MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411919169 · doi:10.1016/j.jbc.2025.110437

Prediction of KIR3DL1 and human leukocyte antigen binding

2025· article· en· W4411919169 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Maiers, Yoram Louzoun, Phillip Pymm, J.P. Vivian, Jamie Rossjohn, Andrëw G. Brööks, Philippa M. Saunders

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Health and Medical Research CouncilBiomedical Advanced Research and Development AuthorityVictorian Cancer AgencyU.S. NavyU.S. Public Health ServiceOffice of Naval ResearchHealth Resources and Services AdministrationNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenComputational biologySequence motifMotif (music)HLA-B AntigensBiologyGeneticsAntigenGenePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KIR3DL1 is a polymorphic inhibitory receptor on natural killer (NK) cells that recognizes HLA class I allotypes. While the Bw4 motif spanning residues 77 to 83 is central to this interaction, structural studies have shown that polymorphisms elsewhere in the HLA molecule also influence binding. To address the challenge of predicting interactions across the extensive diversity of both KIR3DL1 and HLA, we developed a machine learning model trained on binding data from nine KIR3DL1 tetramers tested against a panel of HLA class I allotypes. Multiple models were evaluated using different subsets of HLA sequence features, including the full α1/α2 domains, the Bw4 motif, and α-helical residues excluding loop regions. The best-performing model, using Multi Label Vector Optimization (MLVO) and trained on α-helix positions, achieved AUC scores ranging from 0.74 to 0.974 across all KIR3DL1 allotypes. The model effectively distinguished high and low binders, revealing that residues beyond the Bw4 motif contribute to binding strength in a nonadditive manner. These findings demonstrate that binding affinity cannot be accurately captured by binary classifiers or single-motif rules. Our approach offers a more nuanced framework for modeling KIR3DL1-HLA interactions, with broad applicability to immunogenetic research and clinical decision-making.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological Chemistry→Same topicImmune Cell Function and Interaction→French-language works237,207→