Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are targeted biotherapeutics that combine the antigen specificity of a monoclonal antibody with the cytotoxic potency of a small-molecule drug, joined by a chemical linker. They are designed to deliver highly toxic payloads selectively to antigen-expressing cells, widening the therapeutic window relative to conventional chemotherapy.¹

Conventional cytotoxic agents act systemically and indiscriminately, damaging both malignant and healthy proliferating cells. ADCs address this limitation by exploiting tumor-associated antigens as delivery beacons. The antibody component provides selective binding, the linker maintains payload stability in circulation, and the cytotoxic warhead kills cells once internalized. This modular architecture allows each component to be independently optimized for pharmacokinetics, tumor penetration, and on-target activity.²

The clinical relevance of ADCs has expanded substantially, with approved agents now spanning hematologic malignancies and solid tumors. Their success reflects advances in linker chemistry, site-specific conjugation, and payload diversification, which together have improved tolerability and efficacy compared with earlier generations.³

What is the core architecture of an ADC?

An ADC consists of three functional modules whose properties collectively determine efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic behavior. Each module must be tuned in concert: an antibody with poor internalization limits payload delivery, an unstable linker causes systemic toxicity, and a mismatched payload potency undermines the therapeutic index.⁴

The antibody component

The antibody is typically a humanized or fully human IgG1, selected for high affinity for a tumor-associated antigen with restricted expression in normal tissues. Beyond binding, the antibody must undergo efficient receptor-mediated internalization, since intracellular payload release is central to the mechanism. IgG1 also contributes Fc-mediated immune effector functions, which may complement direct cytotoxicity.⁵

The linker

Linkers determine when and where the payload is released. They fall into two broad classes:

• Cleavable linkers, which respond to intracellular cues such as lysosomal proteases, acidic pH, or reducing environments

• Nnon-cleavable linkers, which require complete antibody degradation to liberate the payload.

Cleavable linkers can enable bystander killing of neighboring antigen-negative cells, whereas non-cleavable designs generally offer greater plasma stability.⁶

The cytotoxic payload

Payloads are chosen for extreme potency, typically several orders of magnitude greater than standard chemotherapeutics, because only a small fraction of administered drug reaches the tumor. Common payload classes include microtubule inhibitors, DNA-damaging agents such as topoisomerase I inhibitors and DNA alkylators, and, more recently, agents that engage alternative cytotoxic mechanisms. The drug-to-antibody ratio (DAR) governs the average number of payload molecules per antibody and influences both efficacy and clearance.⁷

What is the mechanism of action of ADCs?

The ADC mechanism follows a specific series of biological steps, with each step potentially acting as a point of failure or resistance. Understanding this cascade is essential for interpreting both efficacy and toxicity profiles.

Antigen binding and internalization

Following systemic administration, the ADC circulates as an inert prodrug until its antibody component engages the target antigen on the tumor cell surface. Binding triggers receptor-mediated endocytosis, typically via clathrin-coated pits, delivering the ADC-antigen complex into the endolysosomal system. Efficient internalization and trafficking to lysosomes are rate-limiting for productive payload release.⁸

Intracellular processing and payload release

Within the lysosome, cleavable linkers are hydrolyzed by proteases such as cathepsin B, or destabilized by low pH or reducing conditions, releasing the free payload. Non-cleavable linkers require proteolytic degradation of the entire antibody backbone, yielding a charged amino acid-payload adduct. The chemical nature of the released species dictates its ability to diffuse across membranes and reach its intracellular target.⁹

Cytotoxicity and the bystander effect

After release, microtubule-targeting payloads disrupt mitotic spindle assembly, arresting cells in mitosis and triggering apoptosis, while DNA-damaging payloads induce lethal strand breaks or crosslinks. Membrane-permeable payloads can diffuse into neighboring cells, producing a bystander effect that eliminates antigen-low or antigen-negative tumor cells within a heterogeneous tumor. This property is particularly valuable in tumors with variable antigen expression.¹⁰

Comparative overview of ADC components

What determines the therapeutic window of an ADC?

The therapeutic window of an ADC reflects the balance between tumor-selective delivery and off-target exposure. It is shaped by antigen expression differentials between tumor and normal tissue, linker stability in circulation, payload potency, and the rate of premature deconjugation. Even modest antigen expression in healthy tissues can drive dose-limiting toxicity.¹¹

Additional determinants include the DAR distribution, since heterogeneous or high-DAR species often exhibit faster clearance and greater toxicity, and the pharmacokinetics of the released payload, which can produce off-tumor effects independent of antigen targeting. Neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, ocular toxicity, and interstitial lung disease are among the class-associated adverse events that reflect these factors.

How do tumors develop resistance to ADCs?

Resistance to ADCs arises through mechanisms that disrupt any step of the delivery cascade. Downregulation or loss of the target antigen reduces ADC binding, while impaired endocytosis or altered lysosomal trafficking limits payload release. Upregulation of drug efflux pumps can expel liberated payloads before they reach their targets, particularly for microtubule-directed agents.¹²

Other resistance mechanisms include defects in lysosomal proteolysis, which impair linker cleavage, and adaptive changes in apoptotic signaling that blunt payload-induced cell death. Because ADCs integrate multiple pharmacological steps, resistance is often multifactorial, and combination strategies are being explored to counter it.

Why are ADCs considered a distinct therapeutic class?

ADCs occupy a distinct pharmacological space because they behave simultaneously as biologics and small-molecule drugs. Their circulating form is antibody-like, with prolonged half-life and Fc-mediated functions, yet their pharmacodynamic effect is driven by a released small-molecule payload with its own distribution and toxicity profile. This dual nature necessitates specialized approaches to dose optimization and safety assessment.¹³

Unlike naked antibodies, ADCs can eliminate cells irrespective of their dependence on the targeted antigen for survival, since the antigen serves primarily as a delivery address rather than a driver of pathology. This decouples target biology from therapeutic mechanism and expands the range of exploitable antigens.

Frequently asked questions

References

1. Chau CH, Steeg PS, Figg WD. Antibody-drug conjugates for cancer. Lancet. 2019;394(10200):793-804.
2. Beck A, Goetsch L, Dumontet C, Corvaïa N. Strategies and challenges for the next generation of antibody-drug conjugates. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(5):315-337.
3. Drago JZ, Modi S, Chandarlapaty S. Unlocking the potential of antibody-drug conjugates for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021;18(6):327-344.
4. Tsuchikama K, An Z. Antibody-drug conjugates: recent advances in conjugation and linker chemistries. Protein Cell. 2018;9(1):33-46.
5. Joubert N, Beck A, Dumontet C, Denevault-Sabourin C. Antibody-drug conjugates: the last decade. Pharmaceuticals. 2020;13(9):245.
6. Bargh JD, Isidro-Llobet A, Parker JS, Spring DR. Cleavable linkers in antibody-drug conjugates. Chem Soc Rev. 2019;48(16):4361-4374.
7. Fu Z, Li S, Han S, Shi C, Zhang Y. Antibody drug conjugate: the "biological missile" for targeted cancer therapy. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2022;7(1):93.
8. Kalim M, Chen J, Wang S, et al. Intracellular trafficking of new anticancer therapeutics: antibody-drug conjugates. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2017;11:2265-2276.
9. Khongorzul P, Ling CJ, Khan FU, Ihsan AU, Zhang J. Antibody-drug conjugates: a comprehensive review. Mol Cancer Res. 2020;18(1):3-19.
10. Staudacher AH, Brown MP. Antibody drug conjugates and bystander killing: is antigen-dependent internalisation required? Br J Cancer. 2017;117(12):1736-1742.
11. Masters JC, Nickens DJ, Xuan D, Shazer RL, Amantea M. Clinical toxicity of antibody drug conjugates: a meta-analysis of payloads. Invest New Drugs. 2018;36(1):121-135.
12. Loganzo F, Sung M, Gerber HP. Mechanisms of resistance to antibody-drug conjugates. Mol Cancer Ther. 2016;15(12):2825-2834.
13. Coats S, Williams M, Kebble B, et al. Antibody-drug conjugates: future directions in clinical and translational strategies to improve the therapeutic index. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(18):5441-5448.