Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41053523›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2025

A Quantitative Approach to Guiding Target Antigen Selection and Antibody Optimization in Recycling Antibody Discovery.

Hamed Ghaffari, Bernard P Murray, Isabel Figueroa, Brian Carr

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 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

4 authors.

Hamed GhaffariDepartment of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, California, 94404, USA. hamed.ghaffari2@gilead.com.ORCID 0009-0003-0386-0102
Bernard P MurrayDepartment of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, California, 94404, USA.
Isabel FigueroaDepartment of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, California, 94404, USA.
Brian CarrDepartment of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, California, 94404, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recycling antibodies can enhance therapeutic efficacy by enabling efficient antigen removal through pH-dependent binding mechanisms enabling antibody recycling, but the optimal targets for this strategy remain unclear. This work employs a mathematical modeling approach using a minimal PBPK model, along with global and local sensitivity analyses, to explore how target turnover rates influence the suitability of recycling antibodies. We applied this approach to a scenario featuring a soluble antigen with high baseline levels (1000 nM) that necessitates treatment with an antibody with a high intravenous dosing regimen. Our findings indicate that the recycling strategy is most effective for target antigens expressed at high levels, and particularly for those with half-lives of 10 to 30 h. In contrast, for antigens expressed at sufficiently low levels, where the antibody can be present in significant excess, further optimization of conventional antibodies to achieve higher antigen-binding affinity at neutral pH can be beneficial. While optimizing the off-rate at acidic pH is often the primary focus in the engineering of recycling antibodies, our analysis indicates that the on-rate at pH 6 is also an important parameter, albeit to a lesser extent. Therefore, the equilibrium dissociation constant (K

Indexed as

AntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntigensDrug DiscoveryHalf-LifeHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationAntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntigensendosomeFcRnmathematical modelPBPK modelrecycling antibody

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.