Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39930960›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical pharmacology2025

Indication-Specific Dosing and Dose-Evaluation Strategies in New Indications for Non-Oncology Monoclonal Antibodies.

Sherouk M Tawfik, Fei Tang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Sherouk M TawfikDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.
Fei TangGenentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4517-7569

Funding

Genentech, Inc
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compared to traditional small molecule drugs, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) often display more complex pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties that may be impacted by disease-specific factors. For mAbs in non-oncology indications, where the same drug might be used for conditions involving different organ systems and/or having different degrees of severity, the need for indication-specific dosing and/or tailored dose evaluation strategies is more evident. However, a comprehensive analysis on this topic has not been conducted for approved non-oncology therapies. In this work, we extracted literature information for non-oncology mAbs approved in the past 20 years to provide a comprehensive exploration of indication-specific dosing and dose evaluation strategies in the new indications. Our analysis included 21 mAbs with 50 supplemental approvals for new indications. Indication-specific dosing was prevalent, with 15 out of 21 mAbs having different recommended dosing regimens across two or more indications. The majority of the new indications were supported by Phase 2 dose-ranging studies and/or Phase 3 studies that evaluated more than one dosing regimen. Importantly, our analysis uncovered a relationship between indication-specific dosing, dose evaluation strategies, and organ system classification of the original versus the new indication. We delved into dose justification supporting the new indications, including the types of data and modeling approaches used or considered. Through case studies, we highlighted factors that may influence dose selection in new indications, such as target expression levels, disease severity, and benefit-risk profile. Lastly, we made practical recommendations regarding dose optimization approaches in clinical drug development across multiple indications.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug ApprovalHumansAntibodies, Monoclonaldose evaluationindication‐specific dosingmonoclonal antibodiesnon‐oncologysupplemental indications

Identifiers

PMID39930960
PMCPMC12202192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.