ReviewPharmaceutics2026
Two Classes of Protein Therapeutics: Why Dose-Response Architecture Defines the Boundary of mRNA Medicines.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 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
Messenger RNA (mRNA) entered clinical medicine through vaccines, where the innate immune reactivity that complicates protein therapeutics acts as a built-in adjuvant. The success of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines inspired an expansive vision of an mRNA 2.0 era extending the modality to rare and common diseases, with delivery framed as the principal challenge. This review accepts much of that vision but argues it rests on an unstated assumption: that all protein therapeutics form a single pharmacological class. They do not. We propose a taxonomy, the Dose-Response Architecture Classification, separating two classes. Exposure-controlled therapeutics require a specific quantity of active protein on a defined regimen, as outcomes depend on reproducible exposure; examples include insulin, erythropoietin, growth hormone, coagulation factors, and narrow-therapeutic-index biologics. Threshold-response therapeutics depend on surpassing a functional threshold rather than maintaining a precise concentration; these include vaccines, many enzyme-replacement therapies, genome editing, receptor-saturating antibodies, and immune-cell reprogramming. Because an mRNA drug is dosed as an instruction, and a single message is translated into a variable number of proteins through a multiplicative, stochastic intracellular chain, the dose-to-effect relationship is inherently variable. Our central, deliberately falsifiable proposition is that mRNA is suitable for threshold-response therapeutics but unsuitable for exposure-controlled therapeutics unless a construct or delivery system demonstrates validated post-delivery output control within predefined pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic limits. This is a pharmacological boundary, not a delivery obstacle. We conclude that the greatest advances in mRNA 2.0 will come not from delivery alone but from disciplined indication triage by class.
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.