Perfusion with the Olfactomedin Domain of Myocilin Does Not Affect Outflow Facility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Mutations in the MYOC gene coding for myocilin are associated with elevated intraocular pressure (IOP), and recombinant myocilin, produced in a prokaryotic expression system, has been reported to affect aqueous outflow facility. This study was conducted to test whether perfusion with a fragment of recombinant myocilin (containing the full-length olfactomedin domain), produced in a eukaryotic expression system, affects facility. METHODS: 293 EBNA cells were transfected by a vector containing the BM40 signal peptide, a human cDNA coding for myocilin, and a polyhistidine tag (HisTag) sequence. Recombinant protein was isolated by Ni-chelate chromatography, and characterized, and perfused into cultured anterior segments of human and porcine eyes. RESULTS: Recombinant myocilin was secreted as a approximately 55-kDa intact protein and two fragments arising from cleavage of the recombinant protein at amino acid 215. The C-terminal fragment, containing the entire olfactomedin domain, was successfully isolated. When perfused into human and porcine eyes, this C-terminal fragment did not appreciably affect outflow facility. CONCLUSIONS: Although the olfactomedin domain appears to be important for the function of myocilin, perfusion with a recombinant myocilin fragment containing this domain does not change outflow facility. It is possible that both the olfactomedin and N-terminal domains (including the leucine zipper) must be present for myocilin to have full function. Alternatively, posttranslational modifications of myocilin may have a major impact on protein function.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".