MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273249389 · doi:10.1111/imr.12409

Discovery and bio‐optimization of human antibody therapeutics using the XenoMouse<sup>®</sup> transgenic mouse platform

2016· review· en· W2273249389 on OpenAlexaff
Ian N. Foltz, Kannan Gunasekaran, Chadwick King

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunological Reviews · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsAmgen (Canada)
FundersAmgen
KeywordsPanitumumabMonoclonal antibodyAntibodyDrug discoveryTransgeneComputational biologyGenetically modified mouseBiologyImmunologyCancer researchBioinformaticsCetuximabGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the late 1990s, the use of transgenic animal platforms has transformed the discovery of fully human therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. The first approved therapy derived from a transgenic platform--the epidermal growth factor receptor antagonist panitumumab to treat advanced colorectal cancer--was developed using XenoMouse(®) technology. Since its approval in 2006, the science of discovering and developing therapeutic monoclonal antibodies derived from the XenoMouse(®) platform has advanced considerably. The emerging array of antibody therapeutics developed using transgenic technologies is expected to include antibodies and antibody fragments with novel mechanisms of action and extreme potencies. In addition to these impressive functional properties, these antibodies will be designed to have superior biophysical properties that enable highly efficient large-scale manufacturing methods. Achieving these new heights in antibody drug discovery will ultimately bring better medicines to patients. Here, we review best practices for the discovery and bio-optimization of monoclonal antibodies that fit functional design goals and meet high manufacturing standards.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations35
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunological ReviewsSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207