Talk:Antibody–drug conjugate

(Redirected from Talk:Antibody-drug conjugate)
Latest comment: 4 years ago by 2A02:8388:1641:8380:E1C:C3B5:304A:1703 in topic Problem in the article: creating the abbreviation iADC but not explaining it

Linkers

edit

Need more on the linkers eg MCC, what they are, how they dissolve ... Rod57 (talk) 09:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

One source Antibody−Drug Conjugates: Linking Cytotoxic Payloads to Monoclonal Antibodies. 2010 not free.

It seems SeaGens linkers are non-cleavable which can sometimes be advantageous.Seattle Genetics and Genentech. Rod57 (talk) 11:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

ADCs using paclitaxel

edit

ADCs using paclitaxel : Synthesis and Preliminary Biological Evaluation of High-drug Load Paclitaxel-Antibody Conjugates for Tumor-targeted Chemotherapy. Rod57 (talk) 00:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

AN-152 not an ADC

edit

The toxin is targeted by linking it to LHRH which binds to LHRH receptors on the target cells. Is there a name for this type of targeted therapy ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit

Sometimes (as in Epratuzumab-SN-38: a new antibody-drug conjugate for the therapy of hematological malignancies) a less stable link is better when the drug/target is more rapidly internalised. - Rod57 (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Major changes - not discussed

edit

Sometime in 2013 it looks like there have been major changes with a lot of content removed without any apparent discussion here. I'd like to reinstate the lists of ADCs in clinical trials - here or should it be in a separate article ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

The pre-June 2013 old page seemed NPOV but the new page seems very POV with unjustified omissions and change of emphasis. Looks like much of the new material has been based on marketing materials or advertisements from one of the ADC vendors. Needs more investigation. - Rod57 (talk) 13:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

IMMU-132 etc for list

edit

Preclinical

edit

[3] mentions HDCs (Humabody-DC) based on VH fragments. - Rod57 (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Antibody-drug conjugate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Lancet

edit

For cancer doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31774-X JFW | T@lk 07:52, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Problem in the article: creating the abbreviation iADC but not explaining it

edit

Right now the wikipedia article has this:

"The first immunology antibody-drug conjugate (iADC), ABBV-3373, is undergoing clinical trials for participants with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis.[16]"

I tried to search for iADC, and found the abbreviation a few times (via google search) - but never a clear definition of that abbreviation. I believe wikipedia needs to adhere to stricter standards, and define such articles. Right now it reads a bit like an advertisement; I think what has to happen is to define the word, also add who coined it if possible, and when. It is not a good idea to add new articles, but not explain them, or link to in-wikipedia to explain that article on wikipedia. Right now (January 2020) we do not have any explanation for that term iADC, which is not ideal in my opinion. 2A02:8388:1641:8380:E1C:C3B5:304A:1703 (talk) 21:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)Reply