We value your privacy
Screening, in medicine, is a strategy used in a population to detect a disease in individuals without signs or symptoms of that disease. Unlike what generally happens in medicine, screening tests are performed on persons without any clinical sign of disease.
Recent data indicate that PSA is more suitable for therapy follow up than screening purposes. Many other potential prostate cancer biomarkers were published, and at least one (EPCA) was subsequently retracted. This make it difficult to decide which of the prospective biomarkers are the most promising.
It is established that the dysfunction of Na+/K+-pump is a common consequence of any pathology, including cancer. At the same time, it is also known that among a number of mechanisms involved in cell volume regulation, Na+/K+-pump has a central role in it. This role of pump is due to its two important properties: a) Na+/K+-pump which generates Na+ gradient on the membrane serves as an energy source for a number of secondary ionic transporters, such as, Na+/Ca2+, Na+/H+, Na+/sugars, amino acids & other osmolytes and b) Na+/K+-pump, having the highest metabolic energy (ATP) utilizing mechanism, has a great intracellular signaling role in regulation of sorption properties of intracellular structure as well as in generation of water molecules during oxidative glucose processes in cells. Na+/K+-ATPase (working molecules of Na+/K+-pump) has 4 catalytic subunits having different functional activities and sensitivities to cardiac glycoside: α1 (low), α2 (middle), α3 and α4 (high), the latter is identified only in testis. From these isoforms α1 (fully) and α2 (partly) have ion transporting functions, while α3 isoform only performs intracellular signaling function. By previous our study it was shown that dysfunction of α3 isoform-dependent signaling function controlling cell hydration stimulates carcinogenesis: So if you can measure the level of cell hydration it can be indicator for cancer screening.
My question is on calculation of osmotic potential using PEG 8000 using formula 1, 29 x C2 x T -140xC2 -4, 0 x C. Thus 1,29 x0,12x25-140XC2-4,0x0,1 where C =PEG concentration which i get from dissolving 30g/300ml which is of water to get 0,1 ( which is 15 % of PEG) and T=250c.
ls this the correct calculation of osmotic potential . You can kindly assist I want to the correct experiment which is not biased
Its still correct PEG 8000 and PEG 6000 are commonly used for drought screening remain guided by the PEG calibration document. 30g/300ml will give you 10% not 15% which translate to 1.48 bars at room temperature
Our lab is looking for robotic appratus for screening chemicals using reporter constructs in 96 well plate. Which company offers this product for reasonable price so that It can be affordable for our lab. What is the usual price.
Screening is the first step in developing a plan to treat health problems. It is a brief process designed to identify the possibility that a person has a health problem.There are many methods for screening.but what is the best method for screening of a health problem?
We have valid lisence for Imaris 8.0. in a Macintosch (iMac), but we experience that absolute randomly the software freezes the machine, I mean the screen becomes black and the whole computer turns off (sometimes only the screen becomes black, but I can hear the fan working). Other programs (as eg. pyton, op.system linux/ubuntu were also intalled it this Mac). We are capable of loading the image (circa 150-200 MB), but when we try to rotate, magnify or other processess we frequently (but not always) experience the above mentioned problem. Thank your very much for your answer in advance.
This means that the number of observations (time differences) is smaller than 4x the number of events. Since you are looking for 4 parameters (x, y, z, t) you need more than 4xnev of data to solve the problem. In fact this number of events looks very small to me for a proper use of hypoDD. You have 18 stations so it should have a larger amount of dt...
Transposons are mobile elements of DNA that can be used as a tool to generate mutations in the genome (insertional mutagenesis). It seems the authors tested a large number of these transposon-mediated mutants (a library) to identify any that affected biofilm formation. They would then find out which gene had initially been interupted in that particular library strain and therefore identify the genes are responsible for biofilm formation.
What are the causes of false positive and false negative of amphetamine in urine by semi quantitative immunoassay? I am using Roche analyzer for presumptive screening, what are the chances of false negative samples?
Adding to what Rahul and Isain have rightly said... 'genetic variation' resides in the lines, not in the markers. Normally the expectation is that larger the number of lines, more will be the chances to capture more genetic variation. Markers, beyond a certain number, say 15-20, are unlikely to help. Whether you do QTL mapping or Association mapping, their basic requirements quite similar. See if this can possibly help
I'm interested in screening a large number of yeast for the production of isoamyl acetate. I'm searching for a quick, semi-quantitative, ideally visual (perhaps colorimetric?) method to find some yeast that produce varying amounts of IAA. Production of IAA can then be confirmed later by GCMS detection.
Suggestions for either direct or indirect detection methods welcome!
Isoamylacetate is readily absorbed in active charcoal and can then be extracted from the coal with 99% carbondisulfide 1% N,N-dimetylformamide solvent. The isoamylacetate can then be detected by GC with a FID detector. This method is used for detecting isoamylacetate in air at concentrations of 100 ppb.
Try to attach a standardised charcoal tablet to the inside of a petri dish?
When carrying out indirect library screening of different enzyme variants (while searching for more active mutants), what are the disadvantages of using a fluorogenic substrate?
One obvious limitation is that you get what you screen for. In other words, using a modified substrate for screening can yield an enzyme that performs well on the modified substrate, but not the original substrate of interest.
Are there other disadvantages? Are there good alternatives?
I don't know what you mean by "indirect library screening" so I'll just address the general question of the potential disadvantages of using fluorogenic enzyme substrates.
You already mentioned the possibility of identifying inhibitors that work with the fluorogenic substrate but not the natural substrate. One way this could happen is if the fluorophore contributes to the binding affinity of the substrate-enzyme complex, and the inhibitor competes with the fluorophore for binding to the enzyme.
Another potential problem is interference with the assay readout by the compounds being tested. This can arise when there is no separation step in the assay. The compound may itself be fluorescent, or it may quench the fluorescence of the product. This paper describes a method to deal with those problems:
Fluorescent assays offer advantages of simplicity, homogeneity, low cost, and low volume capability. To offset the disadvantages mentioned above, the screening hits should be retested by a completely different method.
Additionally, it is crucial to keep in mind that a high proportion of screening hits can be false positives due to real but non-specific inhibition. Be sure to test for this common problem.
I screened many medicinal plants of coastal wetland of Gujarat, among them on which plant I am working is not yet listed in NMPB (National Medicinal Plant Board) list, I want my species name in this list, wt is the procedure?? I already mail to NMPB research officer but still respond can not be found. So, please guide me for this quarry.
1) What is the level of insurance coverage in your area? 2) What is the level of physician knowledge about the benefits, and the consequent referral rates? 3) What is the average cost of a CAC scan and of 1 statin pill in your area?
When you clone 'small fragments' (<500bp) it is very common that instead of white colonies you get light blue colonies, such as shown in your picture. If you have only few really white colonies these are often frame shift mutations in the MCS region. Another possibility is that when cloning a PCR fragment, you still have primer dimer contamination which can also result in a mix of white and light blue colonies.
I am using Active Presenter, a screen/voice recording software for recording learning videos for my students. How do I stop it from recording my computer fan. I am using Logitech headphones. My voice is very clear, but fan reduces the quality of my video.
Let's say we are trying to make a mutant enzyme with improved activity. If multi-site CASTing is used, a very large number of clones would be obtained. Is there a good method to reduce the screening effort while retaining the diversity at each site?
By using the smallest amino acid alphabet for randomization, but if you only want to improve activity, why don't you just make instead epPCR and leave the active site? You could do small libraries to reduce screening effort and hope for finding hits after several iterative rounds of mutagenesis...
I want to use EMS for suppressor screening of a rice mutant.Without using EMS,thirty percent was able to grow.However,no seed could germinate when use 1.5% ems soaking for 18 hours.What is the appropriate method to succeed this suppressor screening? What should I pay attention to?
In your use of EMS mutagenesis the lack of success might be addressed by working for a combination of lowered concentration and time.
You may want to use .25, .50 1.0 and 1.5 percent using 18, 9, 4.5 2.5 1.25 hours. Using this combination test you might be able to find a window of opportunity where the deleterious effects are minimized to give the success in your screeing.
By response surface methodology actually we try to minimize our experiments and needed treatments to determine optimum condition. By this method we can save time and money and have a results better than full factorial method!!
This method determined effect of independent variable, interaction effect of this variables and ect and you can select optimum condition based on your selected values for outputs.
we don't need any test prior to optimization analysis using response surface methodology.
You can use one of the Minitab, SAS or design expert for RSM designs.
Peer-reviewed articles are generally externally reviewed articles which are reviewed under either a blind review system (where the reviewers don't know the identity of the author of a manuscript) or less commonly a double-blind system (where neither the journal editors nor the reviewers know the identity of the authors of a manuscript). This is also what is commonly meant by a journal being a refereed journal. Matters related to citation indexes are separate and distinct.
Dr. Rabba, I do not agree with your blanket statement above. Vitamin C is being run by RP HPLC every day in hundreds of labs, if not thousands. And experience will show that ascorbate is extremely water soluble.
there are many ways to do this, depending on your specifics
Who is interested in risk-adapeted screening in bladder cancer by the open-access tool RiskCheck Bladder Cancer in asymptomatic patients?
Nov 27, 2012
The tool has been developed continuously since 1996 and included evidence based risk factors inducing bladder cancer development. The tool is initiated as open access via Internet and actually translated in 10 languages. This tool address the personal risk, the smoking risk, the occupational risk and the medical induced risk for BC. After a five minute interactive interview you will get a assessment result with interpretation help to advise patients for reasonable diagnostics and diagnose BC in asymptomatic people, initiating a stage shift the first time in BC. First health service research results has be presented in 2012 at the GU-ASCO in San Francisco. The evaluation is ongoing and in the near future further device based use will be available on all iOS devices.
In the case of cancer, some patients will have fast-growing, aggressive tumors with short asymptomatic periods and rapid progression from symptoms to death. Other patients will have slower-growing, less aggressive tumors that are less likely to metastasize and, therefore, have a better prognosis. These less aggressive tumors have a longer asymptomatic period and are therefore more likely to be identified in a screening program.
When a cohort identified by screening (e.g., mammography) is compared with a cohort identified by clinical presentation (e.g., palpable mass), less aggressive tumors will be overrepresented in the screening cohort, and more aggressive tumors will be overrepresented in the clinical presentation cohort. Even in the absence of therapy, the cohort identified by screening will have a better prognosis. A screening program may appear to improve survival when in fact it has only preferentially selected out the subgroup with the best prognosis.
Is there anyone who knows that some work has addressed this problem with a mathematical approach easy to understand?
Since few months, I have started working in bacterial bioflocculation experiment with 5 screened strains. I've successfully characterized the first strain; whereas 4 other screened strains are stored under ultra-low temperature. This unpredictable behavior started from the next strains under characterization process. The polymer/product concentration as well its activity started varying in each time of experiment get repeated. So, I’m wondering how this happened with my screened bacterial strains and when things were done so precisely in every step? If anyone can explain this and suggest if something has been lacking or been overlooked in the process, I would greatly appreciate it.
The physiological state of your cells would greatly affect your observed results. Try to ensure that you use cells at the same phase of growth in all experiments. If you use cells that are in the stationary phase now and use those in the log phase later, your product concentration would definitely vary. I suggest you first conduct growth curve experiment for each strain so as to know the time each reaches log phase, etc. You should then grow each strain till the late log phase for example and always use that in all the experiments. This is not ruling out other possible sources of variation, but in my experience, this affects the consistency of results a lot.
A high level of agreement and or concordance is observed for high risk HPV than low risk HPV when HPV detected with self-collected samples are compared to those detected with a doctor's collected samples. Please provide citation if available
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Jun 3. pii: S0090-8258(14)00986-X. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.05.026. [Epub ahead of print] Accuracy of dry vaginal self-sampling for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus infection in cervical cancer screening: A cross-sectional study. Haguenoer K1, Giraudeau B2, Gaudy-Graffin C3, de Pinieux I4, Dubois F5, Trignol-Viguier N6, Viguier J7, Marret H8, Goudeau A3.
We can screen a rhamnolipid producer by CTAB and haemolysis assays but these assays are not promising if we are screening for hyperproducers. So I need to know methods for selection of general/specific mutants.
Heomolytic style assays are best suggested for agar plate assays. Did you try agar plates with lipase enzymes. This paper suggests different method of lipase productivity detection and even quantification. Hope this helps
In many publications, researchers compare measures using a screening procedure between extreme conditions of interests (those highly affected vs. healthy) without including patients for which the test is most likely to be used on; those for which the situation is not clear.
In your analysis, you compare AD patients to healthy patients without including those with MCI. However, in practice, we are likely to use the instrument on patients with the entire spectrum of severity of dementia. Your results are therefore only valid if we can previously exclude those with MCI and then use the test.
Yes sir. I am working on fatty acid reductase (Carboxylic Acid Reductase) enzyme. I am trying with fatty acid substrates such as Oleic acid, Palmitic acid etc., But, with this system, I am facing substrate solubility problem. I coudn't optimize the system yet. TLC seems to be very vast for us to screen with product(Aldehyde). Still I am on the way of optimizing the assay conditions for CAR. Can you please suggest something on this? It will be helpful for me. Thank you sir.
please look at ESCAPE-project from Erasmus MC, where we designed and evaluated a screening tool with 6 simple questions; references 1st author Eefje Louwers, e.g. in Pediatrics, and Child Abuse and Neglect; it lead to 5 times more (true) suspicions for child abuse !
Digital breast tomosynthesis seems to have the potential to overcome the limitations due to tissue superposition found in planar X-ray mammography. For this reason, this technology could represent an alternative technique to be used in breast screening programmes. Likewise, dedicated breast CT is also currently being explored, however, the latter might be very expensive technology to implement.
Presently there is a lot of research available on the screening of herbal drugs as antibiotic. Does anyone have such report that one has screened for a natural herbal drug as antibiotic and it is now in use in clinics as antibiotic?
There is also some examples from some other Food and Drug Organization of othe countries such MHLE-FDO or DHO..
But keep in mind many of herbal medicines are not investigated by the WHO or FDA due to this fact that these medicinal plants are used in a traditional way and by a traditional physicians. So, if you wanted to introduce a herbal drug or a Medicinal Plant you have to get a confirmation of use from an acknowledged Drug Organization in your country.
I'm not sure that there's any test that's validated for that sort of use. The main thing you'll lose in remote administration is visual construction, trailmaking, measures of processing speed such as coding and symbol search - basically anything that has test materials that examinees need to put their hands on. In terms of brief screening, I would recommend the blind version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), available here: http://www.mocatest.org/
I added the German manual of the SCL-90(r)-S on Researchgate. You could detect psychological distress, if the T-score is T>=60. You could prove the "Case Definition", 2 T-scores and/or T(GSI) >=63. It is usual to compare the individual score with normative data. Sincerly yours, GHF
A 27 year-old married woman was admitted due to pain in lower abdomen for 7 days. USG revealed a multilobbed and multiloculated cyst in the left lower quadrant. During laparotomy, the parietal peritoneum was found thick. It was opened. A cystic lesion containing straw colored fluid was found. loculi were broken. Biopsy was taken. She had amenorrhoea for last one year.
Creating a mathematical model of the brain changes across time from the evolution of 116 anatomical structures from more than 2100 MRI studies of Alzheimer´s disease patients (CDR=0.5) and healthy subjects showing the possibility of an early detection of this disease since it is possible to describe the neurodegenerative pattern.
I think there are many, many issues to consider that would make this project challenging. A few things that quickly come to mind include:
1. Were the 2100 MRI scans collected on the same scanner using the same pulse sequences? Not all MR images are equal or comparable. This is a big deal in clinical trials and a huge amount of effort is put into building MR protocols at the various sites so that images can be pooled together.
2. What sort of images will you be doing the volume measurements on? Again, there are certain sequences that are more suited for volume measurements.
3. If you are not doing the volume measurements yourself and you are getting the volumes from somewhere else, the software used to analyze the all of the scans needs to be the same. Different analysis methods will give different results.
4. You say you have 2100 scans from Alzheimer's disease patients - has the diagnosis been confirmed pathologically on all of these cases? In many cases people may have AD plus another form of dementia (Lewy Body, Fronto-temporal, Vascular). Or they may not have AD at all, and only another form of dementia.
5. Were all the patients treatment naive? This would be a confounding factor...
Can anybody put forward some suggestions regarding the identification of a fungus with the help of some biochemical tests? Actually I have some mixed fungal strains and I want to identify them according to their genus or family so is their any biochemical tests for identifying them.
At the moment, I am trying to plan a genome-wide siRNA screening in an immortalized murine macrophage cell line (J774) and would like to try as many protocols as I can before the real screen. I'll be using reverse transfection in 384-well plates. Does anyone have any recommendations? What transfection reagents have you used: hiperfect, lipofectamine, interferin, something else? How much did you need per well? If you've screened, what was final siRNA concentration that you ended up using? How was your knock-down efficiency? I'm of course doing a lot of trial-and-error titration at the moment, but it would be great to be able to hear from someone else with a bit more experience. Thanks!!
We use a custom made protocol for siRNA transfection in 24 well-plates. We determine the amount of Interferin based on number of cells per mm^2 rather than well size alone, cell number alone or any other parameter (and that fact is of critical importance considering that all manufacturers give you protocols only based on well-plates without mentioning how many cell they seed; 50 000 cells per well in a 96 well-plate won't give the same result as 80 000 cells per well in the same format). For our protocol, 8 uL of Interferin in a total volume of 700 uL for 200 000 cells in 200 mm^2 and 10 nM siRNA leads to 80-90% KD efficiency without any cytotoxicity observed (medium is changed after 16-24h). In other words we use 0.1 uL Interferin per 2500 cells per 2.5 mm^2 (or 0.025 cm^2). To determine ideal Interferin amount this cell/surface ratio should be calculated for your experiment (for example if you use 5000 cells per 2.5 mm^2 then use 0.2 uL Interferin).
I only use primary macrophages, either BMDM or peritoneal macrophages. But according to litterature primary cell lines are known to be more difficult to transfect than immortalized cell lines (especially because they are way less tolerant to foreign DNA/RNA) so you should have no problem transfecting J774 if it works on BMDM for me, I do think you can even use a bit less Interferin than me considering that point.
Genetic testing seems reasonable in the index patient to facilitate the identification of first-degree family members at risk of developing HCM and therefore do a closer follow-up. However, the usefulness of genetic testing in the assessment of risk of SCD in HCM is uncertain. What's your opinion on that subject?
Follow publications from Professor Oliver Fiehn and Professor Lloyd Sumner by Google Scholar to find all the relevant protocols and methods. For sample preparations also refer to JB Harboune's book on Phytochemicals.Too big question for Research Gate !
I usually do thermoFluor assay with Tris buffer and I use suramin as a positive control for my enzyme to see shift in melting temperature. But when I used PBS instead of Tris buffer, the result is totally different. Usually I get melting temperature 43 degree, with suramin Tm is around 48 degree in tris buffer. When I did the experiment in PBS buffer, melting temperature is 51 degree which is higher than tris condition and there is no melting temperature shift for suramin which I use as positive control for screening my compounds. Does anyone have any suggestion to do my assay effectively for screening coumpounds?
Adam makes a great point, ionic strength of the buffer may influence how your protein behaves. PBS has higher ionic strength than Tris (by at least 5 times depending on what concentrations of Tris you are using) so that may change the Tm of your protein. HEPES is probably a better choice than MES, since MES has more acidic working pH range.
To quantify and follow up in advanced glaucoma is diagnostic challenge. Visual field examination is either unreliable or impossible.
Only when central island of vision remains , visual field tests of the central degrees should be chosen( central Humphery 10-2 program with a size lll or size V while carefully examining the cardinal points around fixation, as well as quadrant totals)
Listen to your patients- they will say "Its getting darker".The patient who notices decline in activities such as reading and driving may help certify results of a functional and structural tests( changes in neuroretinal rim)
I am playing movies (.mov format) using the 'OpenMovie' and 'PlayMovie' commands in PTB. I can't see any way of changing the size at which the movie is presented on screen (I can change the size of the screen window but not the movie itself). Is there a way to change the size of the movie? I don't think I can load the movie into textures as I have done before (based on the commands in the 'LoadMovieintoTextures' demo) because these movies have sound.
Thanks in advance!
Dec 5, 2014
If you don't need to change the size of the movie dynamically during the experiment, then it is probably easiest to resize it with another tool outside of PsychToolbox before playing it. VLC media player is a free software that is good at manipulating movies. Just google 'resize video vlc' or something like that.
Resizing a movie within PsychToolbox during the experiment would be trickier. I'm not sure but I would guess that first separating the sound and video components might help. Then you could load the video component into textures and manipulate it there, then play it simultaneously with the separated sound component. Again, VLC is good at separating audio and video.
Validation of the Aphasic Depression Rating Scale Charles Benaim, MD, PhD; Bruno Cailly, MD; Dominic Perennou, MD, PhD; Jacques Pelissier, MD Background and Purpose—The Aphasic Depression Rating Scale (ADRS) was developed to detect and measure depression in aphasic patients during the subacute stage of stroke. Methods—Six experts selected an initial sampling of behavioral items from existing depression rating scales. Stroke patients (aphasic and nonaphasic) were assessed with these items by the rehabilitation staff, with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) for nonaphasic patients only, by a psychiatrist, and by the rehabilitation staff with Visual Analog Scales (VAS). A second item selection was conducted after a regression algorithm was run including VAS as independent variables (criterion validity) and after their factorial structure was analyzed with a principal component analysis (factorial validity). The construct validity was evaluated with respect to the other depression assessments. A threshold for the diagnosis of depression was computed with respect to the psychiatrist’s diagnosis. Interrater and test-retest reliability were assessed in 2 additional groups of aphasic patients. Results—Eighty patients participated in the study (59 aphasic). Fifteen behavioral items from existing depression rating scales were selected, and 9 were retained after the validation process. ADRS correlated highly with VAS and HDRS (r0.60 to 0.78, P104 to 106). With respect to the psychiatrist’s diagnosis, the sensitivity and specificity of ADRS were 0.83 and 0.71, respectively, when the threshold was set at 9/32. Its factorial structure was comparable to HDRS structure. Interrater and test-retest reliability were high (average coefficient of the 9 items0.69). Conclusions—ADRS is a valid, reliable, sensitive, and specific tool for the evaluation of depression in aphasic patients during the stroke subacute phase. (Stroke. 2004;35:1692-1696.)
It depends of the settings you are working in and the degree of dementia you would like to detect. For screening purposes, I would think the MoCA is the best studied and documented screening procedure. It is translated in many languages and is made available for free by authors. It is easy to administer and only takes about 10-15 minutes.
I’m currently involved with an experimental drug protocol for treatment-resistant depression that excludes participants that have borderline personality disorder. I was inquiring if there is a short assessment tool that helps objectively diagnose a patient with BPD? I understand that diagnosing BPD is a difficult and long process. However, for a research protocol that is time sensitive especially for screening a potential participant, does a valid test exist for BPD?
What about the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II)? Would it be excessively time-consuming?
You may find what you are looking for in the following paper:
Chanen, A. M., Jovev, M., Djaja, D., McDougall, E., Yuen, H. P., Rawlings, D., et al. (2008). Screening for borderline personality disorder in outpatient youth. Journal of Personality Disorders, 22(4), 353-364.
I have identified a protein that is involved in inducing the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokine. I am interested in understanding how the protein can initiate the expression. To determine this, I would like to screen a membrane receptor that recognizes the protein ligand. Is there anyone who knows an easy way to screen those interacting receptors?
You can try preparing a membrane fraction of your protein responding cell. Following which you can perform pull down assay with your protein to check the binding with receptor. Later on the binding receptor could be identified using Mass spectrometry.
As we become technocentric, we are paying very little attention to some of the side effects that these technologies bring to our vision. We have rapidly moved from the Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS) to the Digital Vision Syndrome (DVS). In this era where we are used to the "second" or extended screen (using more than one screen at the same time. Example, smart phone and laptop at the same period of time), what is level of the consciousness of these side effects such as CVS or DVS?
Would the method of using human/mice PBMC and interact it with the subunit TB antigen be plausible? Afterward, the immune response i.e IFN-y and IL-2/4 will be quantified where subunit TB antigen that induce the most IFN-y production would be considered as the most immunogenic antigen.
The method that was used to identify both Ag85B and ESAT-6 as immunogenic antigens was to screen against PBMC of infected mice, and then to screen against PBMC from infected humans, so yes, it is entirely possible. That's how it was done, in fact.
Both humans and mice also respond to vaccination with these antigens with a strong antigen-specific IFN-y and IL-2 response. It is true that not every antigen that is immunogenic in mice is also immunogenic in humans - and there is also variation from strain to strain in mice. It is therefore a good idea to screen your antigens against several different strains of mice - and if you are thinking about vaccines, to also test in several different animal species. When testing vaccine candidates our pipeline was mice> guineapigs> cattle> non-human primates> humans, with the basic concept being that if an antigen was immunogenic in all of these very different species, that it would also be immunogenic in humans. This has proven to be the case, with immune responses to vaccination with select antigens in humans being more or less identical to responses in mice.