MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143701639 · doi:10.1093/glycob/cwp150

The role of CDR H3 in antibody recognition of a synthetic analog of a lipopolysaccharide antigen

2009· article· en· W2143701639 on OpenAlexaff
Cory L. Brooks, R.J. Blackler, Georg Sixta, Paul Kosma, Sven Müller‐Loennies, Lore Brade, Takashi Hirama, C. Roger MacKenzie, Helmut Brade, Stephen V. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueGlycobiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitute for Biological SciencesUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLipopolysaccharideAntigenAntibodyChemistryImmunologyComputational biologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to explore the structural basis for adaptability in near germline monoclonal antibodies (mAb), we have examined the specificity of the promiscuous mAb S67-27 to both naturally derived carbohydrate antigens and a variety of synthetic nonnatural antigens based on the bacterial lipopolysaccharide component 3-deoxy-alpha-D-manno-oct-2-ulosonic acid (Kdo). One such analog, a 7-O-methyl (7-O-Me) Kdo disaccharide, was found to bind to the antibody with at least 30-fold higher affinity than any other antigen tested. The structure of S67-27 in complex with this analog and three other naturally occurring Kdo antigens revealed that the enhanced affinity of the mAb for the synthetic analog was accomplished by the strategic positioning of CDR H3 away from a conserved Kdo binding pocket that allowed the formation of new antibody-antigen contacts. Furthermore, the comparison of this structure with the structures of related mAbs revealed how the position and structure of CDR H3 influence the specificity or promiscuity of near-germline carbohydrate-recognizing antibodies by altering the architecture of the combining site.

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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlycobiologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207