ArticleScientific reports2016
A Shorter Route to Antibody Binders via Quantitative in vitro Bead-Display Screening and Consensus Analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- A blinded, prospective benchmark of in silico antibody discovery anchored to experimental affinity and developability.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Amplicon/Protein Bead Display enables quantitativebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Peptide ligase-mediated display: A cell-free platform for tunable selection of affinity peptides.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- A sticky situation - simple method for rapid poissonian encapsulation of highly aggregation-prone microbeads in polydisperse emulsions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Ultrahigh-Throughput Enzyme Engineering and Discovery inChemical reviews · 2023Review
- In vitro evolution of antibody affinity via insertional scanning mutagenesis of an entire antibody variable region.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Bacterial Cell Display as a Robust and Versatile Platform for Engineering Low-Affinity Ligands and Enzymes.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2020Article
- Split & mix assembly of DNA libraries for ultrahigh throughput on-bead screening of functional proteins.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Microfluidic approaches for the analysis of protein-protein interactions in solution.Biophysical reviews · 2020Review
- One-step site-specific antibody fragment auto-conjugation using SNAP-tag technology.Nature protocols · 2019Article
- Advances and Challenges in Cell-Free Incorporation of Unnatural Amino Acids Into Proteins.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Affinity panning of large libraries is a powerful tool to identify protein binders. However, panning rounds are followed by the tedious re-screening of the clones obtained to evaluate binders precisely. In a first application of Bead Surface Display (BeSD) we show successful in vitro affinity selections based on flow cytometric analysis that allows fine quantitative discrimination between binders. Subsequent consensus analysis of the resulting sequences enables identification of clones that bind tighter than those arising directly from the experimental selection output. This is demonstrated by evolution of an anti-Fas receptor single-chain variable fragment (scFv) that was improved 98-fold vs the parental clone. Four rounds of quantitative screening by fluorescence-activated cell sorting of an error-prone library based on fine discrimination between binders in BeSD were followed by analysis of 200 full-length output sequences that suggested a new consensus design with a K
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.