MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155621040 · doi:10.2174/156652310791321288

Bioprocessing of Baculovirus Vectors: A Review

2010· review· en· W2155621040 on OpenAlexaff
Marc G. Aucoin, Jimmy A. Mena, Amine Kamen

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Gene Therapy · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in Insects
Canadian institutionsBiotechnology Research Institute
FundersGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsBioprocessCommercializationBiotechnologyBiochemical engineeringBaculoviridaeComputational biologyBiologyComputer scienceRecombinant DNAEngineeringBusinessGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The baculovirus/insect cell expression system is best known, and used, as a research tool for the production of recombinant proteins often requiring post-translational modifications. Although studies on the larger scale use of the system have been reported on for three decades, the recognition of this system as an industrially relevant platform for the production of biologics has only been recently achieved with the approvals of baculovirus-derived human and veterinary vaccines for commercialization. The full utility of baculoviruses, however, does not end with the production of recombinant proteins; baculoviruses are increasingly being studied for their ability to transduce mammalian cells and use as a therapeutic themselves. There is, therefore, a need to revisit the current state of the art in the bioprocessing of baculoviruses as the product. This paper is an extensive review of what is currently known about the amplification and recovery of baculoviruses and highlights the gaps that have not been focused on in the midst of optimizing this system for protein production.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Gene TherapySame topicViral Infectious Diseases and Gene Expression in InsectsFrench-language works237,207