Russell body phenotype is preferentially induced by IgG mAb clones with high intrinsic condensation propensity: Relations between the biosynthetic events in the ER and solution behaviors in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underlying reasons for why some mAb (monoclonal antibody) clones are much more inclined to induce a Russell body (RB) phenotype during immunoglobulin biosynthesis remain elusive. Although RBs are morphologically understood as enlarged globular aggregates of immunoglobulins deposited in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), little is known about the properties of the RB-inducing mAb clones as secretory cargo and their physical behaviors in the extracellular space. To elucidate how RB-inducing propensities, secretion outputs, and the intrinsic physicochemical properties of individual mAb clones are interrelated, we used HEK293 cells to study the biosynthesis of 5 human IgG mAbs for which prominent solution behavior problems were known a priori. All 5 model mAbs with inherently high condensation propensities induced RB phenotypes both at steady state and under ER-to-Golgi transport block, and resulted in low secretion titer. By contrast, one reference mAb that readily crystallized at neutral pH in vitro produced rod-shaped crystalline bodies in the ER without inducing RBs. Another reference mAb without notable solution behavior issues did not induce RBs and was secreted abundantly. Intrinsic physicochemical properties of individual IgG clones thus directly affected the biosynthetic steps in the ER, and thereby produced distinctive cellular phenotypes and influenced IgG secretion output. The findings implicated that RB formation represents a phase separation event or a loss of colloidal stability in the secretory pathway organelles. The process of RB induction allows the cell to preemptively reduce the extracellular concentration of potentially pathogenic, highly aggregation-prone IgG clones by selectively storing them in the ER.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".