MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002766919 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-58002-w

Nanodisc technology facilitates identification of monoclonal antibodies targeting multi-pass membrane proteins

2020· article· en· W3002766919 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernd R. Gardill, Jerry I. Huang, Lawrence Tu, Filip Van Petegem, Kirill Oxenoid, Christy A. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsAmgen (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersCIHR Skin Research Training CentreCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacsGovernment of CanadaAmgen
KeywordsNanodiscMembrane proteinMonoclonal antibodyMembraneFlow cytometryChemistryIntegral membrane proteinAntibodyCell biologyBiologyBiochemistryMolecular biologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-pass membrane proteins are important targets of biologic medicines. Given the inherent difficulties in working with membrane proteins, we sought to investigate the utility of membrane scaffold protein nanodiscs as a means of solubilizing membrane proteins to aid antibody discovery. Using a model multi-pass membrane protein, we demonstrate how incorporation of a multi-pass membrane protein into nanodiscs can be used in flow cytometry to identify antigen-specific hybridoma. The use of target protein-loaded nanodiscs to sort individual hybridoma early in the screening process can reduce the time required to identify antibodies against multi-pass membrane proteins.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207