MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408830249 · doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-968-6_14

Isolation and Characterization of Clostridium difficile Toxin-Specific Single-Domain Antibodies

2012· article· en· W2408830249 on OpenAlexaff
Greg Hussack, Mehdi Arbabi‐Ghahroudi, C. Roger MacKenzie, Jamshid Tanha

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of GuelphCarleton UniversityNational Research Council CanadaInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhage displaySingle-domain antibodyToxinEpitopeClostridium difficileAntibodyBiologyMicrobiologyRecombinant DNAEpitope mappingConformational epitopeClostridium difficile toxin AEnterotoxinVirologyComputational biologyEscherichia coliGeneBiochemistryImmunologyAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Camelidae single-domain antibodies (VHHs) are a unique class of small binding proteins that are promising inhibitors of targets relevant to infection and immunity. With VHH selection from hyperimmunized phage display libraries now routine and the fact that VHHs possess long, extended complementarity-determining region (CDR3) loop structures that can access traditionally immunosilent epitopes, VHH-based inhibition of targets such as bacterial toxins are being explored. Toxin A and toxin B are high molecular weight exotoxins (308 kDa and 269 kDa, respectively) secreted by Clostridium difficile that are the causative agents of C. difficile-associated diseases in humans and in animals. Here, we provide protocols for the rapid generation of C. difficile toxin A- and toxin B-specific VHHs by llama immunization and recombinant antibody/phage display technology approaches and for further characterization of the VHHs with respect to toxin-binding affinity and specificity and the conformational nature of their epitopes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207