Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38606289›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in molecular biosciences2024

Benchmarking antibody clustering methods using sequence, structural, and machine learning similarity measures for antibody discovery applications.

Dawid Chomicz, Jarosław Kończak, Sonia Wróbel, Tadeusz Satława, Paweł Dudzic, Bartosz Janusz, Mateusz Tarkowski, Piotr Deszyński, Tomasz Gawłowski, Anna Kostyn and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dawid ChomiczNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Jarosław KończakNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Sonia WróbelNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Tadeusz SatławaNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Paweł DudzicNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Bartosz JanuszNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Mateusz TarkowskiNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Piotr DeszyńskiNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Tomasz GawłowskiNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Anna KostynPure Biologics, Wrocław, Poland.
Marek OrłowskiPure Biologics, Wrocław, Poland.
Tomasz KlausPure Biologics, Wrocław, Poland.
Lukas SchulteGlobal Computational Biology & Digital Sciences, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Biberach, Germany.
Kyle MartinBiotherapeutics Discovery, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biberach, Germany.
Stephen R ComeauBiotherapeutics Discovery, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biberach, Germany.
Konrad KrawczykNaturalAntibody, Szczecin, West Pomeranian, Poland.
Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany) · DEPure Biologics (Poland) · PLAGH University of Krakow · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibodies are proteins produced by our immune system that have been harnessed as biotherapeutics. The discovery of antibody-based therapeutics relies on analyzing large volumes of diverse sequences coming from phage display or animal immunizations. Identification of suitable therapeutic candidates is achieved by grouping the sequences by their similarity and subsequent selection of a diverse set of antibodies for further tests. Such groupings are typically created using sequence-similarity measures alone. Maximizing diversity in selected candidates is crucial to reducing the number of tests of molecules with near-identical properties. With the advances in structural modeling and machine learning, antibodies can now be grouped across other diversity dimensions, such as predicted paratopes or three-dimensional structures. Here we benchmarked antibody grouping methods using clonotype, sequence, paratope prediction, structure prediction, and embedding information. The results were benchmarked on two tasks: binder detection and epitope mapping. We demonstrate that on binder detection no method appears to outperform the others, while on epitope mapping, clonotype, paratope, and embedding clusterings are top performers. Most importantly, all the methods propose orthogonal groupings, offering more diverse pools of candidates when using multiple methods than any single method alone. To facilitate exploring the diversity of antibodies using different methods, we have created an online tool-CLAP-available at (clap.naturalantibody.com) that allows users to group, contrast, and visualize antibodies using the different grouping methods.

Indexed as

antibodiesbiologics and biosimilarsclusteringdrug discoverylanguage models (LMs)machine learning

Identifiers

PMID38606289
PMCPMC11008471
OpenAlexW4393277967

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.