Cited by 16Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchAdvanced Drug Delivery SystemsDrug-Induced Ocular Toxicity

Pharmacokinetics of Monoclonal Antibody and Antibody Fragments in the Mouse Eye Following Systemic Administration

Open access
Bussing, David, Li, Zhe, Li, Yingyi, Chang, Hsuan-Ping, Chang, Hsueh-Yuan, Guo, Leiming, Verma, Ashwni, Shah, Dhaval K.·2021·The AAPS Journal

Abstract

The ocular pharmacokinetics (PK) of antibody-based therapies are infrequently studied in mice due to the technical difficulties in working with the small murine eye. This study is the first of its kind to quantitatively measure the PK of variously sized proteins in the plasma, cornea/ICB, vitreous humor, retina, and posterior cup (including choroid) of the mouse and to evaluate the relationship between molecular weight (MW) and antibody biodistribution coefficient (BC) to the eye. Proteins analyzed include trastuzumab (150 kDa), trastuzumab-vc-MMAE (T-vc-MMAE, 155 kDa), F(ab)2 (100 kDa), Fab (50 kDa), and scFv (27 kDa). As expected, ocular PK mirrored the systemic PK as plasma was the driving force for ocular exposure. For trastuzumab, T-vc-MMAE, F(ab)2, Fab, and scFv, respectively, the BCs in the cornea/ICB were 0.610%, 0.475%, 1.74%, 3.39%, and 13.7%; the BCs in the vitreous humor were 0.0198%, 0.0427%, 0.0934%, 0.234%, and 5.56%; the BCs for the retina were 0.539%, 0.230%, 0.704%, 2.44%, and 20.4%; the BCs for the posterior cup were 0.557%, 0.650%, 1.47%, 4.06%, and 13.9%. The relationship between BC and MW was best characterized by a log-log regression in which BC decreased as MW increased, with every doubling in MW leading to a decrease in BC by a factor of 3.44 × , 6.76 × , 4.74 × , and 3.43 × in cornea/ICB, vitreous humor, retina, and posterior cup, respectively. In analyzing the disposition of protein therapeutics to the eye, these findings enhance our understanding of the potential for ocular toxicity of systemically administered protein therapeutics and may aid in the discovery of systemically administered protein therapeutics for ocular disorders.

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 · 10.1208/s12248-021-00647-0

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?

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: 3

  1. [9]9. FDA approves new therapy for triple negative breast cancer that has spread, not responded to other treatments [press release].
  2. [12]12. Kaufman PL, Alm A, Levin LA, Adler FH. Adler's physiology of the eye. 11th ed. London, New York: Saunders/Elsevier; 2011.
  3. [53]53. Chang HY, Morrow K, Bonacquisti E, Zhang W, Shah DK. Anti- body pharmacokinetics in rat brain determined using microdialy- sis. MAbs. 2018;10(6):843-53.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bussing, D., Li, Z., Li, Y., Chang, H.-P., Chang, H.-Y., Guo, L., Verma, A., & Shah, D. K.
Affiliations
University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Shah, Dhaval K.
Venue
The AAPS Journal
Published
2021-11-08
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
116-116
ISSN
1550-7416 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3213545925
Cited by
16
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The AAPS Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • University at Buffalo
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA246785)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM114179)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R21AI138195)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Drug-Induced Ocular Toxicity
Keywords
ocular pharmacokinetics, monoclonal antibodies, antibody fragments, trastuzumab, F(ab')2 fragments, FAB, scFv, molecular weight, vitreous humor, cornea, retina, choroid, ocular toxicity, therapeutic proteins, mouse eye, intracameral injection, ocular drug delivery
MeSH terms
Trastuzumab, Animals, Eye, Immunoglobulin Fragments, Immunoglobulin Fab Fragments, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mice, Nude, Molecular Weight, Oligopeptides, Tissue Distribution, Immunoconjugates, 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