Pre-existing anti-polyethylene glycol antibodies in pregnant women and newborns
===============================================================================

* Haiyang Wang
* Yan Feng
* Lin Zhang
* Changzheng Yuan
* Junyang Xue
* Jicheng Li
* Xiao Xu
* Wenbin Zhou
* Baohua Li
* Yisha Wang
* Gan Luo
* Yue Zheng
* Meihua Sui

## Abstract

**Importance** Pre-existing anti-polyethylene glycol (PEG) antibodies represent risk factors for reduced efficacy and increased adverse reactions in seropositive individuals receiving PEGylated drugs, but neither their sero-prevalence, nor levels nor potential influencing factors have been investigated in pregnant women or newborns.

**Objective** To parallelly determine the sero-prevalence and levels of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women and newborns, and to reveal their independent influencing factors.

**Design** Cross-sectional analysis using data of pregnant women and their newborns enrolled between May 2021 and May 2022.

**Setting** Pregnant women admitted for delivery at the Women’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine in China, were approached for enrollment.

**Participants** Participants included 256 pregnant women (volunteers) and corresponding 256 newborns. Major eligibility criteria for pregnant women included an age of 20 years or older, a singleton pregnancy, a full-term pregnancy, no history of unhealthy lifestyle (e.g. smoking, drinking and drug abuse), no contagious disease and no disease requiring drug treatment upon enrollment.

**Exposures** Maternal and cord blood samples were collected around or immediately after the delivery for further examinations, along with questionnaire interviews, demographic and clinical data collections.

**Main Outcomes and Measures** All blood samples underwent screening and quantification of pre- existing anti-PEG antibodies. Sero-prevalence and levels of total anti-PEG antibodies and each known isotype/subclass were determined. Influencing factors for sero-prevalence and levels of pre- existing anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women and newborns were respectively revealed with in-depth statistical analysis.

**Results** Seropositivities of total anti-PEG antibodies, anti-PEG IgG1 and IgG2, anti-PEG IgM, and coexistence of anti-PEG IgM and IgG were 19.14%, 2.34%, 7.03%, 10.94% and 1.17%, respectively in pregnant women, and 5.47%, 2.73%, 2.73%, 0% and 0%, respectively in newborns. Anti-PEG IgG3, IgG4 and IgE were undetectable in both pregnant women and newborns. Seropositive pregnant women had a median (Range; IQR) anti-PEG IgG1, IgG2 and IgM concentrations of 273.88 ng/mL (183.74-513.90; 191.70-376.08), 748.35 ng/mL (75.54-2604.89; 159.09-1200.81) and 175.07 ng/mL (55.43-23649.14; 95.95-315.19), respectively. Seropositive newborns had a median (Range; IQR) anti-PEG IgG1 and IgG2 concentrations of 207.92 ng/mL (120.40-1513.98; 133.97-524.58) and 336.52 ng/mL (100.24-1069.62; 275.80-527.07), respectively. Furthermore, we revealed that maternal age, take-out food consumption and cosmetic use were influencing factors of prevalence and levels of maternal anti-PEG antibodies, while prevalence or levels of newborn anti-PEG antibodies were affected by maternal age and cosmetic use.

**Conclusions and Relevance** A proportion of pregnant women and newborns were found seropositive for pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies, raising efficacy and safety concerns over the use of PEGylated drugs in pregnant women and newborns/infants. Several influencing factors on maternal and/or newborn pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies were discovered, providing valuable information for deeper understandings on the induction of risky pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies. Specifically, our data suggest that anti-PEG antibodies may be induced by gastrointestinal exposure to PEG antigens.

## Introduction

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a synthetic polymer comprised of repeating subunits of ethylene glycol and often covalently attached to small molecules, macromolecules and nanomaterials to improve their properties, a process called “PEGylation”1. PEGylation has become one of the most preferred methods to enhance the delivery of therapeutic molecules2. Currently there are 41 PEGylated medicines approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including two COVID- 19 mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®) and mRNA-1273 (Spikevax®), with many other PEGylated agents under clinical development3,4. In addition, PEG and its derivatives have been approved for use in cosmetics and personal care products, as well as food additives and packaging materials in processed foods and beverages, etc5,6.

Although PEG was initially regarded as non-immunogenic, it has been recognized as a polyvalent hapten7–9. Anti-PEG antibodies could be elicited in animals immunized with PEGylated proteins or nanocarriers7–10 and in patients treated with PEGylated drugs11–17. Surprisingly, normal population actually possesses pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in the absence of treatment with PEGylated therapeutics18, which was firstly documented in 198419. It is noteworthy that the presence of anti-PEG antibodies may represent risk factors for reduced efficacy and adverse reactions in patients requiring treatment with PEGylated drugs20–22. Specifically, anti-PEG antibodies may induce the formation of immune complexes with PEG-modified medicines, which could be rapidly cleared via activation of the complement system and subsequent phagocytosis by macrophages, thereby altering the pharmacokinetics and biodistribution21,22. Complement activation may also contribute to the development of infusion-related allergic reactions to PEGylated drugs21,22. For instance, the PEGylated nanoparticles in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine Comirnaty®, which could induce anti-PEG antibodies as recently demonstrated by us23, have been suspected to trigger allergic reactions after vaccinations24.

Up to date, there are seven seroepidemiological studies on pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in general adults, including Chinese adults in Taiwan of China25, American26–29, Australian27, Japanese19, Italian19 and German adults19,30, with interesting data obtained (eTables 1 and 2 in Supplement 1; see Supplement 1 for all online-only materials, e.g. eMethods, eResults, eTable, eFigure and eDiscussion in the following sections). Nevertheless, pregnant women represent a unique population with distinctive and dynamic immunological milieus, and they provide passive immunity to their fetuses/newborns31. Hence, parallel investigation on the pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women and their newborns has offered an opportunity to reveal the potential maternal-fetal/newborn disparities in addition to identifying their respective seroepidemiological characteristics. Meanwhile, in some circumstances, pregnant women need to be treated with PEGylated drugs for medical conditions arising during pregnancy32. Investigating maternal-fetal/newborn anti-PEG antibodies is thus crucial for assessing the maternal-fetal/newborn safety and efficacy of PEGylated drug treatment. Motivated by these concerns, 256 pregnant women and their newborns were enrolled in this cross-sectional study, with corresponding maternal and cord blood samples carefully collected and examined for pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies. Using internationally recognized direct ELISA and competitive ELISA, along with questionnaire interviews, demographic and clinical data collections, and in-depth statistical analysis, the characteristics of pre-existing maternal and newborn anti-PEG antibodies, and the potential independent influencing factors were investigated.

## Methods

### Study Design and Participants

This cross-sectional study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Women’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine (approval No. IRB-20210139-R) and carefully followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines33.

Pregnant women admitted for delivery at the Women’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine were approached for enrollment with a cross-sectional survey conducted between May 2021 and May 2022. Eligibility criteria included an age of 20 years or older, a singleton pregnancy, a full-term pregnancy (ranging from 37+ to 41+6), no history of unhealthy lifestyle (e.g. smoking, drinking or drug abuse), no evidence for exposure to PEGylated drugs before and throughout the pregnancy, no contagious disease, no disease requiring drug treatment upon enrollment and a willingness to participate in this study. Pregnant women participating in other clinical studies were excluded. Eligible participants were identified by dedicated clinicians, with written informed consents obtained from all the participants in accordance with institutional requirements and the Declaration of Helsinki. Maternal blood samples were collected from the peripheral vein within 2 days before delivery. Newborn blood samples were collected from the umbilical cord vein immediately after delivery. All blood samples were centrifuged at 1000 × g for 10 minutes at 4°C, and the serums were immediately harvested and stored at -80°C for further determination of anti- PEG antibodies.

### Questionnaire Interviews and Data Collections

The questionnaire was designed following the ACCADEMY and CHERRIES guides34,35. A face-to-face questionnaire interview was conducted with each participant by a specially trained physician within three days before or after delivery. It is noteworthy that considering the extremely common application of PEG and its derivatives in cosmetics, as well as packaging materials in processed foods and beverages25,30, weekly frequency of cosmetic (e.g. mascara, brow gel, liquid foundation, blemish balm cream, color correcting cream, primer, makeup remover oil, make up removing milk, etc.) use and take-out food consumption during pregnancy were evaluated. In addition, demographic and clinical data including maternal age, body mass index (BMI), education level, permanent address, gestation age at delivery, newborn gender and newborn weight were obtained from hospital electronic medical record (EMR) systems.

### Screening and Quantification of Anti-PEG Antibodies in Serum Samples by ELISA

Anti-PEG antibodies in all serum samples were initially screened using a direct ELISA as described in previous studies25,30. Briefly, MaxisorpTM 96-well microplates were coated with 0.05 mg/well NH2-PEG10000-NH2 in 100 µL of PBS overnight at 4C. Subsequently, plates were gently washed with 350 μL of DPBS for three times, followed by incubation with blocking buffer (5% (w/v) skim milk powder in DPBS, 200 μL/well) at room temperature (RT) for 1.5 hours. Then the plates were washed three times with DPBS again. Afterwards, 100 μL of each serum sample diluted at 1:10 with sample dilution buffer (2% (w/v) skim milk powder in DPBS), together with six serial dilutions of human anti-PEG IgG1-4, IgM or IgE standards (respectively at 10.3, 30.9, 92.6, 277.8, 833.3 and 2500.0 ng/mL) in standard dilution buffer (10% reference human serum tested negative for anti-PEG antibodies (eMethods 1; eFigures 1 and 2), 2% (w/v) skim milk powder in DPBS) were added into corresponding detection plates in duplicate (for serum samples) or triplicate (for anti-PEG antibody standards). Same volumes of sextuplicate standard dilution buffer were used as negative controls.

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F1)

Figure 1. Prevalence and levels of Pre-existing Anti-PEG Antibodies in Pregnant Women and Newborns.
Total Ab included all known isotypes/subclasses of anti-PEG antibodies (A). Venn diagrams display the numbers of serum samples with or without coexistence of maternal anti-PEG IgG1, maternal anti-PEG IgG2, maternal anti-PEG IgM, newborn anti-PEG IgG1, and newborn anti- PEG IgG2 (B), as well as with low level (< 100 ng/mL) (C), moderate level (100-500 ng/mL) (D) and high level (> 500 ng/mL) of anti-PEG antibodies (E). When the number of samples is 0, 0 is not displayed in the Venn diagrams.

![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F2)

Figure 2. Frequency Distributions of Maternal and Newborn Pre-existing Anti-PEG Antibody Levels in Seropositive Pregnant Women and Newborns.
Concentration range, 25% percentile, median and 75% percentile of each antibody isotype/subclass in seropositive pregnant women (A) and newborns (B). Specifically, maternal (M) and paired newborn (N) anti-PEG antibody levels were illustrated (C). Only detected isotypes/subclasses of anti-PEG antibodies were presented.

After further incubation for 1 hour at RT, and five successive washes including four with 350 μL of washing buffer (0.05% (w/v) CHAPS in DPBS) and one with 350 μL of DPBS, 50 µL of diluted mouse anti-human secondary antibodies (IgG1 Fc, 1:2500; IgG2 Fc, 1:5000; IgG3 Hinge, 1:5000; IgG4 Fc, 1:500; IgE, 1:10000) and goat anti-human IgM µ-chain secondary antibody (1:10000) were respectively added and incubated for 1 hour at RT. Again, unbounded antibodies were removed by five successive washes, followed by incubation with 100 µL of TMB for 30 minutes at RT in the dark. Finally, the HRP-TMB reaction was stopped with 100 μL of 2 N H2SO4 and the absorbance was measured at 450 nm. Detailed information on the materials used in ELISA was listed in eMethods 2, and details on the establishment of detection cutoffs of anti-PEG IgG1-4, IgM and IgE were introduced in eMethods 3. Serum samples with average absorbance values higher than the detection cutoffs in direct ELISA were further verified with a competitive ELISA, in order to confirm the PEG specificity of the antibodies detected and minimize false positives (eMethods 4). Only serum samples containing PEG-specific antibodies were ultimately deemed positive for anti-PEG antibodies, and further quantified based on the standard curves established for each batch of the direct ELISA. Detailed information on direct ELISA was described in eMethods 5.

### Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables (maternal age, BMI, gestation age at delivery and newborn weight) were presented as mean with standard deviation (SD) or median with interquartile range (IQR).

Categorical variables (maternal education, permanent address, cosmetic use frequency, take-out food consumption frequency and newborn gender) were presented as numbers with percentages (%). To evaluate the correlations between the prevalence of maternal and newborn anti-PEG antibodies with demographic and clinical variables, univariable logistic regression analysis was firstly performed.

Then variables with *P* < .05 in the univariable logistic regression analysis were re-entered into a multivariable logistic regression analysis to evaluate their potential independent associations with the prevalence of anti-PEG antibodies. Furthermore, for pregnant women and newborns seropositive for anti-PEG antibodies, correlations between antibody levels after log10 transformation and each continuous variable were analyzed using Spearman correlation coefficients (*r*). Meanwhile, univariable generalized linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the correlation of antibody levels after log10 transformation with demographic and clinical variables in seropositive pregnant women and newborns. Then variables with *P* < .05 in the univariable generalized linear regression analysis were re-entered into a multivariable generalized linear regression analysis to determine their potential independent associations with maternal and newborn anti-PEG antibody levels after log10 transformation. Multivariable analysis was only performed in case of 10 or more events per variable (EPV) to avoid bias of the regression coefficients36. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism version 9.0 and IBM SPSS statistics version 29. All statistical tests were based on 2-tailed hypotheses. Differences were considered significant at *P* < .05 unless specifically stated.

## Results

### Study Population

A total of 256 pregnant women enrolled had a median (IQR) age of 32 (29-36) years and a median (IQR) BMI of 26.70 (24.80-29.00) kg/m2. The education levels of participants were as follows: 50 (19.53%) with vocational degrees or below; 61 (23.83%) with associate’s degrees; 107 (41.80%) with bachelor’s degrees; 38 (14.84%) with master’s degrees or above. Moreover, 182 (71.09%) resided in cities while 74 (28.91%) lived in towns. Regarding cosmetic use, 205 (80.09%), 31 (12.11%) and 20 (7.81%) respectively reported 0 days, 1-3 days and 4-7 days for each week. In addition, 70 (27.34%), 97 (37.89%), 64 (25.00%) and 25 (9.77%) respectively reported 0 times, 1-3 times, 4-6 times and 7-9 times take-out food consumption for each week. All newborns were delivered at a mean (SD) gestational age of 38.45 (0.86) weeks, with a mean (SD) birth weight of 3.32 (0.41) kg. Moreover, 127 newborns (49.61%) were males and 129 (50.39%) were females (**Table 1**).

View this table:
[Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/T1)

Table 1. 
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Pregnant Women

### Prevalence and levels of Pre-existing Anti-PEG Antibodies in Pregnant Women and Newborns

By using direct ELISA (eTable 3; eFigures 3-26) and subsequent competitive ELISA (eTable 4; eFigures 27-38), anti-PEG antibody seropositive samples were verified and quantified according to standard curves (eFigures 39-44). Our data showed that anti-PEG antibodies were detectable in 49 (19.14%) pregnant women, with 2.34%, 7.03%, 10.94% and 1.17% of all pregnant women respectively positive for anti-PEG IgG1, IgG2, IgM, and both IgG1 and IgM. No pregnant woman was positive for anti-PEG IgG3, IgG4 or IgE. In addition, double-positivity neither for IgG1 and IgG2, nor for IgG2 and IgM were detected (Figure 1A and B; eTables 5-10). Importantly, anti-PEG antibodies were also detected in 14 (5.47%) newborns, with 7 (2.73%) positive for anti-PEG IgG1 and 7 (2.73%) positive for anti-PEG IgG2. No newborn was positive for anti-PEG IgG3, IgG4, IgM or IgE (Figure 1A and B; eTables 5-10). These data have provided initial characterizations of anti- PEG antibodies in pregnant women (mainly IgM, followed by IgG2 and IgG1) and newborns (IgG1 and IgG2).

![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F3)

Figure 3. Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis for the Prevalence of Pre-existing Anti- PEG Antibodies in Pregnant Women.
Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; OR, odds ratio. A, maternal total anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women (n = 256). B, maternal anti-PEG IgG in pregnant women (n = 256). OR for maternal age represents the change in the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies for each 1-year increase in the age of pregnant women after adjustment for take-out food consumption; and OR for take-out food consumption represents the change in the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies for pregnant women who had take-out food 1-3 times, 4-6 times, and 7-9 times per week compared with those without take-out food consumption after adjustment for maternal age (A). OR for cosmetic use represents the change in the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG for pregnant women who use cosmetics 1-3 days or 4-7 days per week compared with no cosmetic use after adjustment for take-out food consumption; and OR for take-out food consumption represents the change in the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG for pregnant women who had take-out food 1-3 times, 4-6 times and 7-9 times per week compared with those without take-out food consumption after adjustment for cosmetic use (B).

Herein, anti-PEG antibody levels were defined as low (< 100 ng/mL), moderate (100 - 500 ng/mL) and high (> 500 ng/mL) levels according to the literatures26,28. When regarding anti-PEG antibody seropositive pregnant women as the whole population (100%), the following distributions of anti-PEG antibodies were revealed: 10 (20.41%) with low levels (IgG2, 4.08%; IgM, 16.33%), 23 (46.94%) with moderate levels (IgG1, 10.20%; IgG2, 10.20%; IgM, 34.69%; both IgG1 and IgM, 4.08%) and 16 (32.65%) with high levels (IgG1, 2.04%; IgG2, 22.45%; IgM, 6.12%) (Figure 1A, C, D and E; eTables 5-10). Correspondingly, the following distributions were found when regarding 14 seropositive newborns as the whole population (100%): no newborn with low levels, 10 (71.43%) with moderate levels (IgG1, 35.71%; IgG2, 35.71%), and 4 (28.57%) with high levels (IgG1, 14.29%; IgG2, 14.29%) of anti-PEG antibodies (Figure 1A, C, D and E; eTables 5-10). Moreover, seropositive pregnant women had a median (Range; IQR) anti-PEG IgG1, IgG2 and IgM concentrations of 273.88 ng/mL (183.74-513.90; 191.70-376.08), 748.35 ng/mL (75.54-2604.89; 159.09-1200.81) and 175.07 ng/mL (55.43-23649.14; 95.95-315.19), respectively (Figure 2A).

Seropositive newborns had a median (Range; IQR) anti-PEG IgG1 and IgG2 concentrations of 207.92 ng/mL (120.40-1513.98; 133.97-524.58) and 336.52 ng/mL (100.24-1069.62; 275.80-527.07), respectively (Figure 2B).

### Maternal-newborn Differences and Associations of Pre-existing Anti-PEG Antibodies

The prevalence and levels of anti-PEG antibodies were further analyzed to uncover the maternal-newborn differences and associations (Figure 1B and Figure 2C; eTables 5-10). Our data showed that anti-PEG IgG2 was detected in 2 pregnant women and their newborns, with higher antibody levels in mothers (1337.37 vs 275.80 ng/mL; 2604.89 vs 100.24 ng/mL). As neither newborns nor fetuses could generate IgG antibodies owing to immature immune systems37–39, this data suggest a transfer of anti-PEG IgG2 from mothers to their fetuses. Interestingly, although 7 newborns were positive for anti-PEG IgG1, their mothers were negative for anti-PEG IgG1 despite one mother positive for anti-PEG IgG2 and another positive for anti-PEG IgM. Similarly, although 5 newborns were positive for anti-PEG IgG2, their mothers were undetectable for anti-PEG antibodies. Moreover, 6 pregnant women were positive for anti-PEG IgG1, but their newborns were seronegative for anti-PEG antibodies. Sixteen pregnant women were detected with anti-PEG IgG2, but none of their newborns were positive for anti-PEG IgG2 despite one newborn had anti-PEG IgG1.

The complexities of maternal-newborn distribution of anti-PEG IgG not only suggest a transmission of anti-PEG IgG antibodies between mothers and fetuses, but also indicate dynamic changes in antibody subclasses and levels, which may be attributed to varied metabolism and clearance of these antibodies between mothers and fetuses. In addition, 28 pregnant women had anti-PEG IgM, whereas their newborns did not. This data aligns with previous findings that maternal IgM antibodies are unable to cross the placental barrier to reach the fetus37–39.

### Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis for the Prevalence of Pre-existing Maternal Anti- PEG Antibodies

Variables positive in univariable logistic regression analysis (eResults 1; eTables 11), including maternal age and take-out food consumption, were entered into a multivariable logistic regression analysis to estimate adjusted associations with the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies. Our data showed that: with same take-out food consumption, for each 1-year increase in maternal age, the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies dropped to 88.3% (95% CI, 81.5-95.8; *P* = .003) (Figure 3A); with same maternal age, compared with those without take-out food consumption, the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies increased to 332.7% (95% CI, 125.0-885.4; *P* = .016) and 422.4% (95% CI, 123.0-1449.9; *P* = .022), respectively, for pregnant women with take-out food 1-3 times and 7-9 times per week (Figure 3A). These data elucidate that maternal age (inverse association) and take-out food consumption (positive association) are independent influencing factors of the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies.

Moreover, variables positive in univariable logistic regression analysis (eResults 1; eTables 12), including cosmetic use and take-out food consumption, were entered into a multivariable logistic regression analysis to estimate adjusted associations with the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG.

Our data indicate that: with same take-out food consumption, compared with no cosmetic use, the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG increased to 467.8% (95% CI, 151.1-1448.2; *P* = .007) for pregnant women using cosmetics 4-7 days per week (Figure 3B); with same cosmetic use, compared with those without take-out food consumption, the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG increased to 726.3% (95% CI, 126.8-4161.4; *P* = .026) for pregnant women with take-out food 7-9 times per week (Figure 3B). These data suggest that maternal cosmetic use (positive association) and take-out food consumption (positive association) are independent influencing factors of the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG.

In addition, univariable logistic regression analysis for the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgM only showed that for each 1-year increase in the age of pregnant women, the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgM dropped to 88.6% (95% CI, 78.3-95.8; *P* = .005) (eResults 1; eTables 12). That is, requirements for further multivariable logistic regression analysis were not fulfilled for the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgM. Similarly, univariable logistic regression analysis for the prevalence of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies only showed that compared with those without cosmetic use, the prevalence of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies increased to 725.9% (95% CI, 215.9-2441.1; *P* = .001) for pregnant women with 4-7 days per week cosmetic use (eResults 1; eTables 13). Hence, multivariable logistic regression analysis was not eligible for the prevalence of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies.

### Multivariable Generalized Linear Regression Analysis for the Levels of Pre-existing Maternal Anti-PEG Antibodies

Variables positive in Spearman correlation analysis (eResults 2; eFigure 45) and univariable generalized linear regression analysis (eResults 3; eTables 14), including maternal age and cosmetic use, were entered into a multivariable generalized linear regression analysis to estimate adjusted associations with the levels of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies after log10 transformation among seropositive pregnant women. Our data showed that: with same cosmetic use, for each 1-year increase in the maternal age, the anti-PEG antibody levels increased by 0.047 (95% CI, 0.014-0.079; *P* = .005) (Figure 4A); with same maternal age, compared with no cosmetic use, the anti-PEG antibody levels increased by 0.507 (95% CI, 0.148-0.867; *P* = .006) for pregnant women with cosmetic use 4-7 days per week (Figure 4A). These data revealed that maternal age (positive association) and cosmetic use (positive association) are independent influencing factors of the levels of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies.

![Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F4.medium.gif)

[Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/12/10/2024.11.29.24317450/F4)

Figure 4. Multivariable Generalized Linear Regression Analysis for the Levels of Pre-existing Anti-PEG Antibodies in Seropositive Pregnant Women.
Abbreviations: NA, not applicable; β, standardized regression coefficient. A, total anti-PEG antibodies in anti-PEG antibody seropositive pregnant women (n = 49). B, anti-PEG IgG in anti-PEG IgG seropositive pregnant women (n = 24). C, anti-PEG IgM in anti-PEG IgM seropositive pregnant women (n = 28). β for maternal age represents the change of the levels of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies for each 1-year increase in the age of pregnant women after adjustment for cosmetic use; and β for cosmetic use represents the change of the levels of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies for pregnant women who use cosmetics 1- 3 days or 4-7 days per week compared with no cosmetic use after adjustment for maternal age (A). β for maternal age represents the change of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgG for each 1-year increase in the age of pregnant women after adjustment for take-out food consumption; and β for take-out food consumption represents the change of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgG for pregnant women who had take-out food 1-3 times, 4-6 times and 7-9 times per week compared with those without take-out food consumption after adjustment for maternal age (B). β for cosmetic use represents the change of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgM for pregnant women who use cosmetics 1-3 days or 4-7 days per week compared with no cosmetic use after adjustment for education; and β for education represents the change of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgM for pregnant women who had associate’s degree, bachelor’s degree and master’s degree or above compared with those with vocational degree or below after adjustment for cosmetic use (C).

Moreover, variables positive in Spearman correlation analysis (eResults 2; eFigure 45) and univariable generalized linear regression analysis (eResults 3; eTables 15), including maternal age and take-out food consumption, were entered into a multivariable generalized linear regression analysis to estimate adjusted associations with the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgG after log10 transformation among anti-PEG IgG seropositive pregnant women. Our data revealed that: with same take-out food consumption, for each 1-year increase in the maternal age, the anti-PEG IgG levels increased by 0.049 (95% CI, 0.004-0.094; *P* = .033) (Figure 4C); with same maternal age, compared with those without take-out food consumption, the anti-PEG IgG levels increased by 0.591 (95% CI, 0.036-1.145; *P* = .037) for pregnant women with take-out food 1-3 times per week (Figure 4C).

These data demonstrate that maternal age (positive association) and take-out food consumption (positive association) are independent influencing factors of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgG. Interestingly, it is noteworthy that no positive associations were detected between anti-PEG IgG levels with more frequent take-out food consumption such as 4-6 times per week and 7-9 times per week. This data may coincide with previous studies indicating that the positive correlation between anti-PEG antibody level and exposure to a specific antigen was only observed within a certain range of PEG antigen dosages10,39.

Furthermore, variables positive in Spearman correlation analysis (eResults 2; eFigure 45) and univariable generalized linear regression analysis (eResults 3; eTables 15), including maternal education and cosmetic use, were entered into a multivariable generalized linear regression analysis to estimate adjusted associations with the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgM after log10 transformation among anti-PEG IgM seropositive pregnant women. Our data indicate that: with same education background, compared with no cosmetic use, the anti-PEG IgM levels increased by 1.395 (95% CI, 0.810-1.981; *P* < .001) for pregnant women using cosmetics 4-7 days per week (Figure 4B).

However, anti-PEG IgM levels were not affected by education (with same cosmetic use) (Figure 4B). These data suggest that cosmetic use is an independent influencing factor (positive association) of the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgM, while education is not.

Lastly, Spearman correlation analysis for the levels of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies after log10 transformation only showed a positive correlation between the levels of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies and maternal age (*r* = 0.711, *P* = .006) (eResults 2; eFigure 46), and univariable generalized linear regression analysis for the levels of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies after log10 transformation only showed that for each 1-year increase in the age of pregnant women, the levels of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies increased by 0.065 (95% CI, 0.032-0.098; *P* <.001) (eResults 3; eTable 16). Therefore, no further multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted for the levels of newborn total anti-PEG antibodies.

## Discussion

It is noteworthy that the firstly reported low overall seropositivity of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies (0.2%) might be attributed to the low sensitivity of detection method41,42. Certainly, it may also reflect the low exposure to PEG antigens in the early 1980s41,42. Afterwards, the detection methods for anti-PEG antibodies were improved, with the combination of direct ELISA with competitive ELISA being regarded as most reliable41,43. Using this internally recognized method, herein we revealed that the seropositivities of total anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women and newborns ware 19.14% and 5.47%, respectively. Further profile analysis on anti-PEG IgG1-G4, IgM and IgE showed that only anti-PEG IgM, IgG1 and IgG2 were detectable in pregnant women, with IgG2 as the dominant IgG subclass (Figure 1; eFigure 47). Previously there was one literature that determined the anti-PEG IgG subclasses in general adults, in which anti-PEG IgG2 was also most dominant26. IgG2 and IgM antibodies are commonly associated with T cell-independent immune responses against non-protein antigens such as lipids, nucleic acids, polysaccharides, and other natural and synthetic polymers21,22,44. In contrast, protein antigens predominantly induce IgG1 and IgG3 antibodies, with some IgG4 and IgE, by T cell-dependent immune responses21,22,44.

Nevertheless, IgG1 could also arise through a T cell-independent pathway44. Therefore, the absence of IgG3, IgG4 and IgE, the presence of IgG1, IgG2, IgM and co-existence of IgG1 and IgM suggest that pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in pregnant women are more likely generated through T cell- independent mechanisms, supporting the hypothesis that these antibodies stem from exposure to non- protein everyday chemicals containing PEG and its derivatives. Moreover, consistent with five previous studies conducted in general adults25–29 (eTable 1), anti-PEG IgM and IgG exhibited similar seropositivity in pregnant women.

Moreover, parallel investigation in pregnant women and newborns has provided an opportunity to uncover the potential maternal-fetal/newborn transfer or associations in pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies between two generations (eFigure 47). As fetuses are incapable of synthesizing IgG antibodies37–39, the presence of fetal anti-PEG IgG in newborns may suggest active maternal- fetal/newborn antibody transfers across the placenta. Nevertheless, as several factors such as IgG subclasses, maternal antibody titers, gestational age and nature of antigen may affect the placental transfer efficacy of IgG38,45, it is understandable to see discrepancies in prevalence and levels of anti- PEG IgG between pregnant women and newborns. Particularly, mothers and fetuses have disparities in antibody metabolism46. On the other hand, different from IgG, maternal IgM antibodies could not cross the placental barrier to achieve maternal-fetal transfer38,47–49. However, fetuses could produce IgM antibodies by themselves in response to T-independent antigens including PEG and PEGylated derivatives47–49. Therefore, the absence of anti-PEG IgM antibodies in newborns may suggest lack of uterus PEG antigen exposure and/or degradation of fetal anti-PEG IgM induced by uterus PEG antigen exposure. These findings have deepened our understandings of the induction of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies and provided initial evidence for their maternal-fetal/newborn transfer.

Previously, several “inherent” factors such as gender and age have been preliminarily evaluated for their possible influences on pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in general adults25–30 (eTables 1 and 2). However, inconsistent findings were obtained across very limited literatures. For instance, both the prevalence and levels of pre-existing anti-PEG IgG exhibited either a negative correlation25,26 or no correlation28 with donor age in general adults, while no correlation was reported between either prevalence or levels of anti-PEG IgM and donor age25–28, 30. In addition, the highest prevalence of anti-PEG IgG was observed among American adults aged 18-24 years in one report28. These findings suggest age-related disparities as well as potential population heterogeneity in pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies. Interestingly, herein maternal age exhibited a negative correlation with the prevalence of total anti-PEG antibodies and anti-PEG IgM (but not IgG), and a positive correlation with the levels of total anti-PEG antibodies and anti-PEG IgG (but not IgM). Meanwhile, we discovered that maternal age had a positive correlation with total newborn anti-PEG antibody (total newborn anti- PEG IgG) levels (eFigure 47). Although further studies on regulatory mechanisms are needed, the specific age range (23∼39 years old) of seropositive pregnant women, distinctive and dynamic immunological milieus during pregnancy and potential maternal-fetal/newborn crosstalk should be taken into account.

As mentioned above, it has been hypothesized that pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies are associated with exposure to everyday chemicals containing PEG and its derivatives21,25,26,43. However, this hypothesis has been rarely tested, and till now only two reports suggesting the association between cosmetic use (skin contact) and pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies, one conducted in mice50 and another in general adults51. Herein, we revealed that the frequency of maternal cosmetic use is a positive influencing factor for the prevalence of maternal anti-PEG IgG, and for the levels of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies and anti-PEG IgM. Interestingly, we discovered that the frequency of take-out food (ingestion) was a positive influencing factor for the prevalence of maternal total anti-PEG antibodies and anti-PEG IgG, and for the levels of maternal anti-PEG IgG, suggesting that anti-PEG antibodies could be induced by gastrointestinal exposure to PEG antigens (eFigure 47).

Most importantly, as a group of anti-drug antibodies (ADA), anti-PEG antibodies have been demonstrated to induce accelerated blood clearance and increase risks of adverse reactions of PEGylated drugs, including hypersensitivity reactions, in a number of animal studies7,9,10,23,52–63 and in several clinical investigations11,14–17,51,64–66 (eDiscussion 1; eTables 17 and 18). Particularly, a positive correlation between the concentration of ADA and changes in pharmacokinetics (PK) has been confirmed in clinical trials, with alterations of PK parameters even induced by certain low level ADA (30-100 ng/mL)67. Considering that moderate to high levels of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies with potential complement-activating activity were observed in a subset of pregnant women and newborns, our findings have naturally raised efficacy and safety concerns over the use of PEGylated drugs in seropositive pregnant women and newborns (Figures 1 and 2). Indeed, tests for anti-PEG antibodies have been recently recommended by FDA guidelines in patients for assessing the potential immune response to PEGylated therapies68. Finally, it is worthy to note that as passively acquired maternal antibodies in newborns wane throughout 6 to 12 months after birth37, the anti-PEG antibodies detected in newborns may have long-term immunological effects. This is of particular importance as some PEGylated drugs, including Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, have been officially approved for infants as young as 6 months69.

## Limitations

With 256 maternal and 256 newborn blood samples collected around delivery, this cross- sectional study has characterized the prevalence and levels of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies at a specific time point with representative maternal-newborn populations. In addition, although all the isotypes and subclasses of anti-PEG antibodies previously reported in literatures have been examined in this study, it remains unclear whether there is undiscovered isotype or subclass of anti-PEG antibodies. Moreover, as a reasonable cost of time was needed for questionnaire interviews, we selected a number of factors that we are particularly interested in for data collection and subsequent in-depth statistical analysis. Further evaluations assessing additional factors are needed, which will broaden our understandings on the origins of PEG antigens and induction of risky pre-existing anti- PEG antibodies.

## Conclusions

Sero-prevalence and levels of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies were revealed in pregnant women and their newborns with this cross-sectional study, which has raised efficacy and safety concerns over the use of PEGylated drugs in seropositive pregnant women and newborns. Moreover, several influencing factors on maternal and newborn pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies were discovered. These findings have broadened our understandings on seroepidemiological characteristics of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies, and provided useful clues for identifying the origins of PEG antigens inducing risky anti-PEG antibodies. Specifically, our data may provide initial evidence that gastrointestinal exposure to PEG and its derivatives could induce pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies.

## Supporting information

Supplement 1 [[supplements/317450_file06.docx]](pending:yes)

## Author Contributions

Dr. Sui had full access to all the data in the study and took full responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Wang, Feng, and Zhang contributed equally as the first authors.

Concept and design: Sui, Wang, Feng, Yuan. Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors. Drafting of the manuscript: Sui, Wang.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors. Statistical analysis: Sui, Wang, Zhang.

Obtained funding: Sui.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Sui, Wang, Feng, Zhang, Yuan, Li, Xu. Supervision: Sui.

## Conflict of Interest Disclosures

No interest disclosures were reported.

## Funding/Support

This work was supported by the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (LZ23E030003 to Dr. Meihua Sui), National Natural Science Foundation of China (21722405 and 22075243 to Dr. Meihua Sui) and Startup Foundation for Hundred-Talent Program of Zhejiang University (to Dr. Meihua Sui).

## Role of the Funder/Sponsor

The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

## Data Sharing Statement

See Supplement 2.

## Key Points

***Question:*** What are the sero-prevalence and levels of pre-existing anti-polyethylene glycol (PEG) antibodies in pregnant women and newborns, and what are their influencing factors?

***Findings:*** In this cross-sectional study, the seropositivities and levels of total and various isotypes/subclasses of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies in 256 pregnant women and corresponding 256 newborns were revealed. Moreover, we found that maternal age, take-out food consumption, and cosmetic use were influencing factors of prevalence and levels of maternal anti-PEG antibodies, while the prevalence or levels of newborn anti-PEG antibodies were affected by maternal age and cosmetic use.

***Meaning:*** Seroepidemiological characteristics of pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies were revealed in pregnant women and newborns, which has raised efficacy and safety concerns over the use of PEGylated drugs in pregnant women and newborns/infants, and has provided valuable information for public health concerns regarding the origins of PEG antigens and induction of risky pre-existing anti-PEG antibodies.

## Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript

## Footnotes

*   Haiyang Wang, M.D., Ph.D. candidate; Yan Feng, M.D., Ph.D.; Lin Zhang, M.D., Ph.D.; Changzheng Yuan, Ph.D.; Junyang Xue, M.D. candidate; Jicheng Li, M.D., M.M.S.; Xiao Xu, M.D., Ph.D.; Wenbin Zhou, M.D., Ph.D. candidate; Baohua Li, M.D., Ph.D.; Yisha Wang, M.D., Ph.D. candidate; Gan Luo, B.S., Ph.D. candidate; Yue Zheng, B.S., Ph.D. candidate; Meihua Sui, M.D., Ph.D.

*   Abstract updated; Supplemental files updated.

*   Received November 29, 2024.
*   Revision received December 10, 2024.
*   Accepted December 10, 2024.


*   © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.Harris JM, Chess RB. Effect of pegylation on pharmaceuticals. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2003;2(3):214–221. doi:10.1038/nrd1033
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nrd1033&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12612647&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000181201600016&link_type=ISI) 

2.  2. Hoang Thi TT, Pilkington EH, Nguyen DH, Lee JS, Park KD, Truong NP. The importance of poly(ethylene glycol) alternatives for overcoming PEG immunogenicity in drug delivery and bioconjugation. Polymers (Basel*)*. 2020;12(2):298. doi:10.3390/polym12020298
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3390/polym12020298&link_type=DOI) 

3.  3.Gao YS, Joshi M, Zhao ZM, Mitragotri S. PEGylated therapeutics in the clinic. Bioeng Transl Med. 2023;9(1):e10600. doi:10.1002/btm2.10600
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/btm2.10600&link_type=DOI) 

4.  4.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. New drug therapy approvals 2024. Accessed August 22, 2024. [https://www.fda.gov/drugs/novel-drug-approvals-fda/novel-drug-approvals-2024](https://www.fda.gov/drugs/novel-drug-approvals-fda/novel-drug-approvals-2024)
    
    

5.  5.Fruijtier-Pölloth C. Safety assessment on polyethylene glycols (PEGs) and their derivatives as used in cosmetic products. Toxicology. 2005;214(1-2):1–38. doi:10.1016/j.tox.2005.06.001
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.tox.2005.06.001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16011869&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

6.  6.Jang HJ, Shin CY, Kim KB. Safety evaluation of polyethylene glycol (PEG) compounds for cosmetic use. Toxicol Res. 2015;31(2):105–136. doi:10.5487/TR.2015.31.2.105
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.5487/TR.2015.31.2.105&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26191379&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

7.  7.Elsadek NE, Abu Lila AS, Emam SE, et al. Pegfilgrastim (PEG-G-CSF) induces anti-PEG IgM in a dose dependent manner and causes the accelerated blood clearance (ABC) phenomenon upon repeated administration in mice. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2020;152:56–62. doi:10.1016/j.ejpb.2020.04.026
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ejpb.2020.04.026&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32376372&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

8.  8.Talkington AM, McSweeney MD, Zhang T, et al. High MW polyethylene glycol prolongs circulation of pegloticase in mice with anti-PEG antibodies. J Control Release. 2021;338:804–812. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.08.051
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.08.051&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=34481925&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

9.  9.Ishida T, Ichihara M, Wang X, et al. Injection of PEGylated liposomes in rats elicits PEG-specific IgM, which is responsible for rapid elimination of a second dose of PEGylated liposomes. J Control Release. 2006;112(1):15–25. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.01.005
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.01.005&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16515818&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000237263100002&link_type=ISI) 

10. 10.Emam SE, Elsadek NE, Abu Lila AS, et al. Anti-PEG IgM production and accelerated blood clearance phenomenon after the administration of PEGylated exosomes in mice. J Control Release. 2021;334:327–334. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.05.001
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.05.001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33957196&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

11. 11.Hershfield MS, Ganson NJ, Kelly SJ, Scarlett EL, Jaggers DA, Sundy JS. Induced and pre- existing anti-polyethylene glycol antibody in a trial of every 3-week dosing of pegloticase for refractory gout, including in organ transplant recipients. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16(2):R63. doi:10.1186/ar4500
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/ar4500&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24602182&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

12. 12.Liu YW, Smith CA, Yang WJ, et al. Pegaspargase allergic reactions are related to anti- pegaspargase antibodies and to intensity of intrathecal therapy. Blood. 2018;132:2697. doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-110141
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1182/blood-2018-99-110141&link_type=DOI) 

13. 13.Kloos R, van der Sluis IM, Mastrobattista E, Hennink W, Pieters R, Verhoef JJ. Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia patients treated with PEGasparaginase develop antibodies to PEG and the succinate linker. Br J Haematol. 2020;189(3):442–451. doi:10.1111/bjh.16254
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/bjh.16254&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31883112&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

14. 14.Sundy JS, Ganson NJ, Kelly SJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous PEGylated recombinant mammalian urate oxidase in patients with refractory gout. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56(3):1021–1028. doi:10.1002/art.22403
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/art.22403&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17328081&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000244829400040&link_type=ISI) 

15. 15.Ganson NJ, Kelly SJ, Scarlett E, Sundy JS, Hershfield MS. Control of hyperuricemia in subjects with refractory gout, and induction of antibody against poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), in a phase I trial of subcutaneous PEGylated urate oxidase. Arthritis Res Ther. 2006;8(1):R12. doi:10.1186/ar1861
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/ar1861&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16356199&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

16. 16.Thomas J, Levy H, Amato S, et al. Pegvaliase for the treatment of phenylketonuria: Results of a long-term phase 3 clinical trial program (PRISM). Mol Genet Metab. 2018;124(1):27–38. doi:10.1016/j.ymgme.2018.03.006
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ymgme.2018.03.006&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=29653686&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

17. 17.Armstrong JK, Hempel G, Koling S, et al. Antibody against poly(ethylene glycol) adversely affects PEG-asparaginase therapy in acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients. Cancer. 2007;110(1):103–111. doi:10.1002/cncr.22739
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/cncr.22739&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17516438&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000247384200013&link_type=ISI) 

18. 18.Yang Q, Lai SK. Anti-PEG immunity: Emergence, characteristics and unaddressed questions. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2015;7(5):655–77. doi:10.1002/wnan.1339
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/wnan.1339&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25707913&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

19. 19.Richter AW, Akerblom E. Polyethylene-glycol reactive antibodies in man: Titer distribution in allergic patients treated with monomethoxy polyethylene-glycol modified allergens or placebo, and in healthy blood-donors. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol. 1984;74(1):36–39. doi:10.1159/000233512
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1159/000233512&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=6706424&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1984SM31000006&link_type=ISI) 

20. 20.Ju Y, Carreno JM, Simon V, Dawson K, Krammer F, Kent SJ. Impact of anti-PEG antibodies induced by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. Nat Rev Immunol. 2023;23(3):135–136. doi:10.1038/s41577-022-00825-x
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41577-022-00825-x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=36539526&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

21. 21.Chen BM, Cheng TL, Roffler SR. Polyethylene glycol immunogenicity: Theoretical, clinical, and practical aspects of anti-polyethylene glycol antibodies. ACS Nano. 2021;15(9):14022–14048. doi:10.1021/acsnano.1c05922
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acsnano.1c05922&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=34469112&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

22. 22.Shi D, Beasock D, Fessler A, et al. To PEGylate or not to PEGylate: Immunological properties of nanomedicine’s most popular component, polyethylene glycol and its alternatives. Adv Drug Deliver Rev. 2022;180:114079. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2021.114079
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.addr.2021.114079&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=34902516&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

23. 23.Wang HY, Wang YS, Yuan CZ, et al. Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-associated immune responses triggered by clinically relevant lipid nanoparticles in rats. NPJ Vaccines. 2023;8(1)169. doi:10.1038/s41541-023-00766-z
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41541-023-00766-z&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37919316&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

24. 24.de Vrieze J. COVID-19 Pfizer’s vaccine raises allergy concerns. Science. 2021;371(6524):10-11. doi: 10.1126/science.371.6524
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1126/science.371.6524&link_type=DOI) 

25. 25.Chen BM, Su YC, Chang CJ, et al. Measurement of pre-existing IgG and IgM antibodies against polyethylene glycol in healthy individuals. Anal Chem. 2016;88(21):10661–10666. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03109
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03109&link_type=DOI) 

26. 26.Yang Q, Jacobs TM, McCallen JD, et al. Analysis of pre-existing IgG and IgM antibodies against polyethylene glycol (PEG) in the general population. Anal Chem. 2016;88(23):11804–11812. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03437
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03437&link_type=DOI) 

27. 27.Lubich C, Allacher P, de la Rosa M, et al. The mystery of antibodies against polyethylene glycol (PEG) - What do we know? Pharm Res. 2016;33(9):2239–2249. doi:10.1007/s11095-016-1961-x
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11095-016-1961-x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27271335&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

28. 28.Fang JL, Beland FA, Tang YS, Roffler SR. Flow cytometry analysis of anti-polyethylene glycol antibodies in human plasma. Toxicol Rep. 2021;8:148–154. doi:10.1016/j.toxrep.2020.12.022
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.toxrep.2020.12.022&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33437656&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

29. 29.Li ZB, Ma ALC, Miller I, et al. Development of anti-PEG IgG/IgM/IgE ELISA assays for profiling anti-PEG immunoglobulin response in PEG-sensitized individuals and patients with alpha- gal allergy. J Control Release. 2024;366:342–348. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2024.01.003
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2024.01.003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=38182056&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

30. 30.Deuker MFS, Mailänder V, Morsbach S, Landfester K. Anti-PEG antibodies enriched in the protein corona of PEGylated nanocarriers impact the cell uptake. Nanoscale Horiz. 2023;8(10):1377–1385. doi:10.1039/d3nh00198a
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1039/d3nh00198a&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37591816&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

31. 31.Mor G, Aldo P, Alvero AB. The unique immunological and microbial aspects of pregnancy. Nat Rev Immunol. 2017;17(8):469–482. doi:10.1038/nri.2017.64
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nri.2017.64&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28627518&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

32. 32.Jummaat F, Yahya EB, Khalil AHPS, et al. The role of biopolymer-based materials in obstetrics and gynecology applications: A review. Polymers (Basel*)*. 2021;13(4):633. doi:10.3390/polym13040633
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3390/polym13040633&link_type=DOI) 

33. 33.von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology. 2007;18(6):800–804. doi:10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577654
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577654&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18049194&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000262285900027&link_type=ISI) 

34. 34.Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of web surveys: The checklist for reporting results of Internet e-surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(3) e34. doi:10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15471760&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

35. 35.Burns KEA, Duffett M, Kho ME, et al. A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ. 2008;179(3):245–252. doi:10.1503/cmaj.080372
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNzkvMy8yNDUiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8xMi8xMC8yMDI0LjExLjI5LjI0MzE3NDUwLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

36. 36.Vittinghoff E, McCulloch CE. Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165(6):710–718. doi:10.1093/aje/kwk052
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/aje/kwk052&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17182981&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000244655200014&link_type=ISI) 

37. 37.Niewiesk S. Maternal antibodies: clinical significance, mechanism of interference with immune responses, and possible vaccination strategies. Front Immunol. 2015;5:446. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00446
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fimmu.2014.00446&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25278941&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

38. 38.Palmeira P, Quinello C, Silveira-Lessa AL, Zago CA, Carneiro-Sampaio M. IgG placental transfer in healthy and pathological pregnancies. Clin Dev Immunol. 2012;2012:985646. doi:10.1155/2012/985646
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1155/2012/985646&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22235228&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

39. 39.Simister NE. Placental transport of immunoglobulin G. Vaccine. 2003;21(24):3365–3369. doi:10.1016/s0264-410x(03)00334-7
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0264-410X(03)00334-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12850341&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000184402300005&link_type=ISI) 

40. 40.Ichihara M, Shimizu T, Imoto A, et al. Anti-PEG IgM response against PEGylated liposomes in mice and rats. Pharmaceutics. 2010;3(1):1–11. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics3010001
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3390/pharmaceutics3010001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24310423&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

41. 41.Kozma GT, Shimizu T, Ishida T, Szebeni J. Anti-PEG antibodies: Properties, formation, testing and role in adverse immune reactions to PEGylated nano-biopharmaceuticals. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2020;154–155:163-175. doi:10.1016/j.addr.2020.07.024
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.addr.2020.07.024&link_type=DOI) 

42. 42.Gaballa SA, Shimizu T, Ando H, et al. Treatment-induced and pre-existing anti-peg antibodies: prevalence, clinical implications, and future perspectives. J Pharm Sci. 2024;113(3):555–578. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2023.11.001
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.xphs.2023.11.001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37931786&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

43. 43.Fu JR, Wu ER, Li GH, Wang B, Zhan CY. Anti-PEG antibodies: Current situation and countermeasures. Nano Today. 2024;55:102163. doi:10.1016/j.nantod.2024.102163
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.nantod.2024.102163&link_type=DOI) 

44. 44.Vidarsson G, Dekkers G, Rispens T. IgG subclasses and allotypes: from structure to effector functions. Front Immunol. 2014;5:520. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00520
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fimmu.2014.00520&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25368619&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

45. 45.Fouda GG, Martinez DR, Swamy GK, Permar SR. The impact of IgG transplacental transfer on early life immunity. ImmunoHorizons. 2018;2(1):14–25. doi:10.4049/immunohorizons.1700057
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTM6ImltbXVub2hvcml6b24iO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6NjoiMi8xLzE0IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMTIvMTAvMjAyNC4xMS4yOS4yNDMxNzQ1MC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

46. 46.Cassidy AG, Li L, Golan Y, et al. Assessment of adverse reactions, antibody patterns, and 12- month outcomes in the mother-infant dyad after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(7):e2323405. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.23405
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.23405&link_type=DOI) 

47. 47.Novoa RH, Quintana W, Llancarí P, Urbina-Quispe K, Guevara-Ríos E, Ventura W. Maternal clinical characteristics and perinatal outcomes among pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019. A systematic review. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2021;39:101919. doi:10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101919
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101919&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33220455&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

48. 48.Zeng H, Xu C, Fan JL, et al. Antibodies in infants born to mothers with COVID-19 pneumonia. JAMA. 2020;323(18):1848–1849. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.4861
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.4861&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32215589&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

49. 49.Kimberlin DW, Stagno S. Can SARS-CoV-2 infection be acquired in utero? More definitive evidence is needed. JAMA. 2020;323(18):1788–1789. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.4868
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.4868&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32215579&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

50. 50.Ibrahim M, Shimizu T, Ando H, et al. Investigation of anti-PEG antibody response to PEG- containing cosmetic products in mice. J Control Release. 2023;354:260–267. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2023.01.012
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2023.01.012&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=36632951&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

51. 51.Kozma GT, Mészáros T, Berényi P, et al. Role of anti-polyethylene glycol (PEG) antibodies in the allergic reactions to PEG-containing Covid-19 vaccines: Evidence for immunogenicity of PEG. Vaccine. 2023;41(31):4561–4570. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.06.009
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.06.009&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37330369&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

52. 52.Wang XY, Ishida T, Kiwada H. Anti-PEG IgM elicited by injection of liposomes is involved in the enhanced blood clearance of a subsequent dose of PEGylated liposomes. J Control Release. 2007;119(2):236–244. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2007.02.010
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2007.02.010&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17399838&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000247192800012&link_type=ISI) 

53. 53.Li CL, Cao JN, Wang YJ, et al. Accelerated blood clearance of pegylated liposomal topotecan: Influence of polyethylene glycol grafting density and animal species. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101(10):3864–3876. doi:10.1002/jps.23254
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/jps.23254&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22777607&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

54. 54.Xu H, Ye FF, Hu MN, et al. Influence of phospholipid types and animal models on the accelerated blood clearance phenomenon of PEGylated liposomes upon repeated injection. Drug Deliv. 2015;22(5):598–607. doi:10.3109/10717544.2014.885998
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3109/10717544.2014.885998&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24524364&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

55. 55.Wang FL, Ye X, Wu YF, et al. Time interval of two injections and first-dose dependent of accelerated blood clearance phenomenon induced by PEGylated liposomal gambogenic acid: The contribution of PEG-specific IgM. J Pharm Sci. 2019;108(1):641–651. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2018.10.027
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.xphs.2018.10.027&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30595169&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

56. 56.Mima Y, Hashimoto Y, Shimizu T, Kiwada H, Ishida T. Anti-PEG IgM is a major contributor to the accelerated blood clearance of polyethylene glycol-conjugated protein. Mol Pharma. 2015;12(7):2429–2435. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.5b00144
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.5b00144&link_type=DOI) 

57. 57.Elsadek NE, Hondo E, Shimizu T, et al. Impact of pre-existing or induced anti-PEG IgM on the pharmacokinetics of peginterferon Alfa-2a (Pegasys) in mice. Mol Pharma. 2020;17(8):2964–2970. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.0c00366
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.0c00366&link_type=DOI) 

58. 58.Ishihara T, Takeda M, Sakamoto H, et al. Accelerated blood clearance phenomenon upon repeated injection of PEG-modified PLA-nanoparticles. Pharm Res. 2009;26(10):2270–2279. doi:10.1007/s11095-009-9943-x
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11095-009-9943-x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19633820&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000269535700005&link_type=ISI) 

59. 59.Koide H, Asai T, Kato H, et al. Size-dependent induction of accelerated blood clearance phenomenon by repeated injections of polymeric micelles. Int J Pharma. 2012;432(1-2):75–79. doi:10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.04.049
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijpharm.2012.04.049&link_type=DOI) 

60. 60.Fix SM, Nyankima AG, McSweeney MD, Tsuruta JK, Lai SK, Dayton PA. Accelerated clearance of ultrasound contrast agents containing polyethylene glycol is associated with the generation of anti- polyethylene glycol antibodies. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018;44(6):1266–1280. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.02.006
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2018.02.006&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=29602540&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

61. 61.Stavnsbjerg C, Christensen E, Münter R, et al. Accelerated blood clearance and hypersensitivity by PEGylated liposomes containing TLR agonists. J Control Release. 2022;342:337–344. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.12.033
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.12.033&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=34973307&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

62. 62.Kozma GT, Mészáros T, Vashegyi I, et al. Pseudo-anaphylaxis to polyethylene glycol (PEG)- coated liposomes: Roles of anti-PEG IgM and complement activation in a porcine model of human infusion reactions. ACS Nano. 2019;13(8):9315–9324. doi:10.1021/acsnano.9b03942
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acsnano.9b03942&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31348638&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

63. 63.Chen WA, Chang DY, Chen BM, Lin YC, Barenholz Y, Roffler SR. Antibodies against poly(ethylene glycol) activate innate immune cells and induce hypersensitivity reactions to PEGylated nanomedicines. ACS Nano. 2023;17(6):5757–5772. doi:10.1021/acsnano.2c12193
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1021/acsnano.2c12193&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=36926834&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

64. 64.Lipsky PE, Calabrese LH, Kavanaugh A, et al. Pegloticase immunogenicity: the relationship between efficacy and antibody development in patients treated for refractory chronic gout. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16(2):R60. doi:10.1186/ar4497
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/ar4497&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24588936&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

65. 65.Khalil A, Würthwein G, Golitsch J, et al. Pre-existing antibodies against polyethylene glycol reduce asparaginase activities on first administration of pegylated asparaginase in children with acute lymphocytic leukemia. Haematologica. 2022;107(1):49–57. doi:10.3324/haematol.2020.258525
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3324/haematol.2020.258525&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33299233&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

66. 66.Ganson NJ, Povsic TJ, Sullenger BA, et al. Pre-existing anti-polyethylene glycol antibody linked to first-exposure allergic reactions to pegnivacogin, a PEGylated RNA aptamer. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016;137(5):1610–1613. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2015.10.034
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jaci.2015.10.034&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26688515&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

67. 67.Zhou L, Hoofring SA, Wu Y, et al. Stratification of antibody-positive subjects by antibody level reveals an impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics. AAPS J. 2013;15(1):30–40. doi:10.1208/s12248-012-9408-8
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1208/s12248-012-9408-8&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23054969&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F12%2F10%2F2024.11.29.24317450.atom) 

68. 68. Food Drug A, Cder, Cber. Guidance for industry: Immunogenicity assessment for therapeutic protein products. Biotechnol Law Rep. 2013;32(3):172–185. doi:10.1089/blr.2013.9927
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/blr.2013.9927&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000320380000006&link_type=ISI) 

69. 69.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Coronavirus (COVID-19) update: FDA authorizes Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines for children down to 6 months of age. Accessed June 22, 2022. [https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-moderna-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccines-children](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-moderna-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccines-children)