4.7 Review

Human monoclonal antibodies as candidate therapeutics against emerging viruses

Journal

FRONTIERS OF MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages 462-470

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11684-017-0596-6

Keywords

human monoclonal antibodies; emerging infectious diseases; SARS-CoV; MERS-CoV; Ebola virus

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31570936, 81501735, 81561128006]
  2. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research
  3. Technology Service Platform for detecting high-level biological safety pathogenic microorganisms by the Shanghai Science and Technology Commission [15DZ2290200]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The emergence of new pathogens, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and Ebola virus, poses serious challenges to global public health and highlights the urgent need for novel antiviral approaches. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been successfully used to treat various diseases, particularly cancer and immunological disorders. Antigen-specific mAbs have been isolated using several different approaches, including hybridoma, transgenic mice, phage display, yeast display, and single B-cell isolation. Consequently, an increasing number of mAbs, which exhibit high potency against emerging viruses in vitro and in animal models of infection, have been developed. In this paper, we summarize historical trends and recent developments in mAb discovery, compare the advantages and disadvantages of various approaches to mAb production, and discuss the potential use of such strategies for the development of antivirals against emerging diseases. We also review the application of recently developed human mAbs against SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and Ebola virus and discuss prospects for the development of mAbs as therapeutic agents against emerging viral diseases.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available