MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057853325 · doi:10.1021/pr049768z

Study of Ligand−Receptor Binding Using SPME:  Investigation of Receptor, Free, and Total Ligand Concentrations

2005· article· en· W2057853325 on OpenAlexafffund
Florin Marcel Musteata, Janusz Pawliszyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Proteome Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsChemistryLigand (biochemistry)ReceptorLigand binding assayChromatographyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theoretical background and practical approaches for studying ligand-receptor (protein) binding by solid phase microextraction (SPME) are investigated, along with methods for simultaneous calculation of receptor, free, and total ligand concentrations. With the introduction of new extraction phases (restricted access materials, molecularly imprinted polymers, and immobilized antibodies), SPME allows better separation of small molecules of ligand from larger molecules of receptor, and improved accuracy. This sample preparation method based on nonexhaustive extraction is well suited as a general method to study and quantify systems involving multiple equilibriums, with significant advantages over currently used methods. SPME was used previously for the determination of protein binding constants, but only with conventional extraction phases and in simple cases, with a 1:1 combination ratio between the ligand and the receptor or when negligible depletion conditions were met. The new theoretical approach presented in this study allows the quantification of any binding equilibrium, regardless of the extent of depletion. Restricted-access particles are used as extraction phase, and if the amount of receptor is limited, selected regions of the binding curve may be obtained using a single sample, with a volume as low as 10 muL. The equations developed here are simple and independent of the analytical method used for the quantification of the amount of ligand. Three different practical approaches are presented: the method of multiple standard solutions, the method of successive extractions from the same sample and the method of successive additions to the same sample. The usefulness of this novel approach is demonstrated by using it to determine the binding parameters of some selected drugs to human serum albumin. These parameters are subsequently used to calculate albumin, free drug, and total drug concentrations from unknown mixtures. The results are in good agreement with previously published data. Quantification of the amount of ligand extracted by SPME is done by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry.

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)0.002
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations72
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Proteome ResearchSame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207