ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Accurate prediction of asparagine deamidation in biologics using advanced machine learning models.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spontaneous deamidation of asparagine residues remains a major obstacle to the stability and efficacy of protein therapeutics. Currently available models in the literature for predicting deamidation liabilities can suffer from limited generalizability, likely due to biases such as sequence similarity within datasets. In this study, we built machine learning models using protein language models (PLMs, e.g. ESM2) and graph neural networks (GNNs), trained on a comprehensive dataset of 591 asparagine sites from over 105 protein molecules. To address the critical issue of data leakage, we implemented a peptide grouping strategy yielding more accurate estimates of model performance for novel deamidation sites. Our analysis shows that, when sequence similarity bias is controlled, PLMs match traditional feature-based models that use amino acid composition and predicted secondary structure/solvent accessibility, while offering substantial computational advantages. Additionally, our GNN-based pipeline further increases prediction accuracy by $\sim$8% compared with language model-only tools and delivers a 15%-25% improvement over motif-based approaches. This methodological framework enables more reliable and rapid in-silico prediction of deamidation liabilities, potentially reducing costly late-stage interventions in protein therapeutic development and is generalizable to the modeling of other protein post-translational modifications.
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.