MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410876964 · doi:10.1080/19420862.2025.2512217

Does one model fit all mAbs? An evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models

2025· article· en· W4410876964 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuemAbs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacokineticsPopulationPopulation pharmacokineticsComputer scienceComputational biologyMedicineBiologyPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antibodies are extensively used in treating various diseases, with over 100 canonical monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) approved. Population pharmacokinetic (PK) models are typically developed for each individual mAb, despite their similarities in size, shape, and susceptibility to lysosomal degradation. However, sparse datasets with limited PK information pose challenges in deriving accurate parameter estimates. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of 160 published models of 69 mAbs, administered either intravenously or subcutaneously, examining their structural, statistical, and covariate components. Median estimates for the base parameters are linear clearance (0.22 L/d), central volume (3.42 L), peripheral volume (2.68 L), intercompartmental clearance (0.54 L/d), absorption rate (0.25 L/d), and bioavailability (69%). Using these to simulate a 'generic' mAb results in plausible kinetics with a terminal half-life of 21 ds. We demonstrated that the median linear clearance was 26% lower in models that included nonlinear target-mediated kinetics, when compared to linear models (0.18 vs. 0.25 L/d). For chimeric mAbs median linear clearance was 50% higher compared to fully human and humanized mAbs. Variability in PK parameter estimates across models was comparable to the inter-individual variability, which have consistently shown to be large for mAbs PK (e.g. 55% vs. 43% for clearance and 25% vs. 30% for central volume, respectively). Our meta-analysis suggests that a priori parameter estimates derived from the large body of existing pharmacokinetic models for mAbs are representative for many mAbs and can facilitate the design of new and/or more complex pharmacokinetic models or assist in dose optimization models.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.819
GPT teacher head0.647
Teacher spread0.172 · 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