You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Evolution of Intein-Based Affinity Methods as Reflected in 30 years of Patent History
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, April 2022
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmolb.2022.857566 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sai Vivek Prabhala, Izabela Gierach, David W. Wood |
| Abstract |
Self-cleaving affinity tags, based on engineered intein protein domains, have been touted as a universal single step purification platform for tagless non-mAb proteins. These approaches provide all of the power and flexibility of tag-based affinity methods, but deliver a tagless target protein suitable for clinical applications without complex process development. This combination of features might accelerate and de-risk biopharmaceutical development by bridging early discovery to full-scale manufacturing under a single platform. Despite this profound promise, intein-based technologies have yet to reach their full potential. This review examines the evolution of intein-based purification methods in the light of several significant intein patents filed over the last 3 decades. Illustrated with actual key figures from each of the relevant patents, key advances are described with a focus on applications in basic research and biopharmaceutical production. Suggestions for extending intein-based purification systems to emerging therapies and non-protein applications are presented as concluding remarks. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 57% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,418,226
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
#718
of 4,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,447
of 443,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
#52
of 366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,015 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 443,297 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.