Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38700803›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2024

Note on importance of correct stoichiometric assumptions for modeling of monoclonal antibodies.

Leonid Gibiansky, Ekaterina Gibiansky

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Leonid GibianskyQuantPharm LLC, North Potomac, MD, USA. lgibiansky@quantpharm.com.
Ekaterina GibianskyQuantPharm LLC, North Potomac, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Antibodies, MonoclonalModels, BiologicalBinding SitesComputer SimulationHumansAntibodies, MonoclonalAllosteric bindingDrugs with many binding sitesNonlinear pharmacokineticsQuasi-steady-state approximationTarget-mediated drug disposition

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.