Screening and diagnostic value of mimic peptides of autoantigen of systemic lupus erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To screen the mimic peptide of systemic lupus erythematosus(SLE) from the phage peptide library and to evaluate its diagnostic value.Methods Phage random peptide library of 12 amino acids was immunoscreened with purified IgG from sera of healthy individuals,followed by three rounds of screening with IgG purified from sera of SLE patients.Positive clones were detected by ELISA.The binding of mixed positive clones with the sera from patients with SLE,rheumatoid arthritis(RA),and osteoarthritis(OA),and from healthy individuals was detected using phage-ELISA.Results After 3 rounds screening,the input-output ratio increased from 4.4×10-5 to 1.4×10-2.Twenty-two clones were selected for test with antibodies from patients′ sera.Nineteen of them were proved to specifically react with the patients′ sera.When mixed phages were coated to react with the sera from patients with SLE,RA,and OA,and from the healthy controls,the positive rates were 80.0%,15.0%,0 and 0,respectively(χ2= 17.878,P0.01).Conclusion The data demonstrate that the antigen-mimic peptide has been successfully screened from 12 random phage peptide library and the peptides may be diagnostically valuable for SLE.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".