ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Inference and design of antibody specificity: From experiments to models and back.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational Design of Broad-Spectrum Ebola Antibodies through Framework and Complementarity-Determining Region Synergistic Optimization.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Unsupervised modeling of mutational landscapes of adeno-associated viruses viability.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Exquisite binding specificity is essential for many protein functions but is difficult to engineer. Many biotechnological or biomedical applications require the discrimination of very similar ligands, which poses the challenge of designing protein sequences with highly specific binding profiles. Experimental methods for generating specific binders rely on in vitro selection, which is limited in terms of library size and control over specificity profiles. Additional control was recently demonstrated through high-throughput sequencing and downstream computational analysis. Here we follow such an approach to demonstrate the design of specific antibodies beyond those probed experimentally. We do so in a context where very similar epitopes need to be discriminated, and where these epitopes cannot be experimentally dissociated from other epitopes present in the selection. Our approach involves the identification of different binding modes, each associated with a particular ligand against which the antibodies are either selected or not. Using data from phage display experiments, we show that the model successfully disentangles these modes, even when they are associated with chemically very similar ligands. Additionally, we demonstrate and validate experimentally the computational design of antibodies with customized specificity profiles, either with specific high affinity for a particular target ligand, or with cross-specificity for multiple target ligands. Overall, our results showcase the potential of leveraging a biophysical model learned from selections against multiple ligands to design proteins with tailored specificity, with applications to protein engineering extending beyond the design of antibodies.
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.