↓ Skip to main content

Molecular Simulation of Receptor Occupancy and Tumor Penetration of an Antibody and Smaller Scaffolds: Application to Molecular Imaging

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Imaging and Biology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Molecular Simulation of Receptor Occupancy and Tumor Penetration of an Antibody and Smaller Scaffolds: Application to Molecular Imaging
Published in
Molecular Imaging and Biology, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11307-016-1041-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly D. Orcutt, Gregory P. Adams, Anna M. Wu, Matthew D. Silva, Catey Harwell, Jack Hoppin, Manabu Matsumura, Masakatsu Kotsuma, Jonathan Greenberg, Andrew M. Scott, Robert A. Beckman

Abstract

Competitive radiolabeled antibody imaging can determine the unlabeled intact antibody dose that fully blocks target binding but may be confounded by heterogeneous tumor penetration. We evaluated the hypothesis that smaller radiolabeled constructs can be used to more accurately evaluate tumor expressed receptors. The Krogh cylinder distributed model, including bivalent binding and variable intervessel distances, simulated distribution of smaller constructs in the presence of increasing doses of labeled antibody forms. Smaller constructs <25 kDa accessed binding sites more uniformly at large distances from blood vessels compared with larger constructs and intact antibody. These observations were consistent for different affinity and internalization characteristics of constructs. As predicted, a higher dose of unlabeled intact antibody was required to block binding to these distant receptor sites. Small radiolabeled constructs provide more accurate information on total receptor expression in tumors and reveal the need for higher antibody doses for target receptor blockade.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 25%
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 14%
Chemistry 3 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 11%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 3 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Imaging and Biology
#621
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,770
of 322,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Imaging and Biology
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.