4.2 Article

PAAQD: Predicting immunogenicity of MHC class I binding peptides using amino acid pairwise contact potentials and quantum topological molecular similarity descriptors

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 387, Issue 1-2, Pages 293-302

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2012.09.016

Keywords

T-cell reactivity prediction; Vaccine discovery; Immunogenicity; HLA; MHC

Funding

  1. Japanese government scholarship (Monbukagakusho)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prediction of peptide immunogenicity is a promising approach for novel vaccine discovery. Conventionally, epitope prediction methods have been developed to accelerate the process of vaccine production by searching for candidate peptides from pathogenic proteins. However, recent studies revealed that peptides with high binding affinity to major histocompatibility complex molecules (MHCs) do not always result in high immunogenicity. Therefore, it is promising to predict the peptide immunogenicity rather than epitopes in order to discover new vaccines more effectively. To this end, we developed a novel T-cell reactivity predictor which we call PAAQD. Nonapeptides were encoded numerically, using combining information of amino acid pairwise contact potentials (AAPPs) and quantum topological molecular similarity (QTMS) descriptors. Encoded data were used in the construction of our classification model. Our numerical experiments suggested that the predictive performance of PAAQD is at least comparable with POPISK, one of the pioneering techniques for T-cell reactivity prediction. Also, our experiment suggested that the first and eighth positions of nonapeptides are the most important for immunogenicity and most of the anchor residues in epitope prediction were not important in T-cell reactivity prediction. The R implementation of PAAQD is available at http://pirun.ku.ac.th/similar to fsciiok/PAAQD.rar. (c) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available