MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A method for rapid isolation of highly purified human monocytes using fully automated negative cell selection (36.25)

2007· article· en· W80879838 on OpenAlexaff
Ning Yuan, Benoit Guilbault, Graeme T Milton, Jodie Fadum, Jackie E. Damen, Allen Eaves, Terry E. Thomas, Albertus W. Wognum

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsTerry Fox Research InstituteStemcell Technologies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD14MonocyteImmunomagnetic separationMonoclonal antibodyNegative selectionCD16CellMolecular biologyAntibodyChromatographyChemistryBiologyImmunologyFlow cytometryAntigenBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The preparation of highly purified monocytes for experimentation has traditionally been difficult, requiring multiple steps and many hours of work. We report the successful development of a rapid negative selection method that enables the preparation of highly purified monocytes from human peripheral blood using EasySep® column-free immunomagnetic cell separation technology. A cocktail of monoclonal antibodies incorporated into tetrameric antibody complexes was used to crosslink unwanted cells in the sample to EasySep® magnetic particles. The tube containing the labelled cell suspension was then placed in an EasySep® magnet for 2.5 minutes. Unlabelled cells were recovered by pouring off the cell suspension while labelled unwanted cells were held to the walls of the tube by the magnetic field. The whole procedure was completed in 30 minutes and yielded CD14+CD16− monocyte fractions that were on average 90% pure with an average recovery above 60%. Stimulation of purified monocytes with GM-CSF, IL-4 and LPS led to efficient differentiation into dendritic cells (DC) as identified by the expression of the DC markers CD1a and CD83, and the loss of the monocyte marker CD14. Differentiated DC induced robust allogeneic CD4+ T cell proliferation, confirming that the isolated monocytes were fully competent to differentiate into functional DCs. This method was also fully automated using the RoboSep® cell separator.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Immunology→Same topicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses→French-language works237,207→