MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Functional Mimicry of an Anti‐idiotypic Antibody to Nominal Antigen on Cellular Response

2002· article· en· W2047395648 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Ma, Liqiang Zhou, Daqing Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJapanese Journal of Cancer Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChinese Academy of Medical SciencesUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesAcademy of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMonoclonal antibodyAntigenImmune systemBiologyAntibodyImmunologyImmunotherapyMolecular mimicryMolecular biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One concept for immune therapy of cancer involves induction of antigen mimic antibodies to trigger the immune system into a response against the tumor cells. Anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab2) directed against the antigen-combining site of other antibodies (Ab1) may functionally and even structurally mimic antigen and induce anti-anti-idiotypic immune response. We report here the generation of murine monoclonal antibody (mAb) WJ02 (Ab2) raised against the murine monoclonal immunoglobulin MJ01 (Ab1), which defines ovarian cancer antigen CA125. In enzyme immunoassays the binding of Ab2 to the variable region of Ab1 could be inhibited by CA125. In addition, the mimicry of mAb WJ02 to CA125 on cellular immune response was detected by human peripheral blood cells. The T cells primed by mAb WJ02 or CA125 proliferated in the presence of CA125 or mAb WJ02, respectively. Furthermore, T cells specific to mAb WJ02 could lyse ovarian cancer cells OVCAR-3 that express CA125. Finally, we proved that a patient immunized with mAb MJ01 could induce T cells that recognize mAb WJ02. In summary, we conclude that mAb WJ02 mimics CA125 on cellular response and such functional mimicry is one of the most important criteria to select Ab2 for cancer therapy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.321 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJapanese Journal of Cancer ResearchSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207