MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Pharmacologic and pharmacometric studies of factors affecting the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antibody drug conjugate anetumab ravtansine in patients with solid tumors.

2025· article· en· W4410812638 on OpenAlexaff
Li Chen, Andrew T. Lucas, Julie B. Dumond, Aaron S. Mansfield, Stéphanie Lheureux, Anna Spreafico, C.J. O’Connor, Beth A. Zamboni, Kashish Patel, Jeff Moscow, William C. Zamboni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacodynamicsPharmacokineticsAntibody-drug conjugatePharmacologyDrugConjugateAntibodyMonoclonal antibodyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e15024 Background: Anetumab ravtansine (AR) is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) containing the microtubule inhibitor DM4. ADC drugs have high interpatient variability in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD), which raises concerns whether current dosing based on body weight (mg/kg) is optimal. Thus, we evaluated the effects of patient characteristics, including novel biomarkers of the innate immune system (IIS), on the PK/PD of AR. Methods: Studies were performed in patients in three clinical trials of different cancers with AR as part of treatment: 1) platinum-resistant or refractory high-grade ovarian cancer treated with AR at 2.2mg/kg IV weekly plus bevacizumab(N = 19); 2) pleural mesothelioma treated with AR at 6.5 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks plus pembrolizumab(N = 28); and 3) mesothelin-positive advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with AR at 5.5-6.5 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks plus nivolumab (and ipilimumab or gemcitabine, N = 27). Intensive plasma PK sampling was performed after the first dose to calculate clearance (CL), volume of distribution (Vd), and area-under-the-plasma-concentration-time curve (AUC 0-inf ). The relationship between biomarkers of FcɣRs (CD64, CD32, CD16) on IIS blood cells, total body weight (TBW), body surface area (BSA), lean body mass (LBM), and sex with PK parameters and clinical outcomes were evaluated by pearson correlation, t-test and multivariate regression analysis. Population PK (popPK) methods further evaluated patient covariates and variability in PK. Results: Patients with higher IIS FcγR CD64 and/or higher TBW or higher BSA had higher AR ADC CL (p < 0.05). AR ADC CL was lower in females (0.030 ± 0.007 L/h) versus males (0.042 ± 0.006 L/h) (p < 0.05). Patients with stable disease and partial response had higher AR ADC AUC 0-inf versus patients with progressive disease AR ADC disposition was described by linear CL with two pathways for the release of the payload DM4, hydrolysis and the IIS. A time-varying drug-to-antibody ratio predicted the release of the DM4 payload. In the PopPK model, LBM and albumin were associated with CL of the AR ADC, LBM and IIS FcγR CD64 were associated with the Vd of the AR ADC, and LBM and age were associated with the CL of the released DM4. Conclusions: These results suggest that TBW-based dosing of AR ADC is not optimal, whereas precision dosing of antibodies and ADCs based on the use of novel metrics of body habitus, IIS biomarkers, and sex may be more appropriate to reduce PK variability and improve response.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.442 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research→French-language works237,207→