This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Penpulimab does in the body
Penpulimab-kcqx is a programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)-blocking antibody indicated: in combination with either cisplatin or carboplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of adults with recurrent or metastatic non-keratinizing nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) ( 1.1 )
From the FDA-approved label: Binding of the PD-1 ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2, to the PD-1 receptor found on T cells, inhibits T-cell proliferation and cytokine production. Upregulation of PD-1 ligands occurs in some tumors and signaling through this pathway can contribute to inhibition of active T-cell immune surveillance of tumors. Penpulimab-kcqx injection is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds to PD-1 and blocks its interaction with PD-L1 and PD-L2, releasing PD-1 pathway-mediated inhibition of the immune response, including the anti-tumor immune response. In murine tumor models, blocking PD-1 activity resulted in decreased tumor growth.
Why people take it. Penpulimab-kcqx is a programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)-blocking antibody indicated: in combination with either cisplatin or carboplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of adults with recurrent or metastatic non-keratinizing nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) ( 1.1 )
What happened in people
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Not recorded.
Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as protein.
FDA substance registry · IBS1BZ4E4I · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.
The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 176 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Biomarker
A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.
Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.
What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.
A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.
Placebo
A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.
Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.
What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.
An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.
Comparator
A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like the other runner in a race.
Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.
What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.
The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Progression Free Survival at 24 months (PFS24) Assessed by Investigator per Lugano Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06516978
How many people
528
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Recurrence-free survival (RFS)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05862337
How many people
480
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Progression-free survival (PFS)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04974398
How many people
296
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
3-Year Disease-Free Survival
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07612098
How many people
274
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs) ,Clinically significant abnormal laboratory results
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06943820
How many people
230
Study design
Phase 1/Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Objective Response Rate (ORR)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06767800
How many people
204
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Intravenous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.8 registered measures of this kind. 4 written-up studies measured this and did not show a benefit.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
progression free survival
disease free survival
pathological complete remission rate
overall survival
progress free survival
progression free survival pfs
3 year disease free survival
2 year progression free survival rate
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (8)
objective response rate
overall response rate
disease control rate
pathological complete response rate
major pathological response mpr
dose limiting toxicity
adverse event rate
incidence of treatment related adverse events
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 32 days
Read from the label, which states: “Elimination The mean (CV%) clearance was 0.2 L/day (33%) and the mean (CV%) terminal half-life was 32 days (44%).”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Penpulimab-kcqx is a programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)-blocking antibody indicated: in combination with either cisplatin or carboplatin and gemcitabine for the first-line treatment of adults with recurrent or metastatic non-keratinizing nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) ( 1.1 ) as a single agent for the treatment of adults with metastatic non-keratinizing NPC with disease progression on or after platinum-based…
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of penpulimab-kcqx have not been established in pediatric patients [see Indications and Usage (1)] .”
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies did not include a sufficient number of patients aged 65 years or older to determine differences in safety or effectiveness compared to younger patients [see Adverse Reactions (6) ].”
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Based on its mechanism of action, penpulimab-kcqx can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.1) ] .”
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There is no information regarding the presence of penpulimab-kcqx in human milk or its effects on the breastfed child, or on milk production.”
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Still being tested
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Intravenous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S3, S7.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as injection, given by the intravenous route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Reports sent to a regulator
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Penpulimab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 38 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Intravenous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
1 product lists this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 1 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83654-105 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, taken intravenous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83654-105 · read 2026-08-29
1 published label names it as an active ingredient. 1 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-29
Penpulimab kcqx is intravenous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS Injection: 100 mg/10 mL (10 mg/mL) as a clear to slightly opalescent, colorless to yellowish solution in a single-dose vial., recorded as fda label in effect 2025-04-24 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · read 2026-08-30
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Penpulimab studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Penpulimab are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
IBS1BZ4E4I
RxNorm concept
2712652
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Quoted from a stored source.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S3, S7.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20250423.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 83654-105 · read 2026-08-29
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
6 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (10)
Q2
What did Penpulimab's largest trial (528 people) and its longest (7 years) measure?
528 people in Penpulimab's largest registered study, 7 years in its longest registered window, measuring objective response rate (ORR). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
22 phase2, 8 phase1, 4 phase3, 2 na, 1 na or unstated, 1 phase4; NCT05347641; 2029-06-01; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2024, NCT05493995.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Penpulimab was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase2
22
phase1
8
phase3
4
na
2
na or unstated
1
phase4
1
1 more recorded row
Last recorded human testNCT05493995
2024-05-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Penpulimab was tested only in human — what did it show?
"This study was closed due to business reasons. Closure was not prompted by any safety or efficacy concerns"; 3 of 33 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05975645
terminated; "This study was closed due to business reasons. Closure was not prompted by any safety or efficacy concerns"
NCT06297642
terminated; "Based on the current status of the same target research and the company's overall layout in the field of tumors, the early termination was determined after full communication with the principal investigator of the group leader unit."
NCT06320080
terminated; "This study was closed due to business reasons. Closure was not prompted by any safety or efficacy concerns."
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Penpulimab's half-life is 32 days — which schedules were studied?
32 days, the half-life Penpulimab's label states. openfda-label · 830004e8-31af-4cc6-ab16-e870cab1c5ca · 2026-08-30
Show the evidence
half life
32 days; Elimination The mean (CV%) clearance was 0.2 L/day (33%) and the mean (CV%) terminal half-life was 32 days (44%).
metabolism
Metabolism Penpulimab-kcqx is expected to be metabolized into small peptides by catabolic pathways.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which of 2 year progression free survival rate, 3 year disease free survival and adverse event rate did Penpulimab's trials measure?
2 year progression free survival rate, 3 year disease free survival and adverse event rate lead 16 outcome terms across Penpulimab's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Progression-free survival (PFS); 2-year PFS rate of PCNSL patients treated with penpulimab combined with RMA; latest 2031-12-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04974398
"A Study of Penpulimab (AK105) in the First-line Treatment of Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma"; n 296; "Progression-free survival (PFS)"; 2026-12-23
NCT05347641
"Penpulimab Combined With RMA Treatment of Primary Diagnosis of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma"; n 23; "2-year PFS rate of PCNSL patients treated with penpulimab combined with RMA"; 2029-06-01
NCT05494060
"XELOX Combined With Anlotinib and Penpulimab vs XELOX as Adjuvant Therapy in ctDNA Positive Gastric and Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma"; n 80; "Disease Free Survival (DFS)"; 2027-02
NCT05576480
"SCRT Sequential Penpulimab in Combination With CAPEOX in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of MSS Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer"; n 55; "Pathological complete remission rate (pCR)"; 2026-12
NCT06048315
"A Single Center, Single Arm Clinical Study on the Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Positive EGFR Sensitive Mutations and Failed EGFR TKIs With the Combination of Enrotinib and Paclitaxel Monoclonal Antibody"; n 52; "Progress Free Survival"; 2026-09
NCT06081673
"Penpulimab Combined With Chemotherapy for Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Therapy in Patients With Resectable HNSCC"; n 72; "Major pathological response（MPR）"; 2026-10-30
7 further recorded trials
NCT06516978
"A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pola-RCHP-X Versus RCHOP-X and Pola-RCHP in Previously Untreated Patients With DLBCL"; n 528; "Progression Free Survival at 24 months (PFS24) Assessed by Investigator per Lugano Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma"; 2029-04-01
NCT06821503
"Clinical Study Evaluating the Safety, Tolerability, and Preliminary Efficacy of LM-108 ± Penpulimab+Chemotherapy in Advanced Solid Tumors - Cohort C"; n 72; "Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)"; 2028-12
NCT06943820
"AK129 Combination Therapy for Advanced Solid Tumors"; n 230; "Frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs) ,Clinically significant abnormal laboratory results"; 2028-05
NCT07075419
"JDB153 Combined With Penpulimab for Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Standard Treatment Failure"; n 10; "Incidence of Treatment-Related Adverse Events"; 2027-08-01
NCT07612098
"Preoperative Radiotherapy and Anlotinib With or Without Penpulimab for Soft Tissue Sarcoma"; n 274; "3-Year Disease-Free Survival"; 2031-12-31
NCT07744698
"Metronomic Oral Paclitaxel Plus PD-1/ PD-L1 Inhibitor Maintenance in Advanced Lung Cancer (PULSE Study)"; n 107; "Progression-Free Survival (PFS)"; 2029-06
NCT07764601
"R-MA-PD-1 Versus R-MA in Treatment-naive Primary CNS Lymphoma"; n 58; "2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate"; 2029-08
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which running trial of Penpulimab could settle lifespan?
NCT06048315 measures Progress Free Survival, reading out 2026-09.
7 open trials; n 52; "A Single Center, Single Arm Clinical Study on the Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Positive EGFR Sensitive Mutations and Failed EGFR TKIs With the Combination of Enrotinib and…"
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT06048315
"A Single Center, Single Arm Clinical Study on the Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Positive EGFR Sensitive Mutations and Failed EGFR TKIs With the Combination of Enrotinib and Paclitaxel Monoclonal Antibody"; n 52; "Progress Free Survival"; 2026-09
NCT04974398
"A Study of Penpulimab (AK105) in the First-line Treatment of Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma"; n 296; "Progression-free survival (PFS)"; 2026-12-23
NCT05494060
"XELOX Combined With Anlotinib and Penpulimab vs XELOX as Adjuvant Therapy in ctDNA Positive Gastric and Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma"; n 80; "Disease Free Survival (DFS)"; 2027-02
NCT06516978
"A Study Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Pola-RCHP-X Versus RCHOP-X and Pola-RCHP in Previously Untreated Patients With DLBCL"; n 528; "Progression Free Survival at 24 months (PFS24) Assessed by Investigator per Lugano Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma"; 2029-04-01
NCT07744698
"Metronomic Oral Paclitaxel Plus PD-1/ PD-L1 Inhibitor Maintenance in Advanced Lung Cancer (PULSE Study)"; n 107; "Progression-Free Survival (PFS)"; 2029-06
NCT07764601
"R-MA-PD-1 Versus R-MA in Treatment-naive Primary CNS Lymphoma"; n 58; "2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate"; 2029-08
1 further recorded trialNCT07612098
"Preoperative Radiotherapy and Anlotinib With or Without Penpulimab for Soft Tissue Sarcoma"; n 274; "3-Year Disease-Free Survival"; 2031-12-31
Q9
Which 2 trials of Penpulimab posted no result?
Posted no result
2 of 2 completed trials
Registrations
NCT05809336 and NCT05493995
Completion dates
oldest 2022-10-31; newest 2024-05-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05809336
2022-10-31
NCT05493995
2024-05-01
Q10
At the median, Penpulimab's trials enrolled 58 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
58
Largest enrolment
528
Registered trials counted
33
Q11
What do 38 spontaneous reports say about Penpulimab — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Penpulimab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 38 reaction mentions were counted: alanine aminotransferase increased 4; anaemia 4; aspartate aminotransferase increased 4; diarrhoea 4. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL4297571 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
alanine aminotransferase increased
4
anaemia
4
aspartate aminotransferase increased
4
diarrhoea
4
hypothyroidism
4
rash
4
4 more recorded rows
thrombocytopenia
4
vomiting
4
leukopenia
3
neurotoxicity
3
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 6 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.