Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38165819›Full record

ReviewLab on a chip2024

Antibodies, repertoires and microdevices in antibody discovery and characterization.

Luca Johannes Schlotheuber, Ines Lüchtefeld, Klaus Eyer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lab on a chip, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Luca Johannes SchlotheuberETH Laboratory for Functional Immune Repertoire Analysis, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, D-CHAB, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland. klaus.eyer@pharma.ethz.ch.
Ines LüchtefeldETH Laboratory for Functional Immune Repertoire Analysis, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, D-CHAB, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland. klaus.eyer@pharma.ethz.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-4171-7548
Klaus EyerETH Laboratory for Functional Immune Repertoire Analysis, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, D-CHAB, ETH Zürich, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland. klaus.eyer@pharma.ethz.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-9344-5110

Funding

European Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Therapeutic antibodies are paramount in treating a wide range of diseases, particularly in auto-immunity, inflammation and cancer, and novel antibody candidates recognizing a vast array of novel antigens are needed to expand the usefulness and applications of these powerful molecules. Microdevices play an essential role in this challenging endeavor at various stages since many general requirements of the overall process overlap nicely with the general advantages of microfluidics. Therefore, microfluidic devices are rapidly taking over various steps in the process of new candidate isolation, such as antibody characterization and discovery workflows. Such technologies can allow for vast improvements in time-lines and incorporate conservative antibody stability and characterization assays, but most prominently screenings and functional characterization within integrated workflows due to high throughput and standardized workflows. First, we aim to provide an overview of the challenges of developing new therapeutic candidates, their repertoires and requirements. Afterward, this review focuses on the discovery of antibodies using microfluidic systems, technological aspects of micro devices and small-scale antibody protein characterization and selection, as well as their integration and implementation into antibody discovery workflows. We close with future developments in microfluidic detection and antibody isolation principles and the field in general.

Indexed as

AntibodiesMicrofluidicsAntigensLab-On-A-Chip DevicesAntibodiesAntigens

Identifiers

PMID38165819
PMCPMC10898418

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.