MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2089052972 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049934

A Novel Bioassay for the Activity Determination of Therapeutic Human Brain Natriuretic Peptide (BNP)

2012· article· en· W2089052972 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Yu, Xinchang Shi, Yonghong Li, Kai Gao, Xuguang Li, Junzhi Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersNational Institutes for Food and Drug Control
KeywordsBioassayNatriuretic peptidePotencyPharmacologyRecombinant DNABrain natriuretic peptideStimulationReceptorCell culturePeptideMedicineBiologyInternal medicineIn vitroBiochemistryHeart failureGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide (rhBNP) is an important peptide-based therapeutic drug indicated for the treatment of acute heart failure. Accurate determination of the potency of therapeutic rhBNP is crucial for the safety and efficacy of the drug. The current bioassay involves use of rabbit aortic strips, with experiments being complicated and time-consuming and markedly variable in results. Animal-less methods with better precision and accuracy should be explored. We have therefore developed an alternative cell-based assay, which relies on the ability of BNP to induce cGMP production in HEK293 cells expressing BNP receptor guanylyl cyclase-A. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: An alternative assay based on the measurement of BNP-induced cGMP production was developed. Specifically, the bioassay employs cells engineered to express BNP receptor guanylyl cyclase-A (GCA). Upon rhBNP stimulation, the levels of the second messager cGMP in these cells drastically increased and subsequently secreted into culture supernatants. The quantity of cGMP, which corresponds to the rhBNP activity, was determined using a competitive ELISA developed by us. Compared with the traditional assay, the novel cell-based assay demonstrated better reproducibility and precision. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The optimized cell-based assay is much simpler, more rapid and precise compared with the traditional assay using animal tissues. To our knowledge, this is the first report on a novel and viable alternative assay for rhBNP potency analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicHeart Failure Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→