ArticleThe AAPS journal2024
Immunogenicity of Atezolizumab: Influence of Testing Method and Sampling Frequency on Reported Anti-drug Antibody Incidence Rates.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential Mechanisms of Partial/Transient Response or Resistance to Daratumumab Therapy: A Focus on Anti-Daratumumab Antibodies and Urinary Daratumumab Loss.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Revisiting the Anti-Drug Antibody Assay Drug Tolerance of a Commercial Biological Product.The AAPS journal · 2025Article
- Interplay between pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: stepwise development of a bidirectional joint pharmacokinetics-anti-drug antibodies model.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Immunogenicity Risk of Protein Therapeutics by Augmenting T Cell Epitope Prediction with Clinical Factors.The AAPS journal · 2025Article
- What are clinically significant anti-drug antibodies and why is it important to identify them.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurement of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) to assess the incidence of ADA in a clinical trial is a critical step in immunogenicity assessment during the development of a protein therapeutic. We developed novel graphical approaches to illustrate clinical trial ADA data for the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab (Tecentriq) that included a systematic analysis of the impact of the timing of ADA sampling and ADA assay drug tolerance on reported ADA incidence. We found that approaches used across the industry for ADA incidence analysis provide a limited view of immunogenicity in oncology studies, where ADA detection may be confounded by both drug dosage and patient attrition. Moreover, these approaches can miss important temporal information about the immune response. Our results demonstrated that the methodology of ADA assessment for the atezolizumab program was specifically designed to capture most ADA responses to ensure accurate reporting of ADA incidence. We further showed that the use of sparse sampling and/or ADA test methods with insufficient drug tolerance may result in a significant underreporting of ADA incidence. We conclude that the comparison of ADA incidence between different drugs can be highly misleading and that a test method with appropriate sensitivity in the presence of the drug and a clinical sampling scheme that is aligned with ADA responses to a drug is required to accurately report ADA incidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39009791What 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.