Testing a Nanoparticle Reagent for Imaging Mass Cytometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".