Cited by 155Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and ApplicationsCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relative Target Affinities of T-Cell–Dependent Bispecific Antibodies Determine Biodistribution in a Solid Tumor Mouse Model

Mandikian, Danielle, Takahashi, Nene, Lo, Amy A., Li, Ji, Eastham-Anderson, Jeffrey, Slaga, Dionysos, Ho, Jason, Hristopoulos, Maria, Clark, Robyn, Totpal, Klara, Lin, Kedan, Joseph, Sean B., Dennis, Mark S., Prabhu, Saileta, Junttila, Teemu T., Boswell, C. Andrew·2018·Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Anti-HER2/CD3, a T-cell–dependent bispecific antibody (TDB) construct, induces T-cell–mediated cell death in cancer cells expressing HER2 by cross-linking tumor HER2 with CD3 on cytotoxic T cells, thereby creating a functional cytolytic synapse. TDB design is a very challenging process that requires consideration of multiple parameters. Although therapeutic antibody design strategy is commonly driven by striving for the highest attainable antigen-binding affinity, little is known about how the affinity of each TDB arm can affect the targeting ability of the other arm and the consequent distribution and efficacy. To our knowledge, no distribution studies have been published using preclinical models wherein the T-cell–targeting arm of the TDB is actively bound to T cells. We used a combined approach involving radiochemistry, invasive biodistribution, and noninvasive single-photon emission tomographic (SPECT) imaging to measure TDB distribution and catabolism in transgenic mice with human CD3ϵ expression on T cells. Using CD3 affinity variants, we assessed the impact of CD3 affinity on short-term pharmacokinetics, tissue distribution, and cellular uptake. Our experimental approach determined the relative effects of (i) CD3 targeting to normal tissues, (ii) HER2 targeting to HER2-expressing tumors, and (iii) relative HER2/CD3 affinity, all as critical drivers for TDB distribution. We observed a strong correlation between CD3 affinity and distribution to T-cell–rich tissues, with higher CD3 affinity reducing systemic exposure and shifting TDB distribution away from tumor to T-cell–containing tissues. These observations have important implications for clinical translation of bispecific antibodies for cancer immunotherapy. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(4); 776–85. ©2018 AACR.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1158/1535-7163.mct-17-0657

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The relative HER2/CD3 affinity is a critical driver for TDB distribution and catabolism in transgenic mouse models.

    “Mandikian et al. showed that the relative HER2/CD3 affinity is a critical driver for TDB distribution and catabolism in transgenic mouse models.”
  • There is a strong correlation between CD3 affinity and distribution to T-cell-rich tissues, with higher CD3 affinity reducing systemic exposure and shifting TDB distribution away from tumor to T cell-containing tissues.

    “They also showed that there was a strong correlation between CD3 affinity and distribution to T‐cell‐rich tissues, with higher CD3 affinity reducing systemic exposure and shifting TDB distribution away from tumor to T cell‐containing tissues91”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mandikian, D., Takahashi, N., Lo, A. A., Li, J., Eastham-Anderson, J., Slaga, D., Ho, J., Hristopoulos, M., Clark, R., Totpal, K., Lin, K., Joseph, S. B., Dennis, M. S., Prabhu, S., Junttila, T. T., & Boswell, C. A.
Affiliations
  • 1Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California.
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • NGM Biopharmaceuticals (United States) (US)
  • California Institute for Biomedical Research (US)
  • Denali Therapeutics (United States) (US)
Venue
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Published
2018-04-01
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
776-785
ISSN
  • 1535-7163 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-8514
OpenAlex
W2783911823
Cited by
155
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7
FWCI
10.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Genentech (Genentech, Inc.)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Keywords
HER2, tissue distribution, pharmacokinetics, T cell cytotoxicity, tumor targeting, SPECT imaging, antibody catabolism, cancer immunotherapy
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibody Affinity, Colonic Neoplasms, Disease Models, Animal, Female, Humans, Immunotherapy, Mice, Nude, Mice, Transgenic, T-Lymphocytes, Cytotoxic, Tissue Distribution, Tumor Cells, Cultured, CD3 Complex, Antibodies, Bispecific, Erb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinases, Mice

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