Erzotabart (GEN3014): A Comprehensive Scientific Review

Executive Summary

Erzotabart (GEN3014) is an investigational hexamerization-enhanced human immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) kappa monoclonal antibody developed by Genmab, targeting the cell surface glycoprotein CD38. Utilizing Genmab's proprietary HexaBody® technology, Erzotabart incorporates an E430G mutation in its Fc region, designed to promote antibody hexamer formation upon antigen binding, thereby significantly augmenting Fc-mediated effector functions, particularly Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC). The therapeutic rationale was to create a more potent anti-CD38 therapy for hematologic malignancies, notably multiple myeloma.

Preclinical studies indicated that Erzotabart binds CD38 with high affinity and exhibits potent in vitro effector functions, including CDC, Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC), and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP), alongside inhibition of CD38 cyclase activity and in vivo antitumor effects. The clinical development program was centered around the GEN3014-01 (NCT04824794) trial, a Phase 1/2 study evaluating Erzotabart in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies. A key component of this trial was a head-to-head comparison of intravenous Erzotabart with subcutaneous daratumumab.

Preliminary results from this comparison showed Erzotabart achieved a numerically higher overall response rate (55% vs. 52%) and notably deeper responses (Very Good Partial Response or better: 29% vs. 17%; Complete Response or better: 7% vs. 2%) compared to daratumumab. However, concerns regarding the safety profile, including a higher incidence of Grade 3 or higher adverse events and treatment discontinuations with Erzotabart, coupled with the less convenient intravenous administration, complicated its differentiation.

In March 2025, Johnson & Johnson, Genmab's partner for daratumumab, decided not to exercise its option to license Erzotabart. Subsequently, Genmab announced the discontinuation of Erzotabart's clinical development, citing the need for substantial differentiation in a competitive market, the overall data package, and strategic portfolio prioritization. Despite this outcome for Erzotabart, Genmab considers the clinical data as validation of the HexaBody® platform's potential to enhance antibody therapeutics for other targets. The development journey of Erzotabart underscores the significant challenges in improving upon established standards of care in oncology and the multifaceted considerations that drive pharmaceutical development decisions.

1. Introduction to Erzotabart (GEN3014)

Erzotabart, also known by its development code GEN3014 and as HexaBody-CD38, represents a sophisticated approach in antibody engineering aimed at enhancing therapeutic efficacy against hematologic malignancies.[1] Its development was rooted in the clinical success of targeting CD38 and the ambition to create a next-generation therapeutic with superior anti-tumor activity.

• 1.1. Overview: Chemical Nature and Development Rationale Erzotabart is a fully human immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) kappa monoclonal antibody (mAb).1 The IgG1 isotype is significant as it is known for its robust ability to engage Fc-mediated effector functions, such as Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC) and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC), which are crucial for the anti-tumor activity of many therapeutic antibodies. Erzotabart was specifically designed to target CD38, a cell surface glycoprotein.1 A distinguishing feature of Erzotabart is the incorporation of a specific point mutation, E430G (glutamic acid to glycine at position 430), in the Fc region of the antibody.[1] This mutation is the cornerstone of Genmab's proprietary HexaBody® technology. The primary purpose of this mutation is to enhance the natural propensity of IgG1 antibodies to form hexameric complexes (clusters of six antibody molecules) upon binding to their target antigen on the cell surface.[1] This enhanced hexamerization is hypothesized to lead to a more potent activation of the complement cascade and other Fc-dependent effector mechanisms. The CAS number for Erzotabart is 2430792-01-9, and its molecular weight is reported to be approximately 145.056 kDa.[2] The rationale behind Erzotabart's development was to build upon the validated success of CD38 as a therapeutic target, particularly in multiple myeloma, where first-generation anti-CD38 antibodies like daratumumab (also an IgG1) have demonstrated significant clinical benefit.[5] By employing the HexaBody® technology, the goal was to create a "biobetter" – an antibody with potentially superior potency and efficacy compared to existing anti-CD38 therapies. Genmab, having co-developed daratumumab, was strategically positioned to leverage its understanding of CD38 biology and antibody engineering to pursue such an enhanced therapeutic. The focus on augmenting CDC through the HexaBody® platform was a rational approach, as CDC is a known important mechanism of action for anti-CD38 antibodies.
• 1.2. The Therapeutic Target: CD38 in Hematologic Malignancies CD38 is a type II transmembrane glycoprotein with a multifaceted role in cellular physiology. It functions not only as a receptor but also as an ectoenzyme, exhibiting ADP-ribosyl cyclase and cyclic ADP-ribose (cADPR) hydrolase activities.1 These enzymatic functions implicate CD38 in calcium signaling pathways and NAD+ metabolism. Furthermore, CD38 is involved in cell adhesion processes.6 CD38 is expressed on a variety of hematopoietic cells, including B lymphocytes, T lymphocytes, NK cells, monocytes, and notably, terminally differentiated plasma cells.[1] Its expression is significantly upregulated and is found at high, uniform levels on malignant plasma cells in multiple myeloma (MM).[6] This high and relatively consistent expression on tumor cells, compared to many normal tissues, makes CD38 an attractive target for antibody-based therapies. The clinical and commercial success of daratumumab and isatuximab, both anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, has firmly established CD38 as a key therapeutic target in MM and other hematologic malignancies.[6] The high expression density of CD38 on MM cells provides a strong basis for targeted therapy, aiming for selective tumor cell destruction.[6] However, its expression on normal immune cells suggests that anti-CD38 therapies could also exert immunomodulatory effects, potentially leading to both therapeutic benefits and on-target, off-tumor side effects. The enzymatic functions of CD38 are also of interest; for instance, its NADase activity can deplete extracellular NAD+ and generate adenosine, an immunosuppressive molecule, within the tumor microenvironment (TME).[1] Therapeutic antibodies that can inhibit these enzymatic functions, in addition to directly killing CD38-expressing tumor cells, could offer a more comprehensive antitumor effect by also alleviating local immune suppression.
• 1.3. Developer: Genmab and the HexaBody Platform Erzotabart (GEN3014) was developed by Genmab A/S, a biotechnology company headquartered in Denmark with a strong focus on the creation and development of differentiated antibody therapeutics for the treatment of cancer and other serious diseases.9 Genmab has a track record of innovation in antibody engineering, having developed several proprietary technology platforms designed to enhance the therapeutic properties of antibodies. Erzotabart is a direct product of Genmab's HexaBody® technology platform.[4] This platform is engineered to improve the efficacy of IgG antibodies by promoting their organization into hexameric clusters upon binding to cell-surface targets. This enhanced hexamerization is specifically designed to amplify Fc-mediated effector functions, most notably CDC.[4] Beyond HexaBody®, Genmab's technological capabilities include the DuoBody® platform for generating bispecific antibodies, the DuoHexaBody® platform (combining bispecificity with hexamerization enhancement), and the HexElect® platform, which involves combinations of HexaBody® molecules.[11] The development of Erzotabart was a strategic application of Genmab's core HexaBody® technology to CD38, a target where the company already had significant experience and success through its collaboration with Johnson & Johnson on daratumumab. This endeavor represented an effort to create a next-generation anti-CD38 antibody with potentially superior characteristics. The opt-in agreement with Johnson & Johnson for Erzotabart further underscored the strategic intent, positioning it as a potential follow-on or improved therapeutic option within the CD38-targeting landscape.[12]

2. Mechanism of Action

Erzotabart was designed to elicit potent antitumor effects through multiple mechanisms, centered around its high-affinity binding to CD38 and the enhanced effector functions conferred by the HexaBody® technology.

• 2.1. CD38 Engagement and the Role of the E430G Mutation The initial step in Erzotabart's mechanism of action is its specific binding to the CD38 glycoprotein expressed on the surface of target cells, particularly malignant plasma cells in multiple myeloma.1 The antibody's variable regions are responsible for this high-affinity interaction. Central to Erzotabart's design and enhanced functionality is the E430G point mutation (glutamic acid substituted by glycine at position 430) within the CH2 domain of the antibody's Fc region.[1] This single amino acid change is the key modification of the HexaBody® technology. The E430G mutation does not directly alter the antibody's affinity or specificity for CD38; rather, its role is to facilitate and stabilize Fc-Fc interactions between adjacent Erzotabart molecules once they are bound to CD38 antigens on the cell surface.[1] This enhanced intermolecular interaction significantly promotes the formation of ordered antibody hexamers (clusters of six antibody molecules) at the site of target engagement.[1] This antigen-dependent hexamerization is a critical prerequisite for the amplified downstream effector functions that characterize HexaBody®-based therapeutics.
• 2.2. HexaBody Technology: Principles of Enhanced Hexamerization and Effector Function The HexaBody® platform is built upon the understanding of natural antibody biology, where IgG antibodies can self-associate into hexameric rings upon binding to antigens densely expressed on a cell surface.4 These hexameric structures serve as optimal docking sites for C1q, the recognition component of the classical complement pathway. The engineered E430G mutation in the Fc domain of Erzotabart significantly enhances the efficiency of this hexamer formation process.[4] By strengthening the non-covalent interactions between the Fc domains of adjacent, antigen-bound antibodies, the mutation lowers the kinetic barrier for hexamer assembly. This results in more rapid and stable hexamer formation specifically at the target cell surface. The primary and most well-documented consequence of this enhanced, target-dependent hexamerization is a marked potentiation of Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC).[1] The C1q molecule, with its six globular heads, binds with significantly higher avidity and stability to the array of Fc domains presented by an antibody hexamer compared to individual antibodies or less organized clusters. This optimized C1q binding leads to a more robust activation of the entire classical complement cascade, culminating in the formation of the Membrane Attack Complex (MAC) in the target cell's membrane. The MAC creates pores in the cell membrane, leading to osmotic lysis and cell death.[4] While CDC is the most emphasized benefit, the organized clustering of Fc domains in hexamers may also improve the avidity of interaction with Fcγ receptors (FcγRs) on immune effector cells. This could potentially lead to enhanced Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC), mediated by effector cells like Natural Killer (NK) cells, and Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP), mediated by macrophages.[1] A critical safety feature of the HexaBody® technology is that the hexamerization is designed to be strictly dependent on target binding.[4] This prevents the formation of antibody aggregates in circulation, which could otherwise lead to undesirable systemic complement activation or other off-target effects. Furthermore, HexaBody® molecules are engineered to retain the favorable pharmacokinetic properties and biopharmaceutical developability characteristics of standard IgG1 antibodies.[4] The HexaBody® technology thus represents a rational engineering approach to convert antibodies with inherently limited CDC capacity into potent inducers of this effector mechanism, or to further enhance the CDC of already active antibodies, thereby aiming for an improved therapeutic index.
• 2.3. Additional Antitumor Mechanisms In addition to the Fc-mediated effector functions amplified by the HexaBody® technology, Erzotabart was described as possessing other antitumor mechanisms:
• Direct Cell Killing: The binding of Erzotabart to CD38 was suggested to have the potential to induce direct cell killing or apoptosis in tumor cells, independent of complement or immune effector cells.[1] The exact signaling pathways involved in such direct effects were not fully elucidated in the provided materials.
• Enzymatic Inhibition and Immunomodulation of the Tumor Microenvironment (TME): CD38 is an ectoenzyme with NAD+ glycohydrolase and ADP-ribosyl cyclase activities. These activities can lead to the consumption of extracellular NAD+ and the production of cADPR and adenosine. Adenosine, in particular, is known to be an immunosuppressive molecule within the TME. Erzotabart has been shown to inhibit the cyclase activity of CD38.[1] By doing so, Erzotabart could potentially reduce the production of immunosuppressive metabolites, thereby abrogating local immune suppression and potentially enhancing antitumor immune responses within the TME.[1] This enzymatic modulation is a distinct feature that could complement its cytotoxic activities.
• CD38 Downmodulation: Upon binding, GEN3014 (Erzotabart) was reported to induce the downmodulation of CD38 from the tumor cell surface.[1] This phenomenon, also observed with other anti-CD38 antibodies, can have complex consequences. While it might reduce the number of available targets for subsequent antibody binding (antigenic modulation), it could also disrupt CD38-dependent signaling pathways important for tumor cell survival or interaction with the microenvironment.
• Trogocytosis: In vitro studies indicated that Erzotabart could induce trogocytosis, a process whereby effector cells, such as macrophages or NK cells, physically extract or "nibble" portions of the target cell membrane containing the CD38-Erzotabart complexes.[3] This can contribute to tumor cell damage and antigen presentation.

The multifaceted mechanism of action, encompassing direct cytotoxicity, enhanced Fc-effector functions (CDC, ADCC, ADCP), trogocytosis, and modulation of CD38 enzymatic activity with potential TME benefits, suggested a comprehensive approach to targeting CD38-expressing malignancies. This broader mechanistic profile was intended to differentiate Erzotabart from antibodies relying solely on Fc-mediated killing.

3. Preclinical Evaluation

The preclinical development of Erzotabart involved comprehensive in vitro and in vivo studies to characterize its binding properties, biological activities, and antitumor efficacy, providing the foundational evidence for its progression into clinical trials.

• 3.1. In Vitro Studies: Binding Affinity, Potency, and Cellular Effects Erzotabart's interaction with its target, CD38, was characterized by high-affinity binding. Biolayer interferometry (BLI) assays demonstrated that Erzotabart bound to recombinant human CD38 protein with an affinity constant (K_D) of 1.209 nM (1.209 x 10^-9 M), indicative of a strong and specific interaction.2 The functional consequences of this binding, particularly the impact of the HexaBody®-enhancing E430G mutation, were assessed through a battery of in vitro assays evaluating various effector mechanisms [3]:
• Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC): Erzotabart induced potent CDC with a reported EC50 value of 0.044 µg/mL. This strong CDC activity is a hallmark of the HexaBody® platform.
• Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC): The antibody also mediated ADCC effectively, with an EC50 of 0.29 ng/mL.
• Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (ADCP): ADCP activity was demonstrated with EC50 values in the range of 2.719 to 5.779 ng/mL.
• Trogocytosis: Erzotabart was shown to induce trogocytosis with an EC50 of 8.79 ng/mL.

Beyond these Fc-dependent cytotoxic mechanisms, Erzotabart also modulated the enzymatic activity of CD38. It was shown to inhibit the cyclase activity of CD38, while concurrently increasing its hydrolase activity.[1] This enzymatic modulation could contribute to its overall antitumor effect by altering the tumor microenvironment or tumor cell metabolism.These in vitro findings collectively established that Erzotabart not only binds its target with high affinity but also translates its engineered HexaBody® design into potent, multifaceted biological activity at pharmacologically relevant concentrations. The combination of enhanced cell killing via multiple Fc-mediated pathways and the direct modulation of CD38's enzymatic functions provided a strong preclinical rationale for its therapeutic potential.Table 1: Summary of Key In Vitro Preclinical Findings for Erzotabart (GEN3014)

Parameter	Value	Unit	Source Snippet(s)
Binding Affinity to CD38 (K_D)	1.209	nM	2
Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity (EC50)	0.044	µg/mL	3
Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (EC50)	0.29	ng/mL	3
Antibody-Dependent Cellular Phagocytosis (EC50)	2.719 - 5.779	ng/mL	3
Trogocytosis (EC50)	8.79	ng/mL	3
CD38 Cyclase Inhibition	Demonstrated	N/A	1
CD38 Hydrolase Activity	Increased	N/A	3

• 3.2. In Vivo Animal Models: Efficacy and Safety The antitumor potential of Erzotabart observed in vitro was further investigated in in vivo animal models of human hematologic malignancies. Studies demonstrated that Erzotabart exhibited antitumor activity in mouse xenograft models.3 Specifically, when administered intravenously at doses ranging from 0.1 to 10 mg/kg once weekly for three weeks, Erzotabart significantly inhibited tumor growth in Ly12638 xenograft models, which represent a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL).[3] Furthermore, antitumor activity was also reported in models of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).[3] The successful demonstration of in vivo efficacy in these relevant preclinical models was a critical step in validating the therapeutic concept of Erzotabart. It indicated that the antibody could effectively reach tumor sites, engage CD38, and exert its antitumor effects within a complex physiological environment. The dose levels and treatment schedules explored in these animal studies also provided valuable information for designing early-phase human clinical trials. The activity observed in B-NHL and AML models suggested that Genmab might have initially explored a broader therapeutic application for Erzotabart beyond multiple myeloma, which later became the primary focus of its clinical development.
• 3.3. Preclinical Proof-of-Concept for HexaBody-CD38 The comprehensive preclinical data package, encompassing high-affinity target binding, potent and multifaceted in vitro effector functions (CDC, ADCC, ADCP, trogocytosis), direct modulation of CD38's enzymatic activity, and significant in vivo antitumor efficacy in animal models, collectively established the preclinical proof-of-concept for Erzotabart as a HexaBody®-CD38 therapeutic.1 This body of evidence presumably demonstrated that the HexaBody® technology, through the E430G mutation, successfully conferred enhanced biological activities as intended, positioning Erzotabart as a promising candidate for clinical development. The decision by Genmab and regulatory authorities to advance Erzotabart into Phase 1/2 clinical trials implies that the preclinical findings were sufficiently robust to suggest a potential for clinical benefit and an acceptable safety margin, and that the intended enhancements derived from the HexaBody® platform were evident in preclinical comparative assessments.

4. Clinical Development: The GEN3014-01 (NCT04824794) Trial

The clinical development of Erzotabart was primarily centered around the GEN3014-01 study, a multicenter, open-label, Phase 1/2 trial designed to assess its safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy in patients with hematologic malignancies.[10]

• 4.1. Study Design, Objectives, and Patient Population The GEN3014-01 trial (NCT04824794) was initiated to evaluate Erzotabart (HexaBody-CD38) monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, with a strong emphasis on multiple myeloma.12 The study was structured in distinct parts to address different objectives:
• Phase 1 (Dose Escalation): This initial part aimed to determine the safety profile of Erzotabart, identify dose-limiting toxicities, establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and select the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) for further investigation.[12]
• Phase 2 Expansion Part A: This cohort was designed to further evaluate the safety and assess the objective response rate (ORR) of Erzotabart at the RP2D in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and potentially other CD38-expressing blood cancers.[13]
• Phase 2 Expansion Part B: This was a critical, comparative part of the trial. It was designed to directly compare the ORR of intravenously (IV) administered Erzotabart against subcutaneously (SC) administered daratumumab (DARZALEX FASPRO®) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who were naïve to prior anti-CD38 antibody therapy.[12] This head-to-head comparison was pivotal for assessing the differentiation of Erzotabart from an established standard-of-care.

The trial was active, but as of early 2025, it was no longer recruiting participants.[10] The design, particularly the inclusion of a direct comparator arm against SC daratumumab, underscored the high bar set for Erzotabart to demonstrate superiority or a distinct clinical advantage, which was a key factor for the potential opt-in by Johnson & Johnson.

• 4.2. Efficacy Findings The efficacy of Erzotabart was primarily evaluated based on overall response rates and the depth of response, especially in the head-to-head comparison with daratumumab SC in Part B of the GEN3014-01 trial.
• 4.2.1. Response Rates (ORR, VGPR, CR) in Head-to-Head Cohort (Part B) Preliminary data from the Phase 2 Expansion Part B were submitted by Genmab to Johnson & Johnson. These data included 88 patients who received study treatment, with 84 patients being response-evaluable (42 in the Erzotabart IV arm and 42 in the daratumumab SC arm).12
• In the Erzotabart IV arm, the Overall Response Rate (ORR) was 55% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 39%, 70%).[12]
• The rate of Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) or better was 29% for patients treated with Erzotabart.[12]
• The rate of Complete Response (CR) or better was 7% in the Erzotabart arm.[12]
• 4.2.2. Comparative Data: Head-to-Head with Daratumumab (Part B) The comparator arm in Phase 2 Expansion Part B, subcutaneous daratumumab, yielded the following results 12:
• ORR: 52% (95% CI: 36%, 68%).
• VGPR or better rate: 17%.
• CR or better rate: 2%.

Genmab described these comparative results as "promising," indicating "robust clinical efficacy" for Erzotabart. They highlighted that Erzotabart appeared "slightly better" than daratumumab and achieved "deeper responses".[5] While the ORR was numerically similar between the two arms, with overlapping confidence intervals suggesting the difference might not be statistically significant at that stage, the improvement in the depth of response (higher VGPR and CR rates) for Erzotabart was more pronounced. Such deeper responses are often correlated with improved long-term outcomes in multiple myeloma, and this aspect was likely a key focus of the differentiation argument.Table 2: Comparative Efficacy Results from GEN3014-01 Trial Part B: Erzotabart vs. Daratumumab

Efficacy Endpoint	Erzotabart (GEN3014) IV (N=42 evaluable)	Daratumumab SC (N=42 evaluable)	Source Snippet(s)
Overall Response Rate (ORR)	55% (95% CI: 39%, 70%)	52% (95% CI: 36%, 68%)	12
Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) or better	29%	17%	12
Complete Response (CR) or better	7%	2%	12

*   **4.2.3. Durability of Response and Survival Data**    A critical aspect of evaluating any cancer therapy is the durability of the responses and its impact on long-term survival. At the time Johnson & Johnson made its decision regarding the opt-in (March 2025), important secondary efficacy endpoints, including duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), were reported as not yet mature.[12, 13] This immaturity was due to the relatively short follow-up period for the patients in the trial.

   The lack of mature long-term outcome data represented a significant challenge in definitively assessing whether the numerically deeper responses observed with Erzotabart would translate into clinically meaningful, sustained benefits over daratumumab. Without robust PFS or OS data, the claim of superiority or significant differentiation remained largely based on interim response rates, which, while encouraging, are not always predictive of long-term success. This data immaturity likely contributed to the difficulty in making a strong case for Erzotabart's advancement.

• 4.3. Safety and Tolerability Profile The safety and tolerability of Erzotabart were closely monitored throughout the GEN3014-01 trial, especially in comparison to daratumumab.
• 4.3.1. Overview of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) In the HexaBody-CD38 (Erzotabart) IV arm, the most common TEAEs (occurring in >20% of patients) were neutropenia, infusion-related reactions (IRRs), anemia, and thrombocytopenia.12 These types of adverse events are generally expected with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody therapies, reflecting their mechanism of action and impact on hematopoietic cells. The safety profile observed in the daratumumab SC arm was consistent with its known tolerability, and no new safety signals were identified for daratumumab in this study.12 However, earlier reports from the ASH 2023 meeting had already hinted at potential tolerability concerns with Erzotabart. These preliminary data suggested that Grade 3 or higher adverse events, as well as the rates of dose interruptions and treatment discontinuations, might be more frequent with Erzotabart compared to daratumumab.[5] This emerging safety picture was a critical factor in the overall assessment of Erzotabart's clinical profile. If the enhanced effector functions conferred by the HexaBody® technology also led to increased on-target, off-tumor toxicities or more pronounced myelosuppression, this could offset potential efficacy gains. Table 3: Common Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (>20%) in the Erzotabart Arm of GEN3014-01 (Part B)

Adverse Event	Frequency (%)	Source Snippet(s)
Neutropenia	>20%	12
Infusion-Related Reactions	>20%	12
Anemia	>20%	12
Thrombocytopenia	>20%	12

*   **4.3.2. Infusion-Related Reactions and Hematologic Toxicities**    As noted, IRRs and hematologic toxicities were frequently observed with Erzotabart treatment.[12, 13] A significant confounding factor in comparing the safety profiles directly was the difference in administration routes: Erzotabart was administered intravenously, while the comparator, daratumumab, was given subcutaneously.[5] Intravenous administration of monoclonal antibodies is often associated with a higher incidence and severity of IRRs compared to subcutaneous delivery. Genmab executives reportedly acknowledged this, suggesting that the IV route of Erzotabart might have contributed to any observed imbalance in toxicity profiles, particularly for IRRs.[5]

   The development of subcutaneous formulations for antibodies like daratumumab (Darzalex Faspro) was a major step forward in improving patient convenience and reducing the burden of IRRs. An investigational IV agent like Erzotabart would inherently face a disadvantage in terms of convenience and potentially IRR-related tolerability if it did not offer a substantial efficacy benefit to compensate.

*   **4.3.3. Serious Adverse Events and Treatment Discontinuations**    In the head-to-head comparison (Part B of GEN3014-01), TEAEs leading to death were reported in one patient in the Erzotabart IV arm and two patients in the daratumumab SC arm. Crucially, none of these deaths were assessed by the investigators as being related to the study treatment.[12, 13]

   However, a more concerning signal was the report that dose interruptions and treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were more common in patients receiving Erzotabart.[5] A higher rate of such modifications or cessations due to tolerability issues can significantly undermine a drug's real-world effectiveness and its overall benefit-risk assessment. If patients are unable to tolerate the full course of treatment or require frequent interruptions, the potential efficacy benefits may not be fully realized. This aspect of the safety profile, when compared against a generally well-tolerated subcutaneous standard of care, would have been a considerable disadvantage for Erzotabart.

5. Discontinuation of Development and Strategic Implications

The clinical development of Erzotabart was ultimately halted following a series of strategic decisions by Genmab and its potential partner, Johnson & Johnson.

• 5.1. Johnson & Johnson's Decision Not to Exercise Opt-In Rights In a significant development announced on March 10, 2025, Genmab disclosed that Johnson & Johnson (J&J) had decided not to exercise its option to obtain a worldwide license for the development, manufacture, and commercialization of Erzotabart (HexaBody-CD38, GEN3014).12 This decision was made after J&J's evaluation of the clinical proof-of-concept data from the GEN3014-01 trial, notably the results from the head-to-head comparison with subcutaneous daratumumab (Darzalex Faspro®).12 J&J, being the commercial partner for Darzalex, had set a high bar for Erzotabart, requiring it to demonstrate a "truly differentiated" profile to warrant an opt-in and further investment.[5] Despite Genmab characterizing the initial clinical data for Erzotabart as "promising" and showing "robust clinical efficacy" [12], J&J's decision indicates that the overall data package—balancing efficacy, safety, route of administration, and potential market differentiation from the already highly successful Darzalex Faspro®—did not meet their strategic criteria. The marginal numerical improvements in response rates, potentially offset by tolerability concerns and the inconvenience of IV administration, likely did not present a sufficiently compelling case for J&J to invest in a product that could compete with its established CD38 franchise.
• 5.2. Genmab's Rationale for Halting Further Clinical Development Following J&J's decision, Genmab announced that it would also not pursue further clinical development of HexaBody-CD38.5 Genmab's rationale was multifaceted, involving "a thorough evaluation of the data, the market landscape, and Genmab's rigorous portfolio prioritization".12 The company stated its intention to redirect resources and focus on other promising late-stage assets within its proprietary clinical pipeline, aiming to ensure future growth through disciplined investments.13 A significant factor in Genmab's decision was the terms of their development and option agreement with J&J for HexaBody-CD38. This agreement reportedly stipulated that Genmab could not independently develop Erzotabart in indications or markets where Darzalex is already established or in late-stage development.[5] This contractual limitation severely restricted Genmab's ability to pursue Erzotabart's development without J&J as a partner. Competing directly with their own highly successful partnered product, Darzalex, would have been commercially counterproductive. This decision reflects a pragmatic approach based on the competitive environment, commercial viability, and internal strategic resource allocation.
• 5.3. Analysis of Factors Contributing to Discontinuation The discontinuation of Erzotabart's development can be attributed to a confluence of factors:
• Insufficient Differentiation: The primary challenge was the failure to demonstrate a sufficiently compelling and "truly differentiated" clinical profile compared to the existing, highly convenient, and effective subcutaneous daratumumab (Darzalex Faspro®).[5] While deeper responses were noted, the overall efficacy advantage was not transformative enough to overcome other potential drawbacks.
• Safety and Tolerability Concerns: Although treatment-related deaths were not an issue, reports of more frequent Grade 3 or higher adverse events, dose interruptions, and treatment discontinuations with IV Erzotabart compared to SC daratumumab raised concerns about its overall benefit-risk balance.[5]
• Route of Administration: The intravenous route of administration for Erzotabart presented a disadvantage in terms of patient convenience and healthcare system burden when compared to the subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab.[5] This is a significant practical consideration in clinical practice.
• Market Landscape and Commercial Viability: The multiple myeloma market is highly competitive, with Darzalex (particularly Darzalex Faspro®) holding a dominant position. Without J&J's support, launching Erzotabart would have entailed competing directly against this market leader, a venture with high commercial risk and the potential to cannibalize Genmab's own royalty income from Darzalex.[5]
• Immaturity of Long-Term Data: Crucial long-term efficacy data, such as progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), were not mature at the time of the discontinuation decision.[12] This lack of definitive long-term outcome data made it difficult to ascertain whether the observed deeper responses would translate into tangible, sustained clinical benefits.

The Erzotabart story illustrates that in modern oncology drug development, particularly in areas with established effective therapies, incremental improvements may not be sufficient. New agents must offer substantial and clinically meaningful advantages in efficacy, safety, or patient convenience to justify the significant investment and risk associated with late-stage development and market entry.

• 5.4. Broader Implications for the HexaBody Platform and CD38-Targeted Therapies Despite the discontinuation of Erzotabart, Genmab has consistently emphasized that the clinical data generated from the GEN3014-01 trial serve to validate the clinical potential of the HexaBody® platform itself. The company stated that the results reinforce the platform's value for future applications and that they have "higher confidence in its HexaBody technology".5 This perspective suggests that the HexaBody® technology is considered scientifically sound and capable of achieving its intended goal of enhancing antibody effector functions, such as inducing robust CDC. The outcome for Erzotabart is viewed more as a consequence of product-specific challenges and the high competitive bar within the CD38-targeted multiple myeloma space, rather than a fundamental failure of the underlying technology. Genmab has other HexaBody®-based candidates in its pipeline (reportedly constituting around 10% of its pipeline), and the company has dismissed the notion of a negative read-through from Erzotabart's discontinuation to these other projects.[5] The HexaBody® platform's ability to significantly enhance CDC or agonistic activity may prove more impactful and differentiating for other therapeutic targets or in different disease contexts where current antibody therapies have limited effector function or where such enhancement can address a more significant unmet medical need. The experience with Erzotabart highlights that even advanced antibody engineering platforms require the right combination of target, disease context, and comparative clinical profile to yield a successful therapeutic product.

6. Conclusion

Erzotabart (GEN3014) emerged from Genmab's innovative HexaBody® platform as a promising next-generation anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Engineered with the E430G mutation to enhance Fc-mediated effector functions, particularly Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity, Erzotabart demonstrated a strong preclinical rationale and achieved "robust clinical efficacy" in early clinical trials, including numerically deeper responses when compared head-to-head with subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

However, the path to further development was ultimately halted. Key factors contributing to this decision included a clinical profile that, while showing some advantages, was not deemed sufficiently differentiated from the established and highly convenient subcutaneous standard of care (Darzalex Faspro®). Potential concerns regarding a less favorable safety and tolerability profile for the intravenously administered Erzotabart, coupled with the immaturity of long-term outcome data such as progression-free and overall survival, further complicated its value proposition.

The decision by Johnson & Johnson not to exercise its option to license Erzotabart, followed by Genmab's strategic choice to discontinue its development based on these factors, the prevailing market landscape, and internal portfolio prioritization, underscores the rigorous demands and high bar for new therapies in competitive oncology indications.

Despite the discontinuation of this specific candidate, Genmab has expressed that the clinical data generated for Erzotabart serve as a validation of the HexaBody® platform's potential to effectively enhance antibody effector functions. This suggests that the technology remains a valuable tool in Genmab's arsenal for developing novel antibody therapeutics against other targets where such enhancements can provide a more distinct clinical advantage. The Erzotabart program, therefore, offers important lessons on the intricate balance between scientific innovation, clinical performance, strategic partnerships, and the commercial realities that shape the pharmaceutical development landscape.

7. References

1

Works cited

1. Definition of erzotabart - NCI Drug Dictionary, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-drug/def/erzotabart
2. Erzotabart | Anti-CD38 Antibody - MedchemExpress.com, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.medchemexpress.com/erzotabart.html
3. Erzotabart - Product Data Sheet, accessed June 4, 2025, https://file.medchemexpress.com/batch_PDF/HY-P990037/Erzotabart-DataSheet-MedChemExpress.pdf
4. HexaBody®| Genmab, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.genmab.com/antibody-science/antibody-technology-platforms/hexabody
5. Son of Darzalex hits the skids | ApexOnco - Oncology Pipeline, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.oncologypipeline.com/apexonco/son-darzalex-hits-skids
6. Immunotherapies targeting CD38 in Multiple Myeloma - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed June 4, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5139636/
7. Care in Multiple Myeloma with CD38-Targeted Strategies, accessed June 4, 2025, https://managingmyeloma.com/resources/newsletters/1027-care-in-multiple-myeloma-with-cd38-targeted-strategies
8. CD38 | Inhibitors - MedchemExpress.com, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.medchemexpress.com/Targets/cd38.html
9. Pipeline | Genmab, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.genmab.com/antibody-science/pipeline
10. Erzotabart - MedPath, accessed June 4, 2025, https://trial.medpath.com/drug/1a7dbdc5aa7c688b/erzotabart
11. Antibody Technology Platforms - Genmab, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.genmab.com/antibody-science/antibody-technology-platforms
12. Genmab Announces Johnson & Johnson Decision Regarding HexaBody®-CD38, accessed June 4, 2025, https://ir.genmab.com/news-releases/news-release-details/genmab-announces-johnson-johnson-decision-regarding-hexabodyr/
13. Genmab Announces Johnson & Johnson Decision Regarding HexaBody®-CD38, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/03/10/3039878/0/en/Genmab-Announces-Johnson-Johnson-Decision-Regarding-HexaBody-CD38.html
14. Johnson & Johnson Declines Option for Genmab's HexaBody-CD38 Despite Promising Clinical Data - MedPath, accessed June 4, 2025, https://trial.medpath.com/news/40011c82917a3098/johnson-johnson-declines-option-for-genmab-s-hexabody-cd38-despite-promising-clinical-data
15. J&J abandons work with Genmab on Darzalex successor - Pharmaphorum, accessed June 4, 2025, https://pharmaphorum.com/news/jj-abandons-work-genmab-darzalex-successor
16. Therapeutic antibodies | Biosimilars for research use - ProteoGenix, accessed June 4, 2025, https://www.proteogenix.science/product-category/primary-antibodies/therapeutic-antibodies/page/3/
17. erzotabart (GEN3014) / Genmab - LARVOL DELTA, accessed June 4, 2025, https://delta.larvol.com/Products/?ProductId=e3fb1b7f-5095-4b5c-ae19-4cb26d9068f4
18. Genmab to Present New and Updated Results from its Robust Epcoritamab (EPKINLY®) Development Program at the 2025 European Hematology Association (EHA) Congress, accessed June 4, 2025, https://ir.genmab.com/news-releases/news-release-details/genmab-present-new-and-updated-results-its-robust-epcoritamab/
19. Genmab to Highlight New Data Evaluating Late-Stage Oncology Portfolio at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting - FirstWord Pharma, accessed June 4, 2025, https://firstwordpharma.com/story/5965643