MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of the epitope of a monoclonal antibody that disrupts binding of human transferrin to the human transferrin receptor

2005· article· en· W2034959038 on OpenAlexaff
Evelyn Teh, Jeff Hewitt, Karen Ung, Tanya A. M. Griffiths, Vinh Nguyen, Sara K. Briggs, Anne B. Mason, Ross T. A. MacGillivray

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdenosine and Purinergic Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsEpitopeFusion proteinTransferrinLinear epitopeMonoclonal antibodyTransferrin receptorMolecular biologyEpitope mappingRecombinant DNAChemistryBiochemistryBiologyBinding siteAntibodyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The molecular basis of the transferrin (TF)-transferrin receptor (TFR) interaction is not known. The C-lobe of TF is required to facilitate binding to the TFR and both the N- and C-lobes are necessary for maximal binding. Several mAb have been raised against human transferrin (hTF). One of these, designated F11, is specific to the C-lobe of hTF and does not recognize mouse or pig TF. Furthermore, mAb F11 inhibits the binding of TF to TFR on HeLa cells. To map the epitope for mAb F11, constructs spanning various regions of hTF were expressed as glutathione S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins in Escherichia coli. The recombinant fusion proteins were analysed in an iterative fashion by immunoblotting using mAb F11 as the probe. This process resulted in the localization of the F11 epitope to the C1 domain (residues 365-401) of hTF. Subsequent computer modelling suggested that the epitope is probably restricted to a surface patch of hTF consisting of residues 365-385. Mutagenesis of the F11 epitope of hTF to the sequence of either mouse or pig TF confirmed the identity of the epitope as immunoreactivity was diminished or lost. In agreement with other studies, these epitope mapping studies support a role for residues in the C1 domain of hTF in receptor binding.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicAdenosine and Purinergic SignalingFrench-language works237,207