| Title |
Comparison of the size distributions and immunogenicity of human papillomavirus type 16 L1 virus-like particles produced in insect and yeast cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Pharmacal Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12272-018-1024-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hyoung Jin Kim, Seo Young Cho, Min-Hye Park, Hong-Jin Kim |
| Abstract |
Insect and yeast cells are considered the expression systems of choice for producing virus-like particles (VLPs), and numerous types of VLPs have been produced in these systems. However, previous studies were restricted to identifying the characteristics of individual VLP preparations. No direct comparison of the structures and immunogenic properties of insect and yeast-derived VLPs has so far been made. In the present study, the size distribution and immunogenic properties of human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) L1 VLPs produced in Spodoptera frugipedra-9 insect cells and Saccharomyces cerevisiae were compared. The insect cell-derived VLPs were larger than the yeast ones (P < 0.0001), with median sizes of 34 and 26 nm, respectively. In addition, the insect-derived VLPs appeared to be more diverse in size than the yeast-derived VLPs. Immunization of mice with 30 ng per dose of VLPs elicited 2.7- and 2.4-fold higher anti-HPV16 L1 IgG and anti-HPV16 neutralizing antibody titers than immunization with the same amounts of the yeast-derived VLPs after the 4th immunizations, respectively. Our results suggest that the choice of expression system critically affects the particle size and immunogenic property of HPV16 L1 VLPs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 19% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 14% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,944,820
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Pharmacal Research
#1,025
of 1,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,968
of 329,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Pharmacal Research
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,299 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.