MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515945983 · doi:10.1002/dta.2057

Evaluation of AMGEN clone 9G8A anti‐Epo antibody for application in doping control

2016· article· en· W2515945983 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Reichel, Wolfgang Benetka, Barbara Lorenc, Mario Thevis

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Testing and Analysis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Anti-Doping AgencyAmgen
KeywordsEnolaseBlotMolecular biologyMonoclonal antibodyAntibodyclone (Java method)EpitopePolyacrylamide gel electrophoresisGel electrophoresisChemistryRecombinant DNAErythropoietinIsoelectric focusingBiochemistryBiologyEnzymeDNAImmunologyImmunohistochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The two mouse monoclonal anti-erythropoietin (EPO) antibodies clone AE7A5 (generated by using a 26 amino acid N-terminal EPO-peptide) and 9G8A (developed by immunizing mice with full length human EPO) are both directed against linear epitopes at the N-terminus of EPO. While AE7A5 has been commercially available for many years, 9G8A was made for Amgen's internal research purposes. In the past, the commercial antibody was shown to cross-react with several proteins unrelated to EPO (e.g. E. coli thioredoxin reductase, zinc-α2-glycoprotein, S. cerevisiae enolase, human neuron-specific enolase, and human non-neuronal enolase). However, it displayed high sensitivity for detecting recombinant EPO (rEPO) misuse by athletes on Western blots. We evaluated the potential use of clone 9G8A for doping control purposes. While 9G8A showed lower sensitivity than AE7A5 (ca 45% on isoelectric focusing (IEF)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), ca 40% on sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)- and sarcosyl (SAR)-PAGE), non-specific binding of the five proteins was not observed. The cross-reactivity of AE7A5 can be overcome by immunoaffinity purification of EPO before electrophoresis and Western blotting. Similar to AE7A5, clone 9G8A is also suited for Western double-blotting. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Testing and AnalysisSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207