MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401916360 · doi:10.1021/acs.biomac.4c00801

Testing a Nanoparticle Reagent for Imaging Mass Cytometry

2024· article· en· W4401916360 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahtab Abtahi, Ladan Gheiratmand, A C Dinesh, Yang Liu, Edmond C. N. Wong, HyungJun Cho, Daniel Majonis, Hartland W. Jackson, Miralem Mrkonjic, Mitchell A. Winnik

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemMount Sinai HospitalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteInstitute of Cancer ResearchOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMass cytometryNanoparticleReagentChemistryNanotechnologyFlow cytometryMaterials scienceMolecular biologyBiochemistryOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mass cytometry (MC), a powerful single-cell analysis technique, has limitations in detecting low-abundance biomarkers. Nanoparticle (NP) reagents offer the potential for enhancing sensitivity by carrying large numbers of heavy metal isotopes. Here, we report NP reporters for imaging mass cytometry (IMC) based on NaYF 4:Yb 3+ /Er 3+ NPs. A two-step ligand exchange was used to coat NP surfaces with either methoxy-PEG 2K -neridronate (PEG-Ner) and/or poly(sulfobetaine methacrylate)-neridronate (PSBMA-Ner). Both modifications provided long-term colloidal stability in PBS buffer. IMC measurements on tonsil tissue showed that PSBMA-Ner or a 1:1 mixture of PSBMA-Ner + PEG-Ner effectively suppressed nonspecific binding (NSB) at 2 × 10 10 NPs/mL, unlike PEG-Ner alone. However, breast cancer tissue samples showed increased NSB at titers above 2 × 10 10 NPs/mL. Reduced NSB with mixed PEG-Ner and PSBMA-Ner coatings opens the door for using heterobifunctional PEGs for the development of NP conjugates with bioaffinity agents, enabling more sensitive and specific MC analyses.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207