Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22057506›Full record

ReviewTransgenic research2012

Feasibility of Pisum sativum as an expression system for pharmaceuticals.

Heike Mikschofsky, Inge Broer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Transgenic research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Heike MikschofskyAgrobiotechnology, University of Rostock, Justus-von-Liebig-Weg 8, 18059 Rostock, Germany. Heike.Mikschofsky@uni-rostock.de
Inge Broer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based on its high protein content and excellent storage capacity, pea (Pisum sativum), as well as other plants, is considered to be a suitable production platform for protein-based pharmaceuticals. Its capacity to produce high proportions of active recombinant proteins (up to 2% total soluble protein corresponding to approximately 8 mg/g fresh weight) has been proven using pea-derived strong seed-specific promoters. The active antigens produced were also stable for more than 4 years. Pea can be used as a feed additive, up to a proportion of 30% to total feed, despite the presence of lectins. Thus, a low dosage of recombinant pea-based pharmaceuticals is non-hazardous. In addition, it is independent of N-fertilisation, has excellent biosafety characteristics and is accessible to gene transfer. Growth systems with a capacity for high yield are available for the greenhouse (5 t/ha) and, to a limited extent, also in the field (2.3 t/ha). The practicable establishment of pea seed banks allows a continuous production process. Although the use of a pea system is limited by complex transformation procedures, these advantages render pea a promising plant for the production of pharmaceuticals.

Indexed as

Molecular FarmingPlants, Genetically ModifiedGene ExpressionHumansPisum sativumRecombinant ProteinsSeedsVaccines, EdibleRecombinant ProteinsVaccines, Edible

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.