PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 1, 1991The Journal of Immunology104 citations

Reduced immunogenicity and improved pharmacokinetics of humanized anti-Tac in cynomolgus monkeys

View Full Paper
JHJ HakimiRCR ChizzoniteDLDavid R. Luke

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

The anti-Tac mAb has been shown to bind to the p55 chain of the IL-2R, block IL-2 binding and inhibit T cell proliferation. A humanized form of anti-Tac (HAT) has been constructed that retains the binding properties of murine anti-Tac (MAT). These two mAb were evaluated in cynomolgus monkeys to compare relative immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic properties. Monkeys treated with HAT daily for 14 days exhibited anti-HAT antibody titers which were 5- to 10-fold lower than their MAT-treated counterparts and these antibodies developed later than in the MAT-treated monkeys. Two of four monkeys receiving a single injection of MAT developed anti-MAT antibodies, whereas none of four monkeys developed antibodies after a single treatment with HAT. In monkeys injected with either HAT or MAT daily for 14 days, the anti-antibody titers induced were inversely related to the amount of anti-Tac administered. Antibodies that developed against MAT were both anti-isotypic and anti-idiotypic, whereas those developed against HAT appeared to be predominantly anti-idiotypic. The pharmacokinetic properties, that is the half-life and area under the curve values, of HAT were also significantly different from those of MAT. The area under the curve values for HAT in naive monkeys were approximately twofold more than those for MAT, and the mean serum half-life of HAT was 214 h, approximately four- to fivefold more than MAT. These pharmacokinetic values were reduced in monkeys previously sensitized with HAT or MAT suggesting that the presence of anti-antibodies altered these parameters.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hakimi et al. (1991) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0ef42037aeb0126447bab8https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.147.4.1352
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper