Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21187956›Full record

ArticlePloS one2010

Towards universal structure-based prediction of class II MHC epitopes for diverse allotypes.

Andrew J Bordner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Current medicinal chemistry · 2024
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. MHCII3D-Robust Structure Based Prediction of MHC II Binding Peptides.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Immune epitope database analysis resource.Nucleic acids research · 2012
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Andrew J BordnerDepartment of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, United States of America. bordner.andrew@mayo.edu
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The binding of peptide fragments of antigens to class II MHC proteins is a crucial step in initiating a helper T cell immune response. The discovery of these peptide epitopes is important for understanding the normal immune response and its misregulation in autoimmunity and allergies and also for vaccine design. In spite of their biomedical importance, the high diversity of class II MHC proteins combined with the large number of possible peptide sequences make comprehensive experimental determination of epitopes for all MHC allotypes infeasible. Computational methods can address this need by predicting epitopes for a particular MHC allotype. We present a structure-based method for predicting class II epitopes that combines molecular mechanics docking of a fully flexible peptide into the MHC binding cleft followed by binding affinity prediction using a machine learning classifier trained on interaction energy components calculated from the docking solution. Although the primary advantage of structure-based prediction methods over the commonly employed sequence-based methods is their applicability to essentially any MHC allotype, this has not yet been convincingly demonstrated. In order to test the transferability of the prediction method to different MHC proteins, we trained the scoring method on binding data for DRB1*0101 and used it to make predictions for multiple MHC allotypes with distinct peptide binding specificities including representatives from the other human class II MHC loci, HLA-DP and HLA-DQ, as well as for two murine allotypes. The results showed that the prediction method was able to achieve significant discrimination between epitope and non-epitope peptides for all MHC allotypes examined, based on AUC values in the range 0.632-0.821. We also discuss how accounting for peptide binding in multiple registers to class II MHC largely explains the systematically worse performance of prediction methods for class II MHC compared with those for class I MHC based on quantitative prediction performance estimates for peptide binding to class II MHC in a fixed register.

Indexed as

EpitopesGenes, MHC Class IIAmino Acid SequenceAnimalsArea Under CurveHistocompatibility Antigens Class IIHLA-DP AntigensHLA-DQ AntigensHumansInhibitory Concentration 50MiceMolecular Sequence DataMonte Carlo MethodPeptidesProtein BindingReproducibility of ResultsEpitopesHistocompatibility Antigens Class IIHLA-DP AntigensHLA-DQ AntigensPeptides

Identifiers

PMID21187956
PMCPMC3004863
OpenAlexW2051103220

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.