Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18389056›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2008

A systematic assessment of MHC class II peptide binding predictions and evaluation of a consensus approach.

Peng Wang, John Sidney, Courtney Dow, Bianca Mothé, Alessandro Sette, Bjoern Peters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 456 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
456citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

456 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Immunodominant Tuberculosis Antigens Recognized by Human CD4Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

396 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Peng WangLa Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, La Jolla, California, United States of America.
John Sidney
Courtney Dow
Bianca Mothé
Alessandro Sette
Bjoern Peters

Funding

Vaccines and Diagnostics TrialsU54AI065359 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI BARBOUR, ALAN G. · 2005 to 2013
$88.8M
NIAID NIH HHS U54 AI065359PHS HHS HHSN26620040006C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The identification of MHC class II restricted peptide epitopes is an important goal in immunological research. A number of computational tools have been developed for this purpose, but there is a lack of large-scale systematic evaluation of their performance. Herein, we used a comprehensive dataset consisting of more than 10,000 previously unpublished MHC-peptide binding affinities, 29 peptide/MHC crystal structures, and 664 peptides experimentally tested for CD4+ T cell responses to systematically evaluate the performances of publicly available MHC class II binding prediction tools. While in selected instances the best tools were associated with AUC values up to 0.86, in general, class II predictions did not perform as well as historically noted for class I predictions. It appears that the ability of MHC class II molecules to bind variable length peptides, which requires the correct assignment of peptide binding cores, is a critical factor limiting the performance of existing prediction tools. To improve performance, we implemented a consensus prediction approach that combines methods with top performances. We show that this consensus approach achieved best overall performance. Finally, we make the large datasets used publicly available as a benchmark to facilitate further development of MHC class II binding peptide prediction methods.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGenes, MHC Class IIAmino Acid SequenceBinding SitesEpitope MappingHLA-D AntigensMolecular Sequence DataPeptidesProtein BindingSequence Analysis, ProteinHLA-D AntigensPeptides

Identifiers

PMID18389056
PMCPMC2267221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.