Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31092185›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

Balancing sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing TCR groups by CDR sequence similarity.

Neerja Thakkar, Chris Bailey-Kellogg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. T cell receptor sequence clustering and antigen specificity.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020
    Review
  15. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Neerja ThakkarDepartment of Computer Science, Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA.
Chris Bailey-KelloggDepartment of Computer Science, Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA. cbk@cs.dartmouth.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1860-0912
Dartmouth College · US

Funding

Functional Deimmunization of Therapeutic ProteinsR01GM098977 · NIGMS · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI BAILEY-KELLOGG, CHRIS, GRISWOLD, KARL E · 2011 to 2019
$3.4M
National Institutes of Health 2R01GM098977NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM098977
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRepertoire sequencing is enabling deep explorations into the cellular immune response, including the characterization of commonalities and differences among T cell receptor (TCR) repertoires from different individuals, pathologies, and antigen specificities. In seeking to understand the generality of patterns observed in different groups of TCRs, it is necessary to balance how well each pattern represents the diversity among TCRs from one group (sensitivity) vs. how many TCRs from other groups it also represents (specificity). The variable complementarity determining regions (CDRs), particularly the third CDRs (CDR3s) interact with major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-presented epitopes from putative antigens, and thus encode the determinants of recognition.

resultsWe here systematically characterize the predictive power that can be obtained from CDR3 sequences, using representative, readily interpretable methods for evaluating CDR sequence similarity and then clustering and classifying sequences based on similarity. An initial analysis of CDR3s of known structure, clustered by structural similarity, helps calibrate the limits of sequence diversity among CDRs that might have a common mode of interaction with presented epitopes. Subsequent analyses demonstrate that this same range of sequence similarity strikes a favorable specificity/sensitivity balance in distinguishing twins from non-twins based on overall CDR3 repertoires, classifying CDR3 repertoires by antigen specificity, and distinguishing general pathologies.

conclusionWe conclude that within a fairly broad range of sequence similarity, matching CDR3 sequences are likely to share specificities.

Indexed as

Sequence Homology, Amino AcidAmino Acid MotifsAmino Acid SequenceComplementarity Determining RegionsEpitopesHumansMajor Histocompatibility ComplexPeptidesReceptors, Antigen, T-CellTwinsComplementarity Determining RegionsEpitopesPeptidesReceptors, Antigen, T-CellAntigen-specific recognitionCDR classificationImmune repertoireSequence similarityT cell receptor

Identifiers

PMID31092185
PMCPMC6521430
OpenAlexW2951376539

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.