Impact of Epidermal Growth Factor Tethering Strategy on Cellular Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to evaluate the impact of various epidermal growth factor (EGF) grafting strategies upon cell surface receptor activation and cell adhesion, we generated low-fouling surfaces by homogeneously grafting carboxymethylated dextran (CMD) on amino-coated glass substrate. By preventing nonspecific cell adhesion while providing reactive groups facilitating subsequent protein grafting, CMD allowed achieving specific cell/tethered EGF interactions and therefore deriving unambiguous conclusions about various EGF grafting strategies. We demonstrate here that A-431 cell response to immobilized EGF is highly dependent on the bioactivity of the tagged protein being tethered, its proper orientation, and its surface density. Among all the approaches we tested, the oriented tethering of fully bioactive EGF via a de novo-designed coiled-coil capture system was shown to be the most efficient. That is, it led to the most intense and sustained phosphorylation of EGF receptors as well as to strong A-431 cell adhesion, the latter being comparable to that observed with amino-coated surfaces in the absence of CMD.
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) | 0.001 | 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".