Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20368996›Full record

ReviewJournal of biomedicine & biotechnology2010

Benchmarking B-cell epitope prediction for the design of peptide-based vaccines: problems and prospects.

Salvador Eugenio C Caoili

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biomedicine & biotechnology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Protective IgM-mediated immunity againstFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Bioinformatics for cancer immunotherapy target discovery.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2014
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Salvador Eugenio C CaoiliDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, College of Medicine, University of the Philippines Manila, 547 Pedro Gil Street, Ermita, Manila 1000, Philippines. badong@post.upm.edu.ph
University of the Philippines Manila · PH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To better support the design of peptide-based vaccines, refinement of methods to predict B-cell epitopes necessitates meaningful benchmarking against empirical data on the cross-reactivity of polyclonal antipeptide antibodies with proteins, such that the positive data reflect functionally relevant cross-reactivity (which is consistent with antibody-mediated change in protein function) and the negative data reflect genuine absence of cross-reactivity (rather than apparent absence of cross-reactivity due to artifactual masking of B-cell epitopes in immunoassays). These data are heterogeneous in view of multiple factors that complicate B-cell epitope prediction, notably physicochemical factors that define key structural differences between immunizing peptides and their cognate proteins (e.g., unmatched electrical charges along the peptide-protein sequence alignments). If the data are partitioned with respect to these factors, iterative parallel benchmarking against the resulting subsets of data provides a basis for systematically identifying and addressing the limitations of methods for B-cell epitope prediction as applied to vaccine design.

Indexed as

Drug DesignModels, StatisticalAnimalsEpitopes, B-LymphocyteHumansModels, ImmunologicalVaccines, SubunitEpitopes, B-LymphocyteVaccines, Subunit

Identifiers

PMID20368996
PMCPMC2847767
OpenAlexW2046501494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.