» Articles » PMID: 31888437

Benchmarking the PEPOP Methods for Mimicking Discontinuous Epitopes

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Biology
Date 2020 Jan 1
PMID 31888437
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Computational methods provide approaches to identify epitopes in protein Ags to help characterizing potential biomarkers identified by high-throughput genomic or proteomic experiments. PEPOP version 1.0 was developed as an antigenic or immunogenic peptide prediction tool. We have now improved this tool by implementing 32 new methods (PEPOP version 2.0) to guide the choice of peptides that mimic discontinuous epitopes and thus potentially able to replace the cognate protein Ag in its interaction with an Ab. In the present work, we describe these new methods and the benchmarking of their performances.

Results: Benchmarking was carried out by comparing the peptides predicted by the different methods and the corresponding epitopes determined by X-ray crystallography in a dataset of 75 Ag-Ab complexes. The Sensitivity (Se) and Positive Predictive Value (PPV) parameters were used to assess the performance of these methods. The results were compared to that of peptides obtained either by chance or by using the SUPERFICIAL tool, the only available comparable method.

Conclusion: The PEPOP methods were more efficient than, or as much as chance, and 33 of the 34 PEPOP methods performed better than SUPERFICIAL. Overall, "optimized" methods (tools that use the traveling salesman problem approach to design peptides) can predict peptides that best match true epitopes in most cases.

Citing Articles

Peptide Microarrays for Studying Autoantibodies in Neurological Disease.

Talucci I, Maric H Methods Mol Biol. 2022; 2578:17-25.

PMID: 36152277 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2732-7_2.


Identification and Affinity Determination of Protein-Antibody and Protein-Aptamer Epitopes by Biosensor-Mass Spectrometry Combination.

Lupu L, Wiegand P, Holdschick D, Mihoc D, Maeser S, Rawer S Int J Mol Sci. 2021; 22(23).

PMID: 34884636 PMC: 8657952. DOI: 10.3390/ijms222312832.

References
1.
Ito H, Nakashima T, So T, Hirata M, Inoue M . Immunodominance of conformation-dependent B-cell epitopes of protein antigens. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003; 308(4):770-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0006-291x(03)01466-9. View

2.
Soria-Guerra R, Nieto-Gomez R, Govea-Alonso D, Rosales-Mendoza S . An overview of bioinformatics tools for epitope prediction: implications on vaccine development. J Biomed Inform. 2014; 53:405-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2014.11.003. View

3.
Andresen H, Grotzinger C, Zarse K, Kreuzer O, Ehrentreich-Forster E, Bier F . Functional peptide microarrays for specific and sensitive antibody diagnostics. Proteomics. 2006; 6(5):1376-84. PMC: 7167710. DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200500343. View

4.
Demolombe V, de Brevern A, Felicori L, Nguyen C, Avila R, Valera L . PEPOP 2.0: new approaches to mimic non-continuous epitopes. BMC Bioinformatics. 2019; 20(1):387. PMC: 6625012. DOI: 10.1186/s12859-019-2867-5. View

5.
Casey J, Coley A, Parisi K, Foley M . Peptide mimics selected from immune sera using phage display technology can replace native antigens in the diagnosis of Epstein-Barr virus infection. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2008; 22(2):85-91. PMC: 2660343. DOI: 10.1093/protein/gzn076. View