Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30347746›Full record

ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2018

The Goldilocks Approach: A Review of Employing Design of Experiments in Prokaryotic Recombinant Protein Production.

Albert Uhoraningoga, Gemma K Kinsella, Gary T Henehan, Barry J Ryan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Expression of full and fragment-B of diphtheria toxin genes inClinical and experimental vaccine research · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Quality-by-design in hot melt extrusion based amorphous solid dispersions: An industrial perspective on product development.European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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

4 authors.

Albert UhoraningogaDublin Institute of Technology, Dublin D01 HV58, Ireland. C12712219@mydit.ie.
Gemma K KinsellaDublin Institute of Technology, Dublin D01 HV58, Ireland. Gemma.Kinsella@dit.ie.
Gary T HenehanDublin Institute of Technology, Dublin D01 HV58, Ireland. Gary.Henehan@dit.ie.
Barry J RyanDublin Institute of Technology, Dublin D01 HV58, Ireland. Barry.Ryan@dit.ie.ORCID 0000-0001-7213-3273

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The production of high yields of soluble recombinant protein is one of the main objectives of protein biotechnology. Several factors, such as expression system, vector, host, media composition and induction conditions can influence recombinant protein yield. Identifying the most important factors for optimum protein expression may involve significant investment of time and considerable cost. To address this problem, statistical models such as Design of Experiments (DoE) have been used to optimise recombinant protein production. This review examines the application of DoE in the production of recombinant proteins in prokaryotic expression systems with specific emphasis on media composition and culture conditions. The review examines the most commonly used DoE screening and optimisation designs. It provides examples of DoE applied to optimisation of media and culture conditions.

Indexed as

design of experimentsprocess optimizationrecombinant protein productionresponse surface methodologyscreening design

Identifiers

PMID30347746
PMCPMC6316313

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.