↓ Skip to main content

A Systematic Assessment of MHC Class II Peptide Binding Predictions and Evaluation of a Consensus Approach

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, April 2008
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
patent
57 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
709 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
545 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
A Systematic Assessment of MHC Class II Peptide Binding Predictions and Evaluation of a Consensus Approach
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, April 2008
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000048
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peng Wang, John Sidney, Courtney Dow, Bianca Mothé, Alessandro Sette, Bjoern Peters

Abstract

The identification of MHC class II restricted peptide epitopes is an important goal in immunological research. A number of computational tools have been developed for this purpose, but there is a lack of large-scale systematic evaluation of their performance. Herein, we used a comprehensive dataset consisting of more than 10,000 previously unpublished MHC-peptide binding affinities, 29 peptide/MHC crystal structures, and 664 peptides experimentally tested for CD4+ T cell responses to systematically evaluate the performances of publicly available MHC class II binding prediction tools. While in selected instances the best tools were associated with AUC values up to 0.86, in general, class II predictions did not perform as well as historically noted for class I predictions. It appears that the ability of MHC class II molecules to bind variable length peptides, which requires the correct assignment of peptide binding cores, is a critical factor limiting the performance of existing prediction tools. To improve performance, we implemented a consensus prediction approach that combines methods with top performances. We show that this consensus approach achieved best overall performance. Finally, we make the large datasets used publicly available as a benchmark to facilitate further development of MHC class II binding peptide prediction methods.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 545 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 1%
Denmark 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Argentina 2 <1%
Russia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Other 7 1%
Unknown 516 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 110 20%
Researcher 102 19%
Student > Master 63 12%
Student > Bachelor 60 11%
Other 32 6%
Other 80 15%
Unknown 98 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 149 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 103 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 65 12%
Computer Science 31 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 6%
Other 52 10%
Unknown 115 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 25 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,432,242
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#2,186
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,771
of 96,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#10
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 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 done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 96,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.