Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35955604›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Evaluation of Phage Display Biopanning Strategies for the Selection of Anti-Cell Surface Receptor Antibodies.

Nadya Panagides, Lucia F Zacchi, Mitchell J De Souza, Rodrigo A V Morales, Alexander Karnowski, Mark T Liddament, Catherine M Owczarek, Stephen M Mahler, Con Panousis, Martina L Jones and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Computer-Assisted Design of Peptide-Based Radiotracers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadya PanagidesARC Training Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2635-737X
Lucia F ZacchiARC Training Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6217-1380
Mitchell J De SouzaResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1155-1532
Rodrigo A V MoralesResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Alexander KarnowskiResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Mark T LiddamentResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Catherine M OwczarekResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Stephen M MahlerARC Training Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
Con PanousisResearch and Development, CSL Limited, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Martina L JonesARC Training Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5154-6017
Christian FercherARC Training Centre for Biopharmaceutical Innovation, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
CSL (Australia) · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council IC16100027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are one of the most successful and versatile protein-based pharmaceutical products used to treat multiple pathological conditions. The remarkable specificity of mAbs and their affinity for biological targets has led to the implementation of mAbs in the therapeutic regime of oncogenic, chronic inflammatory, cardiovascular, and infectious diseases. Thus, the discovery of novel mAbs with defined functional activities is of crucial importance to expand our ability to address current and future clinical challenges. In vitro, antigen-driven affinity selection employing phage display biopanning is a commonly used technique to isolate mAbs. The success of biopanning is dependent on the quality and the presentation format of the antigen, which is critical when isolating mAbs against membrane protein targets. Here, we provide a comprehensive investigation of two established panning strategies, surface-tethering of a recombinant extracellular domain and cell-based biopanning, to examine the impact of antigen presentation on selection outcomes with regards to the isolation of positive mAbs with functional potential against a proof-of-concept type I cell surface receptor. Based on the higher sequence diversity of the resulting antibody repertoire, presentation of a type I membrane protein in soluble form was more advantageous over presentation in cell-based format. Our results will contribute to inform and guide future antibody discovery campaigns against cell surface proteins.

Indexed as

BacteriophagesPeptide LibraryAntibodies, MonoclonalBioprospectingCell Surface Display TechniquesMembrane ProteinsAntibodies, MonoclonalMembrane ProteinsPeptide Librarybiopanningfunctional inhibitionmonoclonal antibodiesmouse common beta receptorphage display

Identifiers

PMID35955604
PMCPMC9369378
OpenAlexW4289175334

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.