OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of teplizumab and evaluate relevant clinical trial data. DATA SOURCES: Searches of MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, ClinicalTrials.gov, American Diabetes Association scientific posters, and Google Scholar (1966-May 2012) were conducted using the key words teplizumab, anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody, MGA031, and hOKT3γ1 (Ala-Ala). Searches were limited to articles published in English. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Clinical trials evaluating teplizumab for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) published in English were selected from the data sources. All published relevant abstracts were included. References cited in identified articles were used for additional citations. DATA SYNTHESIS: T1DM accounts for up to 10% of all cases of diabetes mellitus. T1DM is characterized as a chronic and progressive autoimmune disease leading to the destruction of insulin-producing β-cells of the pancreas. Teplizumab is a humanized Fc-mutated anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody that alters the function of the T-lymphocytes that mediate the destruction of the insulin-producing β-cells. While clinical data are limited, both Phase 2 and Phase 3 studies have demonstrated preserved C-peptide response as a measure of insulin production, decreased exogenous insulin use, and improved glycemic control following a 12- to 14-day teplizumab infusion in patients diagnosed with T1DM within the previous 6 weeks. However, 1 Phase 3 trial failed to find the same benefits in those diagnosed with T1DM within the previous 12 weeks when a lower cumulative teplizumab dose was used. Initial studies indicated that teplizumab is well tolerated, with a self-limiting rash as the most commonly reported adverse effect. CONCLUSIONS: Teplizumab is an anti-CD3 human monoclonal antibody with promising activity in treatment of patients with T1DM. Results from Phase 3 trials are needed to further determine safety, efficacy, and dosing frequency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Skelley et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: