NL-201
immunotherapy drug candidate
NL-201 was an immunotherapy drug candidate that underwent a Phase 1 human clinical trial in cancer patients. It is a de novo protein that was first computationally designed at the Institute of Protein Design (IPD), University of Washington. In November 2022, Neoleukin Therapeutics announced it would discontinue the development of NL-201.
History
The predecessor of NL-201, neoleukin-2/15, was first described and published on Nature magazine in January 2019. The citizen science distributed computing project Rosetta@home, based at the University of Washington, contributed with "forward folding" experiments that helped validate protein designs of neoleukin-2/15, from which NL-201 was further developed by Neoleukin Therapeutics, a biopharmaceutical company that originated at the IPD.
The Phase 1 human clinical trial began on May 5, 2021.
In January 2022, Neoleukin Therapeutics announced a collaboration with Merck for a combination clinical trial of Merck's Pembrolizumab and Neoleukin's NL-201.
In November 2022, Neoleukin Therapeutics announced it would discontinue the development of NL-201.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “NL-201” is immunotherapy drug candidate. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through NL-201, immunotherapy and drug, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “immunotherapy drug candidate” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 13, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q107439451. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2022, 2019 and 2021.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “NL-201”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow NL-201 primary sources, NL-201 archive and NL-201 research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “NL-201”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “NL-201” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.