4.5 Editorial Material

Therapeutic antibodies in ophthalmology Old is new again

Journal

MABS
Volume 2, Issue 2, Pages 176-180

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.4161/mabs.2.2.11205

Keywords

serotherapy; ranibizumab; bevacizumab; anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies; pharmacology; FcRn

Ask authors/readers for more resources

More than a century after the first successful use of serotherapy, antibody-based therapy has been renewed by the availability of recombinant monoclonal antibodies. As in the past, current clinical experience has prompted new pharmacological questions and induced much debate among practitioners, notably in the field of ophthalmology. An examination of the history of antibodies as treatments for ocular disorders reveals interesting parallels to the modern era. The fact that a treatment administered by a systemic route could be efficacious in a local disease was not widely accepted and the chemical nature of antibodies was not clearly understood in the late 196 century. Clinical studies by Henry Coppez, a Belgian ophthalmologist, established in 1894 that anti-diphtheric antitoxins could be used to treat conjunctival diphtheria. Nearly 20 years later, Coppez and Danis described age-related macular degeneration, a disorder which today benefits from ranibizumab therapy. The product, a locally-administered recombinant monoclonal Fab fragment, is directed against vascular endothelial growth factor A. Interestingly, its full-size counterpart, bevacizumab, which is approved for the treatment of solid tumors, has also demonstrated efficacy in age-related macular degeneration when administered either intravenously or locally, which raises new questions about antibody pharmacology and biodistribution. In order to shed some light on this debate, we recount the early history of serotherapy applied to ophthalmology, review the exact molecular differences between ranibizumab and bevacizumab, and discuss what is known about IgG and the blood-retina barrier and the possible role of FcRn, an IgG transporter.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available