MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006754834 · doi:10.1186/1753-6561-7-s6-p22

Developing a production process for influenza VLPs: a comparison between HEK 293SF and Sf9 production platforms

2013· article· en· W2006754834 on OpenAlexafffund
Christine M. Thompson, Emma Petiot, Marc G. Aucoin, Olivier Henry, Amine Kamen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Proceedings · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsSf9Production (economics)MedicineProcess (computing)VirologyComputer scienceChemistryRecombinant DNABiochemistryOperating systemGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Influenza virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines are one of the most promising approaches to respond to the constant threat of the emergence of pandemic strains, as they possess the potential for higher production capabilities compared to traditional vaccines made in egg-based technology. VLPs are particles produced in cell culture utilizing recombinant protein technology composed of viral antigens that are able to elicit an immune response but lack viral genetic material. Thus far, influenza VLPs have been produced in mammalian, insect and plant based platforms [1], with production in insect cells being the most explored. Baculovirus with mammalian promoters (Bacmam) have been shown to efficiently transduce mammalian cells and further express genes but are unable to replicate, efficiently repressing baculovirus (BV) production that leads to contamination downstream [2]. Influenza VLP production was performed in HEK 293SF cells using the Bacmam gene delivery system. The proposed system was assessed for its ability to produce influenza VLPs composed of Hemagglutinin (HA), Neuraminidase (NA) and Matrix Protein (M1) and compared to VLPs produced in Sf9 cells through the lens of bioprocessing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC ProceedingsSame topicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in InsectsFrench-language works237,207