A facile immunopeptidomics workflow for capturing the HLA-I ligandome with PEAKS XPro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Identifying antigens displayed specifically on tumour cell surfaces by human leukocyte antigen (HLA) proteins is important for the development of immunotherapies and cancer vaccines. The difficulty in capturing an HLA ligandome stems from the fact that many HLA ligands are derived from splicing events or contain mutations, hindering their identification in a standard database search. To address this challenge, we developed an immunopeptidomics workflow with PEAKS XPro that uses de novo sequencing to uncover such peptides and identifies mutations for neoantigen discovery. We demonstrate the utility of this workflow by re-analyzing HLA-I ligandome datasets and reveal a vast diversity in peptide sequences among clones derived from a colorectal cancer tumour. Over 8000 peptides predicted to bind HLA-I molecules were identified by de novo sequencing only (not found in the UniProt database) and make up over 50% of identified peptides from each sample. Lastly, tumour-specific mutations and consensus sequence motif characteristics are defined. This workflow is widely applicable to any immunopeptidomic mass spectrometry dataset and does not require custom database generation for neoantigen discovery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".