ArticleThe AAPS journal2026
Synonymous Gene Recoding Affects the Accuracy of Protein Quantification Measurements.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate measurement of therapeutic protein concentration is critical for ensuring manufacturing consistency. Synonymous gene recoding is often used to improve protein yield, including for coagulation Factor IX (FIX), used to treat Hemophilia B. Although synonymous recoding does not alter primary amino acid sequence, it can affect protein conformation, potentially influencing the accuracy of protein quantification depending on the method used. In this study, we investigated whether synonymous changes in F9 gene, which encodes FIX, impacted reliability of commonly used protein quantitation methods. HEK293- FlpIn cells were used to generate FIX proteins expressed from seven different synonymous F9 sequences. Purified proteins were initially measured using absorbance at 280 nm, followed by quantification using various colorimetric, and fluorometric protein assays. Relative differences among protein quantification methods were inconsistent between wild-type and synonymous F9 variants. Compared with A280 measurements, mean differences across variants ranged from - 33% to - 8% for Bradford and from 14 to 54% for BCA, whereas wider ranges were observed for OPA (- 23% to 133%), CBQCA (14% to 282%), and Lowry (1% to 185%). Bradford and BCA also exhibited lower intra-assay variability, with standard deviations of 6% and 10%, respectively, compared with 12%, 18%, and 33% for OPA, CBQCA, and Lowry assays. These findings indicate that synonymous codon substitutions influence protein quantification outcomes, with Bradford and BCA producing more consistent results and lowest variability, whereas amine-reactive fluorescence-based assays (OPA and CBQCA) showed greater inconsistencies. In conclusion, protein quantification methods may not produce consistent accuracy among proteins translated from synonymously recoded sequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42768248What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.