mouse IgG2a, but not mouse IgG1, greatly inhibited drug or drug/NAb complexes induced cell death. To overcome this obstacle, we implemented a novel cell-based binding assay utilizing the Meso Scale Discovery (MSD) platform. We also propose that an in vitro cell killing NAb assay is limited to at best monitoring the target binding and internalization induced cell death, but not by-stander killing induced by prematurely released or dead-cell released payload, hence cannot really mimic the in vivo MOA of ADC.
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.