Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24970214›Full record

ReviewBiomolecules2014

Refolding techniques for recovering biologically active recombinant proteins from inclusion bodies.

Hiroshi Yamaguchi, Masaya Miyazaki

Abstract readEvaluation StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomolecules, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing 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

91 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Chemical reviews · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Recovering ImmunogenicVaccines · 2025
    Article
  14. Recombinant Production of Ib-AMPProtein and peptide letters · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Design andInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  19. Recognition ofBiology · 2024
    Article
  20. Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Hiroshi YamaguchiLiberal Arts Education Center, Aso Campus, Tokai University, Minamiaso, Kumamoto 869-1404, Japan. yamahiro@tokai-u.jp.
Masaya MiyazakiMeasurement Solution Research Center, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tosu, Saga 841-0052, Japan. m.miyazaki@aist.go.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biologically active proteins are useful for studying the biological functions of genes and for the development of therapeutic drugs and biomaterials in a biotechnology industry. Overexpression of recombinant proteins in bacteria, such as Escherichia coli, often results in the formation of inclusion bodies, which are protein aggregates with non-native conformations. As inclusion bodies contain relatively pure and intact proteins, protein refolding is an important process to obtain active recombinant proteins from inclusion bodies. However, conventional refolding methods, such as dialysis and dilution, are time consuming and, often, recovered yields of active proteins are low, and a trial-and-error process is required to achieve success. Recently, several approaches have been reported to refold these aggregated proteins into an active form. The strategies largely aim at reducing protein aggregation during the refolding procedure. This review focuses on protein refolding techniques using chemical additives and laminar flow in microfluidic chips for the efficient recovery of active proteins from inclusion bodies.

Indexed as

Protein RefoldingBiochemistryEscherichia coliInclusion BodiesRecombinant ProteinsRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID24970214
PMCPMC4030991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.