ArticlemAbs2026
Prediction of antibody non-specificity using protein language models and biophysical parameters.
Article in mAbs, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The development of therapeutic antibodies requires optimizing target binding affinity and pharmacodynamics, while ensuring high developability potential, including minimizing non-specific binding. In this study, we address this problem by predicting antibody non-specificity by two complementary approaches: (1) antibody sequence embeddings by protein language models (PLMs) and (2) a comprehensive set of sequence-based biophysical descriptors. We benchmark the PLM embeddings against interpretable, sequence-derived biophysical descriptors and use fragment-specific models (variable heavy (VH) and variable light (VL) chains, concatenated regions, and individual complementary-determining regions (CDRs) to identify region-level determinants of non-specificity in functional antibodies that bind defined targets. These models were trained on previously published human and mouse antibody data and tested on three public datasets. We show that non-specificity is best predicted from the VH domain and heavy-chain CDRs. These region-level analyses show that heavy-chain features, especially H-CDR3, dominate the predictive signal. The top performing PLM, a VH domain-based Evolutionary Scale Modeling 1 v LogisticReg model, resulted in 10-fold cross-validation accuracy of up to 71%. While predictive accuracy is comparable to classical machine-learning baselines, PLM-based embeddings provide sequence-context representations that yield consistent region-level attribution and provide complementarity to the classical models by enhancing the reliability of predicted non‑specificity scores when used in combination. Our biophysical descriptor-based analysis identified the isoelectric point as a key driver of non-specificity, consistent with previous reports. Our findings highlight the importance of biophysical properties in predicting antibody non-specificity and highlight the potential of PLMs for the development of antibody-based therapeutics. These conclusions are robust to alternative class definitions and are not driven by VH-VL mutational bias. We illustrate the generalizability and practical use of the PLM approach by extending it to therapeutic antibodies and nanobodies, providing a tool for early-stage developability assessment, and we make the models publicly available.
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.