ArticlePrion2016
Establishment of a simple cell-based ELISA for the direct detection of abnormal isoform of prion protein from prion-infected cells without cell lysis and proteinase K treatment.
Article in Prion, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optical biosensors for diagnosing neurodegenerative diseases.Npj biosensing · 2025Review
- Analysis of antibodies from whole-cell immunization by a tANCHOR cell-based ELISA.microPublication biology · 2024Article
- Conventional and State-of-the-Art Detection Methods of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Nucleic acid extraction without electrical equipment via magnetic nanoparticles in Pasteur pipettes for pathogen detection.Analytical biochemistry · 2021Article
- Neurotheranostics as personalized medicines.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2019Review
- Enhancement of binding avidity by bivalent binding enables PrPSc-specific detection by anti-PrP monoclonal antibody 132.PloS one · 2019Article
- Flow Cytometric Detection of PrPJournal of virology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prion-infected cells have been used for analyzing the effect of compounds on the formation of abnormal isoform of prion protein (PrP(Sc)). PrP(Sc) is usually detected using anti-prion protein (PrP) antibodies after the removal of the cellular isoform of prion protein (PrP(C)) by proteinase K (PK) treatment. However, it is expected that the PK-sensitive PrP(Sc) (PrP(Sc)-sen), which possesses higher infectivity and conversion activity than the PK-resistant PrP(Sc) (PrP(Sc)-res), is also digested through PK treatment. To overcome this problem, we established a novel cell-based ELISA in which PrP(Sc) can be directly detected from cells persistently infected with prions using anti-PrP monoclonal antibody (mAb) 132 that recognizes epitope consisting of mouse PrP amino acids 119-127. The novel cell-based ELISA could distinguish prion-infected cells from prion-uninfected cells without cell lysis and PK treatment. MAb 132 could detect both PrP(Sc)-sen and PrP(Sc)-res even if all PrP(Sc) molecules were not detected. The analytical dynamic range for PrP(Sc) detection was approximately 1 log. The coefficient of variation and signal-to-background ratio were 7%-11% and 2.5-3.3, respectively, demonstrating the reproducibility of this assay. The addition of a cytotoxicity assay immediately before PrP(Sc) detection did not affect the following PrP(Sc) detection. Thus, all the procedures including cell culture, cytotoxicity assay, and PrP(Sc) detection were completed in the same plate. The simplicity and non-requirement for cell lysis or PK treatment are advantages for the high throughput screening of anti-prion compounds.
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.