ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2022
Evaluating performance of existing computational models in predicting CD8+ T cell pathogenic epitopes and cancer neoantigens.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- TrambaHLApan: A Transformer and Mamba-based Neoantigen Prediction Method Considering both Antigen Presentation and Immunogenicity.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for translational personalized neoantigen cancer vaccine development.Journal of biomedical science · 2026Review
- Bacterial mRNA Vaccines: Programming Immunity Against Antimicrobial Resistance.Drug development research · 2026Review
- Quantum convolutional HLA immunogenic peptide prediction (Q-CHIPP): Next-generation neoantigen prediction with quantum neural network.Science advances · 2026Article
- Cross-task interpretability through unified modeling reveals a universal shortcut bias in neoantigen prediction.Cell genomics · 2026Article
- Immunopeptidomics-guided identification of functional neoantigens in non-small cell lung cancer.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Immunodominance Hierarchy of Endogenous BBN963 Bladder Cancer Antigens Remains Stable Under Anti-PD1 and Anti-CTLA4 Immunotherapy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- PredIG: an interpretable predictor of T-cell epitope immunogenicity.Genome medicine · 2025Article
- SageTCR: a structure-based model integrating residue- and atom-level representations for enhanced TCR-pMHC binding prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Challenges and opportunities in mRNA vaccine development against bacteria.Nature microbiology · 2025Review
- A roadmap for T cell receptor-peptide-bound major histocompatibility complex binding prediction by machine learning: glimpse and foresight.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Identifying T cell antigen at the atomic level with graph convolutional network.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Informing immunotherapy with multi-omics driven machine learning.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Transfer learning improves pMHC kinetic stability and immunogenicity predictions.Immunoinformatics (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
- Current perspectives on mass spectrometry-based immunopeptidomics: the computational angle to tumor antigen discovery.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2023Review
- A robust deep learning workflow to predict CD8 + T-cell epitopes.Genome medicine · 2023Article
- A transfer-learning approach to predict antigen immunogenicity and T-cell receptor specificity.eLife · 2023Article
- Can we predict T cell specificity with digital biology and machine learning?Nature reviews. Immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
T cell recognition of a cognate peptide-major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) presented on the surface of infected or malignant cells is of the utmost importance for mediating robust and long-term immune responses. Accurate predictions of cognate pMHC targets for T cell receptors would greatly facilitate identification of vaccine targets for both pathogenic diseases and personalized cancer immunotherapies. Predicting immunogenic peptides therefore has been at the center of intensive research for the past decades but has proven challenging. Although numerous models have been proposed, performance of these models has not been systematically evaluated and their success rate in predicting epitopes in the context of human pathology has not been measured and compared. In this study, we evaluated the performance of several publicly available models, in identifying immunogenic CD8+ T cell targets in the context of pathogens and cancers. We found that for predicting immunogenic peptides from an emerging virus such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, none of the models perform substantially better than random or offer considerable improvement beyond HLA ligand prediction. We also observed suboptimal performance for predicting cancer neoantigens. Through investigation of potential factors associated with ill performance of models, we highlight several data- and model-associated issues. In particular, we observed that cross-HLA variation in the distribution of immunogenic and non-immunogenic peptides in the training data of the models seems to substantially confound the predictions. We additionally compared key parameters associated with immunogenicity between pathogenic peptides and cancer neoantigens and observed evidence for differences in the thresholds of binding affinity and stability, which suggested the need to modulate different features in identifying immunogenic pathogen versus cancer peptides. Overall, we demonstrate that accurate and reliable predictions of immunogenic CD8+ T cell targets remain unsolved; thus, we hope our work will guide users and model developers regarding potential pitfalls and unsettled questions in existing immunogenicity predictors.
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.