ArticleBMC bioinformatics2010
Using simple artificial intelligence methods for predicting amyloidogenesis in antibodies.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating Local Sequence-Structural Attributes of Amyloidogenic Light Chain Variable Domains.Proteins · 2025Article
- Review
- How Artificial Intelligence Can Enhance the Diagnosis of Cardiac Amyloidosis: A Review of Recent Advances and Challenges.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- AB-Amy: machine learning aided amyloidogenic risk prediction of therapeutic antibody light chains.Antibody therapeutics · 2023Article
- Machine Learning Approaches in Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment Selection of Cardiac Amyloidosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- On the Conformational Dynamics of β-Amyloid Forming Peptides: A Computational Perspective.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- PredAmyl-MLP: Prediction of Amyloid Proteins Using Multilayer Perceptron.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2020Article
- RFAmyloid: A Web Server for Predicting Amyloid Proteins.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Article
- Breast cancer vaccination comes to age: impacts of bioinformatics.BioImpacts : BI · 2018Review
- FISH Amyloid - a new method for finding amyloidogenic segments in proteins based on site specific co-occurrence of aminoacids.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- On the amyloid datasets used for training PAFIG--how (not) to extend the experimental dataset of hexapeptides.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- Machine learning methods can replace 3D profile method in classification of amyloidogenic hexapeptides.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- A consensus method for the prediction of 'aggregation-prone' peptides in globular proteins.PloS one · 2013Article
- MetAmyl: a METa-predictor for AMYLoid proteins.PloS one · 2013Article
- Article
- Computer-aided antibody design.Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS · 2012Review
- Categorization of 77 dystrophin exons into 5 groups by a decision tree using indexes of splicing regulatory factors as decision markers.BMC genetics · 2012Article
- Dana-Farber repository for machine learning in immunology.Journal of immunological methods · 2011Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAll polypeptide backbones have the potential to form amyloid fibrils, which are associated with a number of degenerative disorders. However, the likelihood that amyloidosis would actually occur under physiological conditions depends largely on the amino acid composition of a protein. We explore using a naive Bayesian classifier and a weighted decision tree for predicting the amyloidogenicity of immunoglobulin sequences.
resultsThe average accuracy based on leave-one-out (LOO) cross validation of a Bayesian classifier generated from 143 amyloidogenic sequences is 60.84%. This is consistent with the average accuracy of 61.15% for a holdout test set comprised of 103 AM and 28 non-amyloidogenic sequences. The LOO cross validation accuracy increases to 81.08% when the training set is augmented by the holdout test set. In comparison, the average classification accuracy for the holdout test set obtained using a decision tree is 78.64%. Non-amyloidogenic sequences are predicted with average LOO cross validation accuracies between 74.05% and 77.24% using the Bayesian classifier, depending on the training set size. The accuracy for the holdout test set was 89%. For the decision tree, the non-amyloidogenic prediction accuracy is 75.00%.
conclusionsThis exploratory study indicates that both classification methods may be promising in providing straightforward predictions on the amyloidogenicity of a sequence. Nevertheless, the number of available sequences that satisfy the premises of this study are limited, and are consequently smaller than the ideal training set size. Increasing the size of the training set clearly increases the accuracy, and the expansion of the training set to include not only more derivatives, but more alignments, would make the method more sound. The accuracy of the classifiers may also be improved when additional factors, such as structural and physico-chemical data, are considered. The development of this type of classifier has significant applications in evaluating engineered antibodies, and may be adapted for evaluating engineered proteins in general.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.