Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32952725›Full record

ArticleBeilstein journal of organic chemistry2020

Clustering and curation of electropherograms: an efficient method for analyzing large cohorts of capillary electrophoresis glycomic profiles for bioprocessing operations.

Ian Walsh, Matthew S F Choo, Sim Lyn Chiin, Amelia Mak, Shi Jie Tay, Pauline M Rudd, Yang Yuansheng, Andre Choo, Ho Ying Swan, Terry Nguyen-Khuong

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Beilstein journal of organic chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. High-Throughput Glycomic Methods.Chemical reviews · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. GlycoBioinformatics.Beilstein journal of organic chemistry · 2021
    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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ian WalshAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.
Matthew S F ChooAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1376-3352
Sim Lyn ChiinAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.
Amelia MakAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.
Shi Jie TayAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.
Pauline M RuddAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.
Yang YuanshengAnimal Cell Technology Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute, Agency for Science Technology and Research, Singapore 138668.
Andre ChooStem Cells 1 Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research, Singapore 138668.
Ho Ying SwanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore 117575.
Terry Nguyen-KhuongAnalytics Group, Bioprocessing Technology Institute - Agency for Science Technology and Research. Singapore 138668.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5852-542X
Agency for Science, Technology and Research · SGNational University of Singapore · SGUniversity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accurate assessment of antibody glycosylation during bioprocessing requires the high-throughput generation of large amounts of glycomics data. This allows bioprocess engineers to identify critical process parameters that control the glycosylation critical quality attributes. The advances made in protocols for capillary electrophoresis-laser-induced fluorescence (CE-LIF) measurements of antibody N-glycans have increased the potential for generating large datasets of N-glycosylation values for assessment. With large cohorts of CE-LIF data, peak picking and peak area calculations still remain a problem for fast and accurate quantitation, despite the presence of internal and external standards to reduce misalignment for the qualitative analysis. The peak picking and area calculation problems are often due to fluctuations introduced by varying process conditions resulting in heterogeneous peak shapes. Additionally, peaks with co-eluting glycans can produce peaks of a non-Gaussian nature in some process conditions and not in others. Here, we describe an approach to quantitatively and qualitatively curate large cohort CE-LIF glycomics data. For glycan identification, a previously reported method based on internal triple standards is used. For determining the glycan relative quantities our method uses a clustering algorithm to 'divide and conquer' highly heterogeneous electropherograms into similar groups, making it easier to define peaks manually. Open-source software is then used to determine peak areas of the manually defined peaks. We successfully applied this semi-automated method to a dataset (containing 391 glycoprofiles) of monoclonal antibody biosimilars from a bioreactor optimization study. The key advantage of this computational approach is that all runs can be analyzed simultaneously with high accuracy in glycan identification and quantitation and there is no theoretical limit to the scale of this method.

Indexed as

capillary electrophoresisclusteringdata analysiselectropherogramglycosylationmonoclonal antibodiespeak pickingprocess development

Identifiers

PMID32952725
PMCPMC7476600
OpenAlexW3081432555

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.