Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Ciphergen Biosystems(CIPH): -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (360)	8/8/2005 3:07:53 AM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 510

There's also the issue of ELISA using much more sample, though that is more important factor in the discovery phase than in the screening phase. But here's the SELDI advantage over ELISA as summarized by Petricoin: "Mass spectroscopy as a clinical analytical method has many unique attributes that no ELISA can achieve at this time. In addition to the speed of mass spectroscopy, ions can be precisely identified without the need for antibody development or a priori amino acid sequencing. This agnostic approach affords the experimentalist an approach to disease detection without bias about the source or identity of the markers. Mass spectroscopy can differentiate clipped or modified versions of molecules with extremely high speed and resolution. If the biomarker were a cleaved version of a larger, abundant protein, it may be nearly impossible to generate antibodies that recognize the cleaved version and do not cross-react with the much more abundant parent species. Consequently, mass spectroscopy is attractive for biomarker discovery as well as routine high-throughput testing." Emphasis mine. From: clinchem.org Isoform specific ELISAs are out there, at least for some proteins. But fragments seem to be a weakness for ELISA. The TTR fragment in question has had the N-terminal lopped off. Cheers, Tuck

To: Biomaven who wrote (360)	8/14/2005 1:33:01 AM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 510

I posed this question to some of the resident biofreaks with bench experience in this area. I'm not sure what to make of it. Kind of thought SDS PAGE wasn't that appropriate for a clinical diagnostics lab, and it's developer, O'Farrell, has said as much. But perhaps times have changed since he said that. Anyhow, I'll link the beginning of the thread. Just follow the posts, perhaps six in all. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts, and feel free to add to this thread . . . Message 21591694 Cheers, Tuck