Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31548525›Full record

ReviewAntibodies (Basel, Switzerland)2017

Strategies for Selecting Membrane Protein-Specific Antibodies using Phage Display with Cell-Based Panning.

Mohamed A Alfaleh, Martina L Jones, Christopher B Howard, Stephen M Mahler

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Targeting breast cancer: the promise of phage-based nanomedicines.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Antibody Selection on Cells Targeting Membrane Proteins.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Improving antibody drug development using bionanotechnology.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Mohamed A AlfalehAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. mohamed.alfaleh@uqconnect.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3716-0019
Martina L JonesAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. martina.jones@uq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5154-6017
Christopher B HowardAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. c.howard2@uq.edu.au.
Stephen M MahlerAustralian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia. s.mahler@eng.uq.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Membrane proteins are attractive targets for monoclonal antibody (mAb) discovery and development. Although several approved mAbs against membrane proteins have been isolated from phage antibody libraries, the process is challenging, as it requires the presentation of a correctly folded protein to screen the antibody library. Cell-based panning could represent the optimal method for antibody discovery against membrane proteins, since it allows for presentation in their natural conformation along with the appropriate post-translational modifications. Nevertheless, screening antibodies against a desired antigen, within a selected cell line, may be difficult due to the abundance of irrelevant organic molecules, which can potentially obscure the antigen of interest. This review will provide a comprehensive overview of the different cell-based phage panning strategies, with an emphasis placed on the optimisation of four critical panning conditions: cell surface antigen presentation, non-specific binding events, incubation time, and temperature and recovery of phage binders.

Indexed as

affinity selectionantibodiescell markerscell receptorscompetitive elutionepitopespanningphage displaytransfectionwhole cell

Identifiers

PMID31548525
PMCPMC6698842

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.