Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35756972›Full record

ReviewImmuno-oncology technology2021

1,2,3, MHC: a review of mass-spectrometry-based immunopeptidomics methods for relative and absolute quantification of pMHCs.

L E Stopfer, A D D'Souza, F M White

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Immuno-oncology technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Molecular origin, discovery, validation and application of neoantigens.Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Immunopeptidomics ofBiology · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. MEK inhibition enhances presentation of targetable MHC-I tumor antigens in mutant melanomas.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

3 authors.

L E StopferDepartment of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA.
A D D'SouzaKoch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Center for Precision Cancer Medicine, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA.
F M WhiteDepartment of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA.

Funding

TRAINING GRANTS IN ENVIROMENTAL TOXICOLOGYT32ES007020 · NIEHS · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI ESSIGMANN, JOHN M · 1985 to 2024
$13.1M
Trans Network ProjectU54CA210180 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI SARKARIA, JANN N., WHITE, FOREST M · 2016 to 2020
$10.2M
Identification of adaptive response mechanisms in breast cancer by information theory and proteomicsU01CA238720 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI KRAVCHENKO-BALASHA, NATALY, WHITE, FOREST M · 2019 to 2023
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA238720NCI NIH HHS U54 CA210180NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES007020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative mass-spectrometry-based methods to perform relative and absolute quantification of peptides in the immunopeptidome are growing in popularity as researchers aim to measure the dynamic nature of the peptide major histocompatibility complex repertoire and make copies-per-cell estimations of target antigens of interest. Multiple methods to carry out these experiments have been reported, each with unique advantages and limitations. This article describes existing methods and recent applications, offering guidance for improving quantitative accuracy and selecting an appropriate experimental set-up to maximize data quality and quantity.

Indexed as

antigen presentationHLAimmunopeptidomicsmass spectometryMHC

Identifiers

PMID35756972
PMCPMC9216433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.