George P. Smith received his Bachelor of Arts degree in biology from Haverford College in 1963 and his Ph.D. in bacteriology and immunology from Harvard University in 1970. From 1970 to 1975 he was a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Wisconsin in the laboratory of Oliver Smithies, who shared the 2007 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Smith then served as Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of Missouri in Columbia from 1975 until his retirement in 2015. In 2018 he shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Greg Winter and Frances Arnold, for their work in developing phage-display technology. Here are links to his Nobel personal biography, and his current research website.
Information on Phage Display.
2018 Nobel Lecture Transcript: Phage Display: Evolution in a Petri Dish.
Wikipedia information on phage-display
Some papers on Phage Display
Smith GP, Petrenko VA. 1997. Phage Display. Chemical Reviews 97:391-410
Bazan J, Callkosinski I, Gamian A. 2012. Phage display- A powerful technique for immunotherapy: Introduction and potential of therapeutic applications. Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics 8:12, 1817-1828.
Grunn CN, Jain R, Schniederberend M, Shoemaker CB, Nelson B. Kazmierczak BI. 2024. Bacterial cell surface characterization by phage display coupled to high-throughput sequencing. Nature Communications 15: 7502
Information on the Syngenta Symposium
Title: Phage antibodies: potent medicines we shouldn’t have to pay monopoly prices for
George P. Smith, Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri—Columbia (2018 Nobel Prize in Chemistry)
Wednesday March 19th
101 Sullivan Science
University of North Carolina Greensboro
5:30-6:30 PM with light refreshments following the symposium
Free Parking in McIver Parking Deck
Abstract:
Phage antibody technology allows scientists to create human antibodies specific for almost any chosen antigen—even human antigens that the natural human immune system can’t respond to. Some of today’s most important medicines are antibodies created in this way. They’re so expensive, however, that they’re unavailable to many people who desperately need them. That’s because they’re sold by companies holding government-enforced patent monopolies. Some economists argue persuasively that it would be much less costly, more efficient, and more socially just for the government itself to invest in these drugs, rather than offering patent monopolies to incentivize private corporations to do so.
Information on Phage Display.
2018 Nobel Lecture Transcript: Phage Display: Evolution in a Petri Dish.
Wikipedia information on phage-display
Some papers on Phage Display
Smith GP, Petrenko VA. 1997. Phage Display. Chemical Reviews 97:391-410
Bazan J, Callkosinski I, Gamian A. 2012. Phage display- A powerful technique for immunotherapy: Introduction and potential of therapeutic applications. Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics 8:12, 1817-1828.
Grunn CN, Jain R, Schniederberend M, Shoemaker CB, Nelson B. Kazmierczak BI. 2024. Bacterial cell surface characterization by phage display coupled to high-throughput sequencing. Nature Communications 15: 7502
Information on the Syngenta Symposium
Title: Phage antibodies: potent medicines we shouldn’t have to pay monopoly prices for
George P. Smith, Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri—Columbia (2018 Nobel Prize in Chemistry)
Wednesday March 19th
101 Sullivan Science
University of North Carolina Greensboro
5:30-6:30 PM with light refreshments following the symposium
Free Parking in McIver Parking Deck
Abstract:
Phage antibody technology allows scientists to create human antibodies specific for almost any chosen antigen—even human antigens that the natural human immune system can’t respond to. Some of today’s most important medicines are antibodies created in this way. They’re so expensive, however, that they’re unavailable to many people who desperately need them. That’s because they’re sold by companies holding government-enforced patent monopolies. Some economists argue persuasively that it would be much less costly, more efficient, and more socially just for the government itself to invest in these drugs, rather than offering patent monopolies to incentivize private corporations to do so.