Detection of Sotatercept (ACE‐011) in human serum by SAR‐PAGE and western single blotting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method for the detection of Sotatercept (ACE-011, ACVR2A-Fc) in human serum is presented. The method is a modification of a recently published protocol for Luspatercept (ACE-536, ACVR2B-Fc), another erythropoiesis stimulating fusion protein. Out of 27 tested antibodies against either the extracellular domain of ACVR2A or the full-length protein, only 4 antibodies bound strongly enough to Sotatercept for usage with immunoprecipitation followed by SAR-PAGE and Western single blotting. The adapted protocol allows the detection of 0.1 ng/mL Sotatercept in just 50 μL human serum. None of the 3 commercial ACVR2-ELISAs was able to detect Sotatercept and the 2 tested surrogate proteins, even in the μg/mL range. As for Luspatercept, only IPG-IEF/2D-PAGE generated discrete isoforms. Due to the long serum half-life, the SAR-PAGE method will be able to detect Sotatercept for several weeks and will be very useful in doping testing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
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".