Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36545804›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2023

Comprehensive evaluation of peptide de novo sequencing tools for monoclonal antibody assembly.

Denis Beslic, Georg Tscheuschner, Bernhard Y Renard, Michael G Weller, Thilo Muth

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Transformer-based de novo peptide sequencing for data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering · 2023
    Article
  17. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Denis BeslicRobert Koch Institute, MF1, Nordufer 20, 13353 Berlin.ORCID 0000-0001-6346-7896
Georg TscheuschnerFederal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM), Richard-Willstätter-Straße 11, 12489 Berlin.ORCID 0000-0002-2311-1016
Bernhard Y RenardHasso Plattner Institute, Digital Engineering Faculty, University of Potsdam, Prof.-Dr.-Helmert-Straße 2-3, 14482 Potsdam.ORCID 0000-0003-4589-9809
Michael G WellerFederal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM), Richard-Willstätter-Straße 11, 12489 Berlin.ORCID 0000-0003-2767-2029
Thilo MuthFederal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM), Richard-Willstätter-Straße 11, 12489 Berlin.ORCID 0000-0001-8304-2684
Federal Institute For Materials Research and Testing · DEHasso Plattner Institute · DERobert Koch Institute · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies are biotechnologically produced proteins with various applications in research, therapeutics and diagnostics. Their ability to recognize and bind to specific molecule structures makes them essential research tools and therapeutic agents. Sequence information of antibodies is helpful for understanding antibody-antigen interactions and ensuring their affinity and specificity. De novo protein sequencing based on mass spectrometry is a valuable method to obtain the amino acid sequence of peptides and proteins without a priori knowledge. In this study, we evaluated six recently developed de novo peptide sequencing algorithms (Novor, pNovo 3, DeepNovo, SMSNet, PointNovo and Casanovo), which were not specifically designed for antibody data. We validated their ability to identify and assemble antibody sequences on three multi-enzymatic data sets. The deep learning-based tools Casanovo and PointNovo showed an increased peptide recall across different enzymes and data sets compared with spectrum-graph-based approaches. We evaluated different error types of de novo peptide sequencing tools and their performance for different numbers of missing cleavage sites, noisy spectra and peptides of various lengths. We achieved a sequence coverage of 97.69-99.53% on the light chains of three different antibody data sets using the de Bruijn assembler ALPS and the predictions from Casanovo. However, low sequence coverage and accuracy on the heavy chains demonstrate that complete de novo protein sequencing remains a challenging issue in proteomics that requires improved de novo error correction, alternative digestion strategies and hybrid approaches such as homology search to achieve high accuracy on long protein sequences.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalPeptidesAlgorithmsAmino Acid SequenceSequence Analysis, ProteinAntibodies, MonoclonalPeptidesbenchmarking studybioinformaticsde novo peptide sequencingmass spectrometrymonoclonal antibodies

Identifiers

PMID36545804
PMCPMC9851299
OpenAlexW4312095560

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.