ArticleImmunogenetics2005
Peptide-binding motif of HLA-A*6603.
Article in Immunogenetics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) micropolymorphism on ligand specificity within the HLA-B*41 allotypic family.Haematologica · 2011Article
- A modular concept of HLA for comprehensive peptide binding prediction.Immunogenetics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The peptide motif of HLA-A*6603 was determined and compared with the available data on the peptide motifs of A*6601 and A*6602. A*6601 differs from A*6602 by two amino acids at positions 90 (Asp90Ala; outer loop) and 163 (Arg163Glu; pocket A). A*6603 differs from A*6601 and A*6602 by a single amino-acid exchange at position 70 (His70Gln; pockets A, B and C). No significant differences were found between the A*6602 and A*6603 peptide motifs suggesting that the Gln70His variation is of minor importance. However, the auxiliary anchors at position P1 of peptides bound by A*6601 (polar/acidic: Asp, Glu) and A*6602/6603 (polar/neutral: Ser) had striking differences. This finding may be best explained by the Arg163Glu substitution that results in a shift towards higher acidity in pocket A of A*6602/6603, apparently leading to the loss of preference for acidic auxiliary anchors. The similarity of A*6602 and A*6603 peptide motifs suggests low allogenicity when mismatched in stem cell transplantation. Inversely, the differences in A*6601 versus A*6602/6603 peptide motifs suggest that mismatches will have a higher allogenicity. These data will contribute to both assessing permissive mismatches in the A*66 group and weighting the impact of this individual amino-acid variation for matching and peptide binding algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15592665What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.