ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2024
Note on importance of correct stoichiometric assumptions for modeling of monoclonal antibodies.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- General quasi-equilibrium multivalent binding model to study diverse and complex drug-receptor interactions of biologics.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacokinetic modeling of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) with non-linear binding is based on equations of the target-mediated drug disposition (Mager and Jusko, J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 28:507-532, 2001). These equations demonstrated their utility in countless examples and drug development programs. The model assumes that the mAb drug and the target have only one binding site each while, in reality, most antibodies have two binding sites. Thus, the currently used model does not correspond to the biological process that it aims to describe. The correct mechanistic model should take into account both binding sites. We investigated, using simulations, whether this discrepancy is important and when it is advisable to use a model with correct stoichiometric 2-to-1 ratio. We show that for soluble targets when elimination rate of the drug-target complex is comparable with the elimination rate of the drug or lower, and when measurements of both total drug and total target concentrations are available, the model with 1-to-1 (monovalent) binding cannot describe data simulated from the model with 2-to-1 (bivalent) binding. In these cases, models with correct stoichiometric assumptions may be necessary for an adequate description of the observed data. Also, a model with allosteric binding that encompasses both 2-to-1 and 1-to-1 binding models as particular cases was proposed and applied. It was shown to be identifiable given the detailed concentration data of total drug and total target.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38700803What 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.