↓ Skip to main content

Enhancement to the RANKPEP resource for the prediction of peptide binding to MHC molecules using profiles

Overview of attention for article published in Immunogenetics, September 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
4 patents
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
325 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
Title
Enhancement to the RANKPEP resource for the prediction of peptide binding to MHC molecules using profiles
Published in
Immunogenetics, September 2004
DOI 10.1007/s00251-004-0709-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro A. Reche, John-Paul Glutting, Hong Zhang, Ellis L. Reinherz

Abstract

We introduced previously an on-line resource, RANKPEP that uses position specific scoring matrices (PSSMs) or profiles for the prediction of peptide-MHC class I (MHCI) binding as a basis for CD8 T-cell epitope identification. Here, using PSSMs that are structurally consistent with the binding mode of MHC class II (MHCII) ligands, we have extended RANKPEP to prediction of peptide-MHCII binding and anticipation of CD4 T-cell epitopes. Currently, 88 and 50 different MHCI and MHCII molecules, respectively, can be targeted for peptide binding predictions in RANKPEP. Because appropriate processing of antigenic peptides must occur prior to major histocompatibility complex (MHC) binding, cleavage site prediction methods are important adjuncts for T-cell epitope discovery. Given that the C-terminus of most MHCI-restricted epitopes results from proteasomal cleavage, we have modeled the cleavage site from known MHCI-restricted epitopes using statistical language models. The RANKPEP server now determines whether the C-terminus of any predicted MHCI ligand may result from such proteasomal cleavage. Also implemented is a variability masking function. This feature focuses prediction on conserved rather than highly variable protein segments encoded by infectious genomes, thereby offering identification of invariant T-cell epitopes to thwart mutation as an immune evasion mechanism.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 1%
Chile 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 133 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 21%
Student > Master 22 16%
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 3%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 34 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Computer Science 6 4%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 36 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2023.
All research outputs
#4,729,453
of 23,943,619 outputs
Outputs from Immunogenetics
#115
of 1,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,056
of 60,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Immunogenetics
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,943,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,219 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 60,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.