Unlocking the potential of microfluidics in mass spectrometry-based immunopeptidomics for tumor antigen discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of tumor-specific antigens (TSAs) is critical for developing effective cancer immunotherapies. Mass spectrometry (MS)-based immunopeptidomics has emerged as a powerful tool for identifying TSAs as physical molecules. However, current immunopeptidomics platforms face challenges in measuring low-abundance TSAs in a precise, sensitive, and reproducible manner from small needle-tissue biopsies (<1 mg). Inspired by recent advances in single-cell proteomics, microfluidics technology offers a promising solution to these limitations by providing improved isolation of human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-associated peptides with higher sensitivity. In this context, we highlight the challenges in sample preparation and the rationale for developing microfluidics technology in immunopeptidomics. Additionally, we provide an overview of promising microfluidic methods, including microchip pillar arrays, valved-based systems, droplet microfluidics, and digital microfluidics, and discuss the latest research on their application in MS-based immunopeptidomics and single-cell proteomics.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".