Skip to main content
search

March 3, 2026

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are reshaping oncology drug development. With more than 170 ADCs in clinical development and approvals accelerating, the field is moving quickly. Yet regardless of innovation in targets, payloads, or linker chemistry, one constraint continues to define ADC success: the therapeutic window.

How do you design an FIH study when the margin between efficacy and toxicity is narrow and depends on the multiple components which comprise an ADC? For ADC programs, successful FIH planning requires thoughtful integration of nonclinical safety data, translational insight, and exposure-based thinking from the very beginning. As Fran Brown noted, “The therapeutic index really becomes the defining feature for ADC development; it drives everything from dose selection to escalation strategy.

Why ADC first-in-human dose selection is uniquely challenging

Unlike traditional chemotherapy or monoclonal antibodies, ADCs are built from three interconnected components:

  • An antibody that targets tumor cells
  • A potent cytotoxic payload
  • A linker that connects the payload to the antibody

Each element both separately and through their interactions can affect both safety and efficacy.

Common development challenges include variable target expression across tumors, limited tumor penetration, variability in drug–antibody ratio (DAR), premature payload release, off-target toxicities, and unintended cellular uptake. Because these variables operate simultaneously and ADCs have narrow safety margins, dose optimization becomes particularly complex.

Why exposure–response drives ADC first-in-human dose selection

For many ADCs, increasing dose does not proportionally increase tolerability. More drug does not necessarily mean more benefit without additional risk. That’s why FIH dose selection must focus on exposure, how much drug reaches the systemic circulation, rather than simply scaling doses from animals.

Understanding what exposure level drives efficacy and what exposure level drives toxicity is central to ADC development strategy. As was highlighted in the webinar, “Dose alone doesn’t tell the full story. It’s the exposure–response relationship that ultimately informs safe and effective dose selection.

Sponsors seeking a more detailed understanding of ADC pharmacokinetics from noncompartmental analysis through population PK approaches can explore our discussion on applying NCA and PopPK to ADCs.

Building the nonclinical foundation for ADC first-in-human studies

Before entering the clinic, nonclinical ADC programs should evaluate the conjugated ADC (toxicity testing, toxicokinetics and safety pharmacology) and any novel components (e.g. cytotoxic payload) in safety pharmacology, ADME and/or toxicity testing.

Selecting the fight toxicology species

A relevant preclinical species is typically required. If cross-reactive species are unavailable, additional laboratory and computational approaches may be necessary.

Understanding preclinical risk

The cytotoxic payload often drives safety findings. Novel payloads may require additional safety assessment beyond what is required for the conjugated ADC.

Aligning with regulatory expectations

Because ADCs combine biologics and small molecules, development strategies often bridge multiple regulatory guidelines. Programs must be tailored to the construct and indication.

Choosing the starting dose

Traditional rules of thumb still apply such as fractions of highest non-severely toxic doses observed in animals, but they should be complemented with translational modeling to refine predicted human exposure.

And this is where modeling shifts from helpful to essential.

Why modeling is essential for ADC first-in-human dose selection

Industry analyses show that programs incorporating robust preclinical modeling achieve significantly higher probabilities of reaching clinical proof of mechanism, reinforcing the value of structured, data-driven FIH strategy.

Regulatory agencies increasingly expect quantitative justification of FIH dose selection decisions, especially for complex modalities like ADCs. Empirical escalation alone is no longer enough. As Piet emphasized, “Regulators want to understand not just what dose you chose, but why, and modeling provides that scientific rationale.”

For a deeper look at how mechanistic modeling addresses translational uncertainty in ADC programs, explore our insights on mechanistic modeling to meet challenges in ADC development.

Modeling provides a structured way to:

  • Anticipate human exposure
  • Evaluate safety margins
  • Simulate likely toxicities
  • Refine escalation strategy

For ADCs, this is particularly important because safety margins are tight, and translational uncertainty is high.

Moving from reactive to predictive ADC first-in-human strategy

Advanced modeling platforms can integrate tumor biology, pharmacokinetics, DAR, and toxicity drivers. This allows sponsors to narrow starting dose ranges, reduce unnecessary patient risk, avoid subtherapeutic dosing, and design smarter escalation plans.

In short, it shifts FIH planning from reactive to predictive.

How emerging ADC modalities increase first-in-human complexity

The ADC field is expanding into bispecific constructs, antibody fragments, dual payload approaches, immune-activating payloads, and protein degraders. As molecular architecture becomes more sophisticated, translational uncertainty grows.

The underlying principles remain consistent:

  • Understand the components
  • Understand how they interact
  • Quantify safety margins
  • Align with regulators early

But the need for structured, model-informed strategies becomes even more critical.

Key takeaways for ADC first-in-human dose selection

Designing a successful ADC first-in-human study requires:

  1. Early evaluation of therapeutic window
  2. Scientifically justified starting dose
  3. Integrated safety assessment
  4. Predictive modeling
  5. Early regulatory alignment

As ADC pipelines expand and competition intensifies, thoughtful, data-driven FIH strategy is no longer optional; it is a competitive advantage.

To learn more about ADC FIH dose selection and translational strategy, watch our latest webinar.

ADC first-in-human dose selection FAQs

As regulatory expectations evolve and ADC complexity increases, Antibody-drug conjugates First-in-Human Dose Selection requires structured, model-informed strategy. Below we answer common technical and regulatory questions sponsors face when designing ADC FIH studies.

Why is first-in-human dose selection particularly challenging for ADCs?

First-in-human (FIH) dose selection for antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) is uniquely challenging because ADCs are hybrid molecules composed of an antibody, linker, and cytotoxic payload. Each component influences safety and efficacy, and their interactions can narrow the therapeutic index. Small changes in drug–antibody ratio (DAR), linker stability, or target expression can significantly affect exposure and toxicity, making empirical dose-escalation approaches insufficient.

How is the starting dose for an ADC typically determined?

ADC starting dose selection generally incorporates nonclinical toxicology data, including:

  • One-sixth of the highest non-severely toxic dose (HNSTD) in a relevant non-rodent species
  • One-tenth of the severely toxic dose (STD10) in 10% of animals (if applicable)
  • Body surface area scaling of animal dose to humans

However, these heuristics are increasingly complemented by exposure–response modeling and translational simulation to better predict clinical exposure and therapeutic index.

Why is exposure–response modeling important for ADC dose optimization?

For many ADCs, improvements in tumor efficacy are not accompanied by proportional increases in maximum tolerated dose. As a result, dose alone does not adequately define safety and efficacy. Exposure–response modeling helps quantify the relationship between systemic exposure, tumor response, and toxicity, enabling more rational first-in-human dose selection and escalation strategies.

What role does modeling and simulation play in ADC first-in-human study design?

Model-Informed Drug Development (MIDD) approaches including population PK/PD, quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP), and physiologically based pharmacokinetics (PBPK), support translational dose prediction for ADCs. These tools help:

  • Predict human exposure from preclinical data
  • Simulate intracellular payload release
  • Anticipate hematologic toxicities
  • Optimize dose-escalation strategies

Regulatory agencies increasingly expect quantitative justification of dose selection decisions, particularly for complex modalities like ADCs.

How do regulatory guidelines apply to ADC nonclinical development?

ADC development requires bridging multiple regulatory frameworks due to their hybrid nature. Programs often integrate:

  • ICH S6 for biologics
  • ICH S9 for oncology small molecules
  • ICH M3 for non-oncology indications

Nonclinical strategies must evaluate both the conjugated ADC construct and, when necessary, its individual components (e.g., novel payloads and/or linkers).

How do next-generation ADC formats affect first-in-human strategy?

Emerging ADC formats such as bispecific constructs, antibody fragments, dual payloads, and immune-activating payloads increase translational complexity. While the core principles of therapeutic index assessment remain unchanged, these innovations heighten the need for structured, model-informed dose selection and early regulatory alignment.

Learn more about First-in-Human (FIH) Dose Predictions

Strengthen your First-in-Human (FIH) strategy with model-informed insights that improve dose confidence and translational alignment.

Explore Certara’s First-in-Human dose prediction capabilities.

Learn more

Authors

Erika Brooks

Marketing Director, Quantitative Science Services

With over 22 years of experience in hospitals, health systems, associations, life sciences, physician practices, and suppliers, Erika is an experienced marketing strategist and supports the Quantitative Science Services offering with Go-to market planning and execution.

Fran Brown, PhD

Vice President, Global Head, Drug Development Science

Fran has over 25 years of experience with strategic and operational global drug development from early discovery to filing and post-marketing.  She possesses a broad knowledge of strategic drug discovery and development, with a special focus on development strategy and the application of model-informed drug development (MIDD).

Contact us