MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064298344 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005309

Characterizing Complex Polysera Produced by Antigen-Specific Immunization through the Use of Affinity-Selected Mimotopes

2009· article· en· W2064298344 on OpenAlexafffund
Galina Denisova, D. A. Denisov, Carole Evelegh, Michaela Weissgram, J.Glenn Beck, S.R. Foley, Jonathan L. Bramson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance
KeywordsEpitopeAntigenPolyclonal antibodiesComputational biologyImmunizationAntibodyImmunogenicityMimotopeBiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Antigen-based (as opposed to whole organism) vaccines are actively being pursued for numerous indications. Even though different formulations may produce similar levels of total antigen-specific antibody, the composition of the antibody response can be quite distinct resulting in different levels of therapeutic activity. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Using plasmid-based immunization against the proto-oncogene HER-2 as a model, we have demonstrated that affinity-selected epitope mimetics (mimotopes) can provide a defined signature of a polyclonal antibody response. Further, using novel computer algorithms that we have developed, these mimotopes can be used to predict epitope targets. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: By combining our novel strategy with existing methods of epitope prediction based on physical properties of an individual protein, we believe that this method offers a robust method for characterizing the breadth of epitope-specificity within a specific polyserum. This strategy is useful as a tool for monitoring immunity following vaccination and can also be used to define relevant epitopes for the creation of novel vaccines.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.143 · 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesFrench-language works237,207