ArticleInvestigational new drugs2026
Effector-to-target ratio as a translational bottleneck for CD33 T-cell engagers in acute myeloid leukemia: a quantitative reanalysis of AMG 330.
Article in Investigational new drugs, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A common, often unstated paradigm in T-cell engager (TCE) translation assumes that target-antigen density and drug exposure are the main efficacy drivers, with effector context secondary. This paradigm is visible in dose-escalation strategies and in the use of high-E:T screens as principal preclinical assays. We tested whether an alternative, receptor-saturation framework better organizes the published AMG 330 record in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Receptor-saturation arguments motivate two qualitative expectations: at sufficiently high CD33 densities, EC
Indexed as
Identifiers
42268556What 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.