Cited by 144Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsPharmaceutical studies and practices

Interspecies Scaling of Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies: Initial Look

Ling, Jie, Zhou, Honghui, Jiao, Qun, Davis, Hugh M.·2009·The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract

The authors evaluated interspecies scaling for the prediction of human clearance of 18 therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Human and monkey/chimpanzee data of 14 mAbs were classified based on the targeted antigens (soluble or membrane bound). Simple allometry and/or a time‐invariant method (elementary Dedrick plot) were performed. Results indicate that human clearance might be accurately predicted from monkey data for mAbs targeting soluble receptors or membrane‐bound receptors with limited tissue distribution using simplified allometry. The optimal exponents were estimated to be 0.85 or 0.90. If nonlinearity is anticipated at the human efficacious dose, pharmacokinetic parameters obtained at high doses in animals might not be sufficient for full pharmacokinetic characterization and prediction. Using prespecified criteria, including predicted human clearance (≤ or > 10 mL/d/kg), simplified allometric scaling might be helpful in predicting the effect of receptor‐mediated clearance for mAbs targeting membrane‐bound antigens. Furthermore, simplified allometry and an elementary Dedrick plot provide similar results in predicted clearance. Given the significant advantages offered by simplified allometry, it should be used when data are available from only 1 species. When reasonable data from ≥3 species are available, traditional allometry should be explored. Overall, clearance prediction is useful for human dose prediction in drug discovery and development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0091270009337134

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ling, J., Zhou, H., Jiao, Q., & Davis, H. M.
Corresponding author
Ling, Jie
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-12
Volume
49
Issue
12
Pages
1382-1402
ISSN
  • 0021-9754 (ISSN-L)
  • 0091-2700
  • 1552-4604
OpenAlex
W2011077241
Cited by
144
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
Keywords
interspecies scaling, therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, soluble receptor, cell surface receptors, receptor-mediated clearance
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humans, Metabolic Clearance Rate, Species Specificity, Models, Animal

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