MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2589472505 · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/54/1a/08007

Key comparison study on peptide purity—synthetic human C-peptide

2017· article· en· W2589472505 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueMetrologia · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Établissements canadiensNational Research Council Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMetrologyMutual recognitionMass fractionAmino acid analysisPeptideImpurityCharacterization (materials science)Fraction (chemistry)Standard uncertaintyChemistryChromatographyMathematicsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyStatisticsMeasurement uncertaintyAmino acidBusinessBiochemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Under the auspices of the Protein Analysis Working Group (PAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) a key comparison, CCQM-K115, was coordinated by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) and the Chinese National Institute of Metrology (NIM). Eight Metrology Institutes or Designated Institutes and the BIPM participated. Participants were required to assign the mass fraction of human C-peptide (hCP) present as the main component in the comparison sample for CCQM-K115. The comparison samples were prepared from synthetic human hCP purchased from a commercial supplier and used as provided without further treatment or purification. hCP was selected to be representative of the performance of a laboratory's measurement capability for the purity assignment of short (up to 5 kDa), non-cross-linked synthetic peptides/proteins. It was anticipated to provide an analytical measurement challenge representative for the value-assignment of compounds of broadly similar structural characteristics. The majority of participants used a peptide impurity corrected amino acid analysis (PICAA) approach as the amount of material that has been provided to each participant (25 mg) is insufficient to perform a full mass balance based characterization of the material by a participating laboratory. The coordinators, both the BIPM and the NIM, were the laboratories to use the mass balance approach as they had more material available. It was decided to propose KCRVs for both the hCP mass fraction and the mass fraction of the peptide related impurities as indispensable contributor regardless of the use of PICAA, mass balance or any other approach to determine the hCP purity. This allowed participants to demonstrate the efficacy of their implementation of the approaches used to determine the hCP mass fraction. In particular it allows participants to demonstrate the efficacy of their implementation of peptide related impurity identification and quantification. More detailed studies on the identification/quantification of peptide related impurities and the hydrolysis efficiency revealed that the integrity of the impurity profile of the related peptide impurities obtained by the participant is crucial for the impact on accuracy of the hCP mass fraction assignment. The assessment of the mass fraction of peptide impurities is based on the assumption that only the most exhaustive and elaborate set of results is taken for the calculation of the KCRVPepImp. The KCRVPepImp for the peptide related impurity mass fractions of the material was 83.3 mg/g with a combined standard uncertainty of 1.5 mg/g. Inspection of the degree of equivalence plots for the mass fraction of peptide impurities and additional information obtained from the peptide related impurity profile indicates that in many cases only a very small number of impurities have been identified and quantified resulting in an underestimation of the peptide related impurity mass fractions. The approach to obtain a KCRVhCP for the mass fraction of hCP is based on a mass balance calculation that takes into account the most exhaustive and elaborate set of results for the peptide related impurities KCRVPepImp, the TFA mass fraction value, water and other minor counter ions obtained by the coordinating laboratories. Differences in the quality of the results obtained for both peptides related impurity mass fractions and hCP mass fractions are better weighted and reflected in smaller uncertainties. The KCRVhCP for CCQM-K115 is 801.8 mg/g with a corresponding combined standard uncertainty of 3.1 mg/g. In general, mass balance approaches show smaller uncertainties than PICAA approaches and the majority of results obtained by the PICAA approach are in agreement because of larger corresponding uncertainties. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,296
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,081
Tête enseignante GPT0,387
Écart entre enseignants0,305 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle