↓ Skip to main content

Reliable B Cell Epitope Predictions: Impacts of Method Development and Improved Benchmarking

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, December 2012
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
6 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
559 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
457 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reliable B Cell Epitope Predictions: Impacts of Method Development and Improved Benchmarking
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002829
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Vindahl Kringelum, Claus Lundegaard, Ole Lund, Morten Nielsen

Abstract

The interaction between antibodies and antigens is one of the most important immune system mechanisms for clearing infectious organisms from the host. Antibodies bind to antigens at sites referred to as B-cell epitopes. Identification of the exact location of B-cell epitopes is essential in several biomedical applications such as; rational vaccine design, development of disease diagnostics and immunotherapeutics. However, experimental mapping of epitopes is resource intensive making in silico methods an appealing complementary approach. To date, the reported performance of methods for in silico mapping of B-cell epitopes has been moderate. Several issues regarding the evaluation data sets may however have led to the performance values being underestimated: Rarely, all potential epitopes have been mapped on an antigen, and antibodies are generally raised against the antigen in a given biological context not against the antigen monomer. Improper dealing with these aspects leads to many artificial false positive predictions and hence to incorrect low performance values. To demonstrate the impact of proper benchmark definitions, we here present an updated version of the DiscoTope method incorporating a novel spatial neighborhood definition and half-sphere exposure as surface measure. Compared to other state-of-the-art prediction methods, Discotope-2.0 displayed improved performance both in cross-validation and in independent evaluations. Using DiscoTope-2.0, we assessed the impact on performance when using proper benchmark definitions. For 13 proteins in the training data set where sufficient biological information was available to make a proper benchmark redefinition, the average AUC performance was improved from 0.791 to 0.824. Similarly, the average AUC performance on an independent evaluation data set improved from 0.712 to 0.727. Our results thus demonstrate that given proper benchmark definitions, B-cell epitope prediction methods achieve highly significant predictive performances suggesting these tools to be a powerful asset in rational epitope discovery. The updated version of DiscoTope is available at www.cbs.dtu.dk/services/DiscoTope-2.0.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 457 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 <1%
Argentina 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 445 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 74 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 16%
Student > Bachelor 61 13%
Student > Master 46 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 6%
Other 73 16%
Unknown 103 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 112 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 86 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 36 8%
Computer Science 22 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 2%
Other 69 15%
Unknown 121 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 31 August 2023.
All research outputs
#3,713,898
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#3,226
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,186
of 288,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#37
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 288,927 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.