I love the Trackpoint on my Thinkpad, and I really miss it when I use my desktop. Here's what I've really been looking for: a WIRELESS keyboard with a Trackpoint. Does anyone know of such a thing? I looked around at http://pckeyboard.com/ and http://www.lenovo.com/...but I have not been able to find such a creation.
Also...a biochemist may want to correct me, but TFA says that these buggers bind toxins "thousands" of time better than free peptides. But to be seriously effective, wouldn't you need hundreds of thousands or even millions of times better binding?
Generally, the affinity (strength) of a binding interaction (e.g. a drug interacting with its molecular target) is measured by the equilibrium dissociation constant, Kd. Kd is derived from the law of mass action. The Kd is reported in concentration units such as molar (M). The lower the Kd, the "stronger" the binding interaction. Drugs are usually designed to have a "high affinity" for their target (e.g. Kd values in the low nM to pM range). So, if a peptide has a binding affinity of 1 uM (micromolar) for it's target...then an engineered molecule - such as the one mentioned in the article - may have an affinity around 1 nM (nanomolar). The thing is...some peptides themselves have high affinities for their target, so the peptide could already have a very high affinity in the nM range. The article is lacking such details. So, to answer your question, perhaps an affinity that is "thousands" of times better is good enough...depending on the affinity of the peptide/target interaction that they are starting with.
By the articles description of the liposome construct, it could be that the binding is improved simply through an avidity effect. Basically, apparent binding strength can be increased by including multiple binding sites for the target molecule (e.g. by diplaying multiple peptides on a liposome...yielding a multivalent liposome).
It's difficult to assess how novel this technique is based on the article itself. However, there are many studies related to functionalized liposomes and nanoparticles for use as potential drugs. A Google Scholar search on "targeted drug delivery liposome" yields thousands of hits. Also, the idea of creating multivalent liposomes has been around for a while...as evidenced by a similar Google search.
Yes, I'm sure some way to generate freestanding, cross-platform Perl executables exists. I was about to tell flamers not to bother, but, come to think of it, I'd love to see a link.
If you are a man you could always go down and have some of your boys frozen before you get the therapy. ...but would you want too? Considering you may pass on a genetic predisposition to the same disorder you are suffering from.
It seems, in this particular field that raw data is extremely valuable to the researcher.
They often have to go to all corners of the earth to collect samples (e.g. ice cores, tree cores sediment samples, etc.).
I'm not sure how this works in practice, but I could imagine that the amount of work and $$$ that go into collecting this data make the groups that collect it reluctant to share it widely.
I have acquaintances that work in this field, and they do share data with other groups...but they seem fairly careful/conservative about it.
Imagine spending years or decades collecting extremely valuable data to have some other research group take it and beat you to the punch. For example, something like this could happen.
I actually favor openly publishing the data and the algorithms/code to analyze it. This is a complex field that could benefit from an open source like approach.
However, I was just trying to point out that there may be some reluctance by some to go in the open source/open data direction.
I tried out an evaluation version of Perl2Exe, and found that it worked nicely. However, since then I've switched to pp for converting scripts into executables. It's available under the Artistic License.
Slashdot Mirror
I love the Trackpoint on my Thinkpad, and I really miss it when I use my desktop. Here's what I've really been looking for: a WIRELESS keyboard with a Trackpoint. Does anyone know of such a thing? I looked around at http://pckeyboard.com/ and http://www.lenovo.com/ ...but I have not been able to find such a creation.
it looks like someone has beaten them to implementing advanced humping algorithms.
Generally, the affinity (strength) of a binding interaction (e.g. a drug interacting with its molecular target) is measured by the equilibrium dissociation constant, Kd. Kd is derived from the law of mass action. The Kd is reported in concentration units such as molar (M). The lower the Kd, the "stronger" the binding interaction. Drugs are usually designed to have a "high affinity" for their target (e.g. Kd values in the low nM to pM range). So, if a peptide has a binding affinity of 1 uM (micromolar) for it's target...then an engineered molecule - such as the one mentioned in the article - may have an affinity around 1 nM (nanomolar). The thing is...some peptides themselves have high affinities for their target, so the peptide could already have a very high affinity in the nM range. The article is lacking such details. So, to answer your question, perhaps an affinity that is "thousands" of times better is good enough...depending on the affinity of the peptide/target interaction that they are starting with.
By the articles description of the liposome construct, it could be that the binding is improved simply through an avidity effect. Basically, apparent binding strength can be increased by including multiple binding sites for the target molecule (e.g. by diplaying multiple peptides on a liposome...yielding a multivalent liposome).
It's difficult to assess how novel this technique is based on the article itself. However, there are many studies related to functionalized liposomes and nanoparticles for use as potential drugs. A Google Scholar search on "targeted drug delivery liposome" yields thousands of hits. Also, the idea of creating multivalent liposomes has been around for a while...as evidenced by a similar Google search.
AIX on Power???...now that would be funny.
Yes, I'm sure some way to generate freestanding, cross-platform Perl executables exists. I was about to tell flamers not to bother, but, come to think of it, I'd love to see a link.
How about PAR
If you are a man you could always go down and have some of your boys frozen before you get the therapy.
...but would you want too? Considering you may pass on a genetic predisposition to the same disorder you are suffering from.
No need to write the page. Use this url. Wikipedia doesn't seem to like the trailing / character.
It seems, in this particular field that raw data is extremely valuable to the researcher. They often have to go to all corners of the earth to collect samples (e.g. ice cores, tree cores sediment samples, etc.). I'm not sure how this works in practice, but I could imagine that the amount of work and $$$ that go into collecting this data make the groups that collect it reluctant to share it widely. I have acquaintances that work in this field, and they do share data with other groups...but they seem fairly careful/conservative about it. Imagine spending years or decades collecting extremely valuable data to have some other research group take it and beat you to the punch. For example, something like this could happen. I actually favor openly publishing the data and the algorithms/code to analyze it. This is a complex field that could benefit from an open source like approach. However, I was just trying to point out that there may be some reluctance by some to go in the open source/open data direction.
Ummm yeah, it's extremely difficult to find. Go to google, type "r" in the search box. Hit "I'm feeling lucky". It's the first link :)
Hehe...I didn't notice your username on the original post. Thanks for providing such a useful tool.
I tried out an evaluation version of Perl2Exe, and found that it worked nicely. However, since then I've switched to pp for converting scripts into executables. It's available under the Artistic License.