Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27249227›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Usefulness of ELISA Methods for Assessing LPS Interactions with Proteins and Peptides.

Victoria Martínez-Sernández, Ricardo A Orbegozo-Medina, Fernanda Romarís, Esperanza Paniagua, Florencio M Ubeira

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Victoria Martínez-SernándezLaboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ricardo A Orbegozo-MedinaLaboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Fernanda RomarísLaboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Esperanza PaniaguaLaboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Florencio M UbeiraLaboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Microbiología y Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lipopolysaccharide (LPS), the major constituent of the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria, can trigger severe inflammatory responses during bacterial infections, possibly leading to septic shock. One approach to combatting endotoxic shock is to neutralize the most conserved part and major mediator of LPS activity (lipid A) with LPS-binding proteins or peptides. Although several available assays evaluate the biological activity of these molecules on LPS (e.g. inhibition of LPS-induced TNF-α production in macrophages), the development of simple and cost-effective methods that would enable preliminary screening of large numbers of potential candidate molecules is of great interest. Moreover, it would be also desirable that such methods could provide information about the possible biological relevance of the interactions between proteins and LPS, which may enhance or neutralize LPS-induced inflammatory responses. In this study, we designed and evaluated different types of ELISA that could be used to study possible interactions between LPS and any protein or peptide. We also analysed the usefulness and limitations of the different ELISAs. Specifically, we tested the capacity of several proteins and peptides to bind FITC-labeled LPSs from Escherichia coli serotypes O111:B4 and O55:B5 in an indirect ELISA and in two competitive ELISAs including casein hydrolysate (hCAS) and biotinylated polymyxin B (captured by deglycosylated avidin; PMX) as LPS-binding agents in the solid phase. We also examined the influence of pH, detergents and different blocking agents on LPS binding. Our results showed that the competitive hCAS-ELISA performed under mildly acidic conditions can be used as a general method for studying LPS interactions, while the more restrictive PMX-ELISA may help to identify proteins/peptides that are likely to have neutralizing properties in vitro or in vivo.

Indexed as

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayLipopolysaccharidesPeptidesProtein BindingProteinsLipopolysaccharidesPeptidesProteins

Identifiers

PMID27249227
PMCPMC4889133
OpenAlexW2411803452

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.