ImmuniT Platform for Improved Neoantigen Prediction in Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality, with many patients responding poorly to immunotherapy due to limited tumor recognition. Neoantigen-based strategies offer a promising solution, but current discovery methods often miss key targets, particularly those with low or heterogeneous expression. To address this, we developed ImmuniT, a three-phase platform for enhanced neoantigen discovery and validation. METHODS: Under an IRB-approved protocol, patients with lung cancer consented to tumor collection for ex vivo processing to modulate antigen expression. Autologous T cells from matched blood were co-cultured with treated cancer cells to expand tumor-reactive populations. The nextneopi pipeline integrated mutational, transcriptomic, and HLA data to predict candidate neoantigens, which were validated using MHCepitope tetramer staining. RESULTS: In five patient samples, ImmuniT identified a broader spectrum of neoantigens and induced stronger T cell activation in vitro compared to conventional approaches. Notably, in one case, two neoantigens missed by standard methods were confirmed to elicit tumor-specific T cell responses in both the tumor-infiltrating and peripheral compartments. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight ImmuniT's potential to expand the repertoire of actionable tumor antigens and improve personalized immunotherapy strategies, particularly for patients with limited response to existing treatments.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".