Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?

Of the ten top-selling drugs in 2013, the first three (Humira®, Enbrel®, Remicade®) were all monoclonal antibodies for treating autoimmune diseases; together these three accounted for approximately $28 billion in sales. Another antibody, Avastin®, indicated for bowel cancer, accounted for $6.7 billi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ng, Xu Wen, Subbu, Venkatraman
Other Authors: School of Materials Science & Engineering
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/83239
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/42495
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-83239
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-832392023-07-14T15:50:51Z Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded? Ng, Xu Wen Subbu, Venkatraman School of Materials Science & Engineering Protein Recombinant Antibodies Of the ten top-selling drugs in 2013, the first three (Humira®, Enbrel®, Remicade®) were all monoclonal antibodies for treating autoimmune diseases; together these three accounted for approximately $28 billion in sales. Another antibody, Avastin®, indicated for bowel cancer, accounted for $6.7 billion among these top-selling drugs, while Herceptin®, used to treat breast cancer, had sales of $6.6 billion. These numbers bear eloquent testimony to the increasing demand for protein therapeutics. All of these proteins are made by recombinant synthesis which has truly revolutionized the ready availability of human analogs. Such antibodies are administered via subcutaneous injection or via intravenous infusion; the frequency of administration varies. For example, Enbrel is injected subcutaneously once a week for rheumatoid arthritis whereas Remicade dosing is 3 mg/kg given via intravenous induction at 0, 2 and 6 weeks. While the number of protein therapeutics has grown substantially over the last decade [1], delivery systems continue to be limited. We examine the reasons for this and discuss what we can expect in the future. Accepted version 2017-05-26T04:25:45Z 2019-12-06T15:18:08Z 2017-05-26T04:25:45Z 2019-12-06T15:18:08Z 2015 Journal Article Ng, X. W., & Subbu, V. (2015). Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded? Therapeutic Delivery, 6(5), 537-539. 2041-5990 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/83239 http://hdl.handle.net/10220/42495 10.4155/tde.15.11 en Therapeutic Delivery © 2015 Future Science Ltd. This is the author created version of a work that has been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by Therapeutic Delivery, Future Science Ltd. It incorporates referee’s comments but changes resulting from the publishing process, such as copyediting, structural formatting, may not be reflected in this document. The published version is available at: [http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/tde.15.11]. 5 p. application/pdf
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic Protein
Recombinant Antibodies
spellingShingle Protein
Recombinant Antibodies
Ng, Xu Wen
Subbu, Venkatraman
Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
description Of the ten top-selling drugs in 2013, the first three (Humira®, Enbrel®, Remicade®) were all monoclonal antibodies for treating autoimmune diseases; together these three accounted for approximately $28 billion in sales. Another antibody, Avastin®, indicated for bowel cancer, accounted for $6.7 billion among these top-selling drugs, while Herceptin®, used to treat breast cancer, had sales of $6.6 billion. These numbers bear eloquent testimony to the increasing demand for protein therapeutics. All of these proteins are made by recombinant synthesis which has truly revolutionized the ready availability of human analogs. Such antibodies are administered via subcutaneous injection or via intravenous infusion; the frequency of administration varies. For example, Enbrel is injected subcutaneously once a week for rheumatoid arthritis whereas Remicade dosing is 3 mg/kg given via intravenous induction at 0, 2 and 6 weeks. While the number of protein therapeutics has grown substantially over the last decade [1], delivery systems continue to be limited. We examine the reasons for this and discuss what we can expect in the future.
author2 School of Materials Science & Engineering
author_facet School of Materials Science & Engineering
Ng, Xu Wen
Subbu, Venkatraman
format Article
author Ng, Xu Wen
Subbu, Venkatraman
author_sort Ng, Xu Wen
title Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
title_short Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
title_full Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
title_fullStr Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
title_full_unstemmed Protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
title_sort protein delivery options: how well have we succeeded?
publishDate 2017
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/83239
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/42495
_version_ 1772828940116688896