Evidence mapPaperPMID 33523413Full record

ReviewBioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy2021

Immunogenicity Challenges Associated with Subcutaneous Delivery of Therapeutic Proteins.

Nicole L Jarvi, Sathy V Balu-Iyer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Therapeutic peptides and proteins: Status and developments in drug delivery.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Advances and Strategies in Enhancing mRNA Cancer Vaccines.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicole L JarviDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, 359 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.
Sathy V Balu-IyerDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, 359 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA. svb@buffalo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0569-2865
University at Buffalo, State University of New York · US

Funding

Development and Pharmacology of Novel Lipidic rAHFR01HL070227 · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · 2002 to 2005
$763k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL070227NIH HHS R01 HL-70227
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The subcutaneous route of administration has provided convenient and non-inferior delivery of therapeutic proteins compared to intravenous infusion, but there is potential for enhanced immunogenicity toward subcutaneously administered proteins in a subset of patients. Unwanted anti-drug antibody response toward proteins or monoclonal antibodies upon repeated administration is shown to impact the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of multiple biologics. Unique immunogenicity challenges of the subcutaneous route have been realized through various preclinical and clinical examples, although subcutaneous delivery has often demonstrated comparable immunogenicity to intravenous administration. Beyond route of administration as a treatment-related factor of immunogenicity, certain product-related risk factors are particularly relevant to subcutaneously administered proteins. This review attempts to provide an overview of the mechanism of immune response toward proteins administered subcutaneously (subcutaneous proteins) and comments on product-related risk factors related to protein structure and stability, dosage form, and aggregation. A two-wave mechanism of antigen presentation in the immune response toward subcutaneous proteins is described, and interaction with dynamic antigen-presenting cells possessing high antigen processing efficiency and migratory activity may drive immunogenicity. Mitigation strategies for immunogenicity are discussed, including those in general use clinically and those currently in development. Mechanistic insights along with consideration of risk factors involved inspire theoretical strategies to provide antigen-specific, long-lasting effects for maintaining the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalAntigen-Presenting CellsAdministration, IntravenousAntigensHumansInjections, SubcutaneousAntibodies, MonoclonalAntigens

Identifiers

PMID33523413
PMCPMC7848667
OpenAlexW3127396319

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.