ArticleMicrobial cell factories2017
Joining the in vitro immunization of alpaca lymphocytes and phage display: rapid and cost effective pipeline for sdAb synthesis.
Article in Microbial cell factories, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-SARS-CoV-2 VHH and C7C peptide fused with Angiopep-2 efficiently traverse blood-brain barrier model and neutralizes virus.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Nanobodies: Robust miniprotein binders in biomedicine.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2023Review
- Differential transcriptome response of blood brain barrier spheroids to neuroinvasiveFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Single-Cell Transcriptome Analysis of H5N1-HA-Stimulated Alpaca PBMCs.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Exploring cellular biochemistry with nanobodies.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2020Review
- Advances in the Production and Batch Reformatting of Phage Antibody Libraries.Molecular biotechnology · 2019Review
- Theranostics in immuno-oncology using nanobody derivatives.Theranostics · 2019Review
- Deciphering the Interactome ofFrontiers in microbiology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCamelids possess unique functional heavy chain antibodies, which can be produced and modified in vitro as a single domain antibody (sdAb or nanobody) with full antigen binding ability. Production of sdAb in conventional manner requires active immunization of Camelidae animal, which is laborious, time consuming, costly and in many cases not feasible (e.g. in case of highly toxic or infectious antigens).
resultsIn this study, we describe an alternative pipeline that includes in vitro stimulation of naïve alpaca B-lymphocytes by antigen of interest (in this case endothelial cell binding domain of OspA of Borrelia) in the presence of recombinant alpaca interleukins 2 and 4, construction of sdAb phage library, selection of antigen specific sdAb expressed on phages (biopanning) and confirmation of binding ability of sdAb to the antigen. By joining the in vitro immunization and the phage display ten unique phage clones carrying sdAb were selected. Out of ten, seven sdAb showed strong antigen binding ability in phage ELISA. Furthermore, two soluble forms of sdAb were produced and their differential antigen binding affinity was measured with bio-layer interferometry.
conclusionA proposed pipeline has potential to reduce the cost substantially required for maintenance of camelid herd for active immunization. Furthermore, in vitro immunization can be achieved within a week to enrich mRNA copies encoding antigen-specific sdAbs in B cell. This rapid and cost effective pipeline can help researchers to develop efficiently sdAb for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.
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.