↓ Skip to main content

A computational method for designing diverse linear epitopes including citrullinated peptides with desired binding affinities to intravenous immunoglobulin

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
A computational method for designing diverse linear epitopes including citrullinated peptides with desired binding affinities to intravenous immunoglobulin
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1008-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rob Patro, Raquel Norel, Robert J. Prill, Julio Saez-Rodriguez, Peter Lorenz, Felix Steinbeck, Bjoern Ziems, Mitja Luštrek, Nicola Barbarini, Alessandra Tiengo, Riccardo Bellazzi, Hans-Jürgen Thiesen, Gustavo Stolovitzky, Carl Kingsford

Abstract

Understanding the interactions between antibodies and the linear epitopes that they recognize is an important task in the study of immunological diseases. We present a novel computational method for the design of linear epitopes of specified binding affinity to Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIg). We show that the method, called Pythia-design can accurately design peptides with both high-binding affinity and low binding affinity to IVIg. To show this, we experimentally constructed and tested the computationally constructed designs. We further show experimentally that these designed peptides are more accurate that those produced by a recent method for the same task. Pythia-design is based on combining random walks with an ensemble of probabilistic support vector machines (SVM) classifiers, and we show that it produces a diverse set of designed peptides, an important property to develop robust sets of candidates for construction. We show that by combining Pythia-design and the method of (PloS ONE 6(8):23616, 2011), we are able to produce an even more accurate collection of designed peptides. Analysis of the experimental validation of Pythia-design peptides indicates that binding of IVIg is favored by epitopes that contain trypthophan and cysteine. Our method, Pythia-design, is able to generate a diverse set of binding and non-binding peptides, and its designs have been experimentally shown to be accurate.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 5 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Unknown 7 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,646,462
of 24,162,843 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,533
of 7,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,522
of 305,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#101
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,162,843 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 305,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.