ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental hygiene2016
The influence of diisocyanate antigen preparation methodology on monoclonal and serum antibody recognition.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Exposure to diisocyanates (dNCOs), such as methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) can cause occupational asthma (OA). Currently, lab tests for dNCO specific IgE are specific, but not sensitive, which limits their utility in diagnosing dNCO asthma. This may be due to variable preparation and poor characterization of the standard antigens utilized in these assays. The aim of this study was to produce and characterize a panel of antigens prepared using three different commonly employed methods and one novel method. The conjugates were examined for recognition by anti-MDI monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in varying enzyme linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) formats, extent of crosslinking, total amount of MDI, the sites of MDI conjugation, relative shape/charge, and reactivity with human serum with antibodies from sensitized, exposed workers. Results indicate that while there are minimal differences in the total amount of MDI conjugated, the extent of crosslinking, and the conjugation sites, there are significant differences in the recognition of differently prepared conjugates by mAbs. Native and denaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis demonstrate differences in the mobility of different conjugates, indicative of structural changes that are likely important for antigenicity. While mAbs exhibited differential binding to different conjugates, polyclonal serum antibodies from MDI exposed workers exhibited equivalent binding to different conjugates by ELISA. While differences in the recognition of the different conjugates exist by mAb detection, differences in antigenicity could not be detected using human serum from MDI-sensitized individuals. Thus, although dNCO conjugate preparation can, depending on the immunoassay platform, influence binding of specific antibody clones, serologic detection of the dNCO-exposure-induced polyclonal antibody response may be less sensitive to these differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.