Cited by 52Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsProtein purification and stability

Identifying biophysical assays and in silico properties that enrich for slow clearance in clinical-stage therapeutic antibodies

Open access
Grinshpun, Boris, Thorsteinson, Nels, Pereira, Joao NS, Rippmann, Friedrich, Nannemann, David, Sood, Vanita D., Fomekong Nanfack, Yves·2021·mAbs

Abstract

Understanding the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of a drug, such as clearance, is a crucial step for evaluating efficacy. The PK of therapeutic antibodies can be complex and is influenced by interactions with the target, Fc-receptors, anti-drug antibodies, and antibody intrinsic factors. A growing body of literature has linked biophysical properties of antibodies, particularly nonspecific-binding propensity, hydrophobicity and charged regions to rapid clearance in preclinical species and selected human PK studies. A clear understanding of the connection between biophysical properties and their impact on PK would allow for early selection and optimization of antibodies and reduce costly attrition during clinical trials due to sub-optimal human clearance. Due to the difficulty in obtaining large and unbiased human PK data, previous studies have focused mostly on preclinical PK. For this study, we obtained and curated the most comprehensive clinical PK dataset to date and calculated accurate estimates of linear clearance for 64 monoclonal antibodies ranging from investigational candidates in Phase 2 trials to marketed products. This allows for the first time a deep analysis of the influence of biophysical and sequence-based in silico properties directly on human clearance. We use statistical analysis and a Random Forest classifier to identify properties that have the greatest influence in our dataset. Our findings indicate that in vitro poly-specificity assay and in silico estimated isoelectric point can discriminate fast and slow clearing antibodies, extending previous observations on preclinical clearance. This provides a simple yet powerful approach to select antibodies with desirable PK during early-stage screening.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/19420862.2021.1932230

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Grinshpun et al. found that pI is the most essential feature to discriminate between fast and slow clearing antibodies.

    “They found the pI is the most essential feature to discriminate between fast and slow clearing antibodies.”
  • Grinshpun et al. collected 64 mAbs that have been approved or are under Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, and their published clearance data, and trained a random forest classifier to distinguish antibodies with different clearance levels.

    “To predict clearance rate through comprehensive evaluation of these factors, Grinshpun et al. [35] collected 64 mAbs that have been approved or are under Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, and their published clearance data, and trained a random forest classifier to distinguish antibodies with different clearance levels.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Pharmapendium [Internet]. Amsterdam (Netherlands): Elsevier; [ cited 2019 3 11]. Available from: https://www.pharmapendium.com

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grinshpun, B., Thorsteinson, N., Pereira, J. N., Rippmann, F., Nannemann, D., Sood, V. D., & Fomekong Nanfack, Y.
Affiliations
  • Discovery & Development Technologies, Drug Disposition & Design, EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Inc, Billerica, MA, USA
  • Department of Scientific Services, Chemical Computing Group ULC, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • Merck KGaA, Darmstadt (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Sood, Vanita D.
Venue
mAbs
Published
2021-01-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
1932230-1932230
ISSN
  • 1942-0862 (ISSN-L)
  • 1942-0870
OpenAlex
W3167428358
Cited by
52
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2
FWCI
4.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • mAbs (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein purification and stability
Keywords
therapeutic antibodies, antibody clearance, pharmacokinetics, biophysical properties, non-specific binding, hydrophobicity, isoelectric point, antibody selection, random forest classification
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Blood Chemical Analysis, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review