IUBio

phage display info.

Mike Clark mrc7 at cam.ac.uk
Tue Jul 2 11:14:53 EST 1996


In article <4r7ine$c6n at newsbf02.news.aol.com>, WHearl
<mailto:whearl at aol.com> wrote:
> I have been following the recombinant antibody story closely, and aside
> from a small but active group of enthusists, the technology does not seem
> to be living up to expectations yet.  Conventional antibodies - monoclonal
> or polyclonal - still generate proteins which have the most desirable
> characteristics for biniding to target.  I would be interested in hearing
> from others who have tried the method.  Is it working well for you?  Do
> you get antibodies which are better than MABs?
> 

I have the impression that the phage technology has been "oversold" with
respect to the ease of producing specific antibodies. I can recall the 
early days of hybridoma technology. The original paper was published in
1975, in 1978 there was a workshop in Bethesda Maryland in which a very
large number of different groups reported having produced monoclonal
antibodies succesfully. By the early 80s the literature was stuffed full
of papers on different specificities and of course the Leukocyte Workshops
and the CD nomenclature began.

I do think that there is a place for the phage antibody systems and there
are some applications more suited to them. However as a technology I still
do not think it is a good replacement for conventional hybridoma technology.


Mike Clark, mrc7 at cam.ac.uk          http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/
-- 
  o/ \\    //            ||  ,_ o   Dr. M.R. Clark, Division of Immunology
 <\__,\\  //   __o       || /  /\,  Cambridge University, Dept. Pathology
  ">    ||   _`\<,_    //  \\ \> |  Tennis Court Rd., Cambridge CB2 1QP
   `    ||  (_)/ (_)  //    \\ \_   Tel. 01223 333705  Fax. 01223 333875




More information about the Immuno mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net