ArticlePloS one2025
Physicochemical quality assessment of four asparaginases.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
L-Asparaginases (ASNases) are used for the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. There are reports of quality problems for some therapeutic asparaginase products, especially those manufactured in middle-income countries. These products may exhibit decreased potency and/or decreased specific activity, or an elevated level of impurities such as host cell proteins. In this study, four different ASNase preparations that were not modified with polyethylene glycol were compared in detail regarding their quality: Spectrila®, Celginase™, Bionase®, and L-Aspase®. Samples were analyzed for protein content, impurities, and enzyme activity. Various chromatographic methods as well as mass spectrometry were used to assess purity and identity. Sample protein content, host cell protein, and enzyme activity showed some results that were out of target range for Celginase™ and Bionase®. These ASNase preparations also showed detectable levels of endotoxins. In gel electrophoresis, additional bands were found for Bionase®. Size exclusion chromatography showed increased high and low molecular weight species for Bionase® and L-Aspase®, and reversed-phase chromatography showed increased hydrophilic and hydrophobic species for Bionase®. In capillary zone electrophoresis, increased retention time for L-Aspase® and increased levels of charge variants for Bionase®, Celginase™, and L-Aspase® were seen. ASNase quality standards are crucial to ensure patient safety and product efficacy, as decreased potency and specific activity may affect efficacy in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia treatment, and increased impurities may affect immunogenicity. Out of four ASNase preparations tested in this study, only Spectrila® did not raise any quality concerns. The other three products exhibited quality problems, rendering them unsuitable according to established quality requirements defined in European and US guidelines for pharmaceutical development of parenteral drug products.
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.