Filtering by
- All Subjects: Organizations
- All Subjects: Antibodies
- Creators: Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
- Status: Published
Methods: We have designed a multiplexed magnetics programmable bead ELISA (MagProBE) to profile the immune responses of the proteins from 11 high-risk HPV types and 2 low-risk types—106 genes in total. HPV genes were optimized for human expression and either built with PCR or commercially purchased, and cloned into the Gateway-compatible pANT7_cGST vector for in vitro transcription/translation (IVTT) in a MagProBE array. Anti-GST antibody (Ab) labeling was then used to measure gene expression.
Results: 53/106 (50%) HPV genes have been cloned and tested for expression of protein. 91% of HPV proteins expressed at levels above the background control (MFI = 2288), and the mean expression was MFI = 4318. Codon-optimized genes have also shown a 20% higher expression over non-codon optimized genes.
Conclusion: Although this research is ongoing, it suggests that gene optimization may improve IVTT expression of HPV proteins in human HeLa lysate. Once the remaining HPV proteins have been expression confirmed, the cDNA for each gene will be printed onto slides and tested in serologic assays to identify potential Ab biomarkers to CIN3.
Examinations of trust have advanced steadily over the past several decades, yielding important insights within criminal justice, economics, environmental studies, management and industrial organization, psychology, political science, and sociology. Cross-disciplinary approaches to the study of trust, however, have been limited by differences in defining and measuring trust and in methodological approaches. In this chapter, we take the position that: 1) cross-disciplinary studies can be improved by recognizing trust as a multilevel phenomenon, and 2) context impacts the nature of trusting relations. We present an organizing framework for conceptualizing trust between trustees and trustors at person, group, and institution levels. The differences between these levels have theoretical implications for the study of trust and that might be used to justify distinctions in definitions and methodological approaches across settings. We highlight where the levels overlap and describe how this overlap has created confusion in the trust literature to date. Part of the overlap – and confusion – is the role of interpersonal trust at each level. We delineate when and how interpersonal trust is theoretically relevant to conceptualizing and measuring trust at each level and suggest that other trust-related constructs, such as perceived legitimacy, competence, and integrity, may be more important than interpersonal trust at some levels and in some contexts. Translating findings from trust research in one discipline to another and collaborating across disciplines may be facilitated if researchers ensure that their levels of conceptualization and measurement are aligned, and that models developed for a particular context are relevant in other, distinct contexts.