ArticlemAbs
Application of quantitative protein mass spectrometric data in the early predictive analysis of membrane-bound target engagement by 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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative Investigation of ATP Switch Concept of STA551 Through Combined In Vivo Tissue Distribution Studies and Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling.The AAPS journal · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Investigating Sulfotransferase Mediated Drug Interactions of Ethinylestradiol using a Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model.The AAPS journal · 2025Article
- Cross-species translational modelling of targeted therapeutic oligonucleotides using physiologically based pharmacokinetics.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025Article
- Accelerating Biologics PBPK Modelling with Automated Model Building: A Tutorial.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Biologic Case Studies in Monkeys and Humans Reveals the Necessity of an Additional Clearance Term.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Model-informed drug discovery advocates the use of mathematical modeling and simulation for improved efficacy in drug discovery. In the case of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against cell membrane antigens, this requires quantitative insight into the target tissue concentration levels. Protein mass spectrometry data are often available but the values are expressed in relative, rather than in molar concentration units that are easier to incorporate into pharmacokinetic models. Here, we present an empirical correlation that converts the parts per million (ppm) concentrations in the PaxDb database to their molar equivalents that are more suitable for pharmacokinetic modeling. We evaluate the insight afforded to target tissue distribution by analyzing the likely tumor-targeting accuracy of mAbs recognizing either epidermal growth factor receptor or its homolog HER2. Surprisingly, the predicted tissue concentrations of both these targets exceed the Kd values of their respective therapeutic mAbs. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling indicates that in these conditions only about 0.05% of the dosed mAb is likely to reach the solid tumor target cells. The rest of the dose is eliminated in healthy tissues via both nonspecific and target-mediated processes. The presented approach allows evaluation of the interplay between the target expression level in different tissues that determines the overall pharmacokinetic properties of the drug and the fraction that reaches the cells of interest. This methodology can help to evaluate the efficacy and safety properties of novel drugs, especially if the off-target cell degradation has cytotoxic outcomes, as in the case of antibody-drug conjugates.
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.