Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34687010›Full record

ReviewExperientia supplementum (2012)2021

Automation of Immunoglobulin Glycosylation Analysis.

Jenifer L Hendel, Richard A Gardner, Daniel I R Spencer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Experientia supplementum (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

3 authors.

Jenifer L HendelLudger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK.
Richard A GardnerLudger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK.
Daniel I R SpencerLudger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK. Daniel.spencer@ludger.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of reliable, affordable, high-resolution glycomics technologies that can be used for many samples in a high-throughput manner are essential for both the optimization of glycosylation in the biopharmaceutical industry as well as for the advancement of clinical diagnostics based on glycosylation biomarkers. We will use this chapter to review the sample preparation processes that have been used on liquid-handling robots to obtain high-quality glycomics data for both biopharmaceutical and clinical antibody samples. This will focus on glycoprotein purification, followed by glycan or glycopeptide generation, derivatization and enrichment. The use of liquid-handling robots for glycomics studies on other sample types beyond antibodies will not be discussed here. We will summarize our thoughts on the current status of the field and explore the benefits and challenges associated with developing and using automated platforms for sample preparation. Finally, the future outlook for the automation of glycomics will be discussed along with a projected impact on the field in general.

Indexed as

GlycomicsPolysaccharidesAntibodiesAutomationGlycosylationAntibodiesPolysaccharidesAntibodyAutomationGlycan analysisGlycomicsHigh-throughput strategiesRobotizationSample preparation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.