MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract PR-09: Meta-Analysis of Neoantigens: Insights from the Cancer Epitope Database and Analysis Resource (CEDAR)

2025· article· en· W4414466025 on OpenAlex
Zeynep Koşaloğlu, Ibel Carri, Bjoern Peters, Alessandro Sette

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Immunology Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpitopeHuman leukocyte antigenCancerGeneColorectal cancerMutationMHC class IMajor histocompatibility complex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cancer cells accumulate somatic mutations that can give rise to novel amino acid sequences absent from the normal human proteome. These mutation-derived, cancer-specific peptides are referred to as “neo-peptides.” A subset of neo-peptides capable of eliciting an immune response are termed “neo-epitopes.” Neo-epitopes hold significant promise for precision cancer immunotherapy, both as therapeutic targets and as biomarkers for prognosis and treatment response. Given their central role in immuno-oncology, we performed a meta-analysis to systematically assess how experimental evidence shapes current understanding of neo-epitope biology. Our study is the largest reported to date. Using the Cancer Epitope Database and Analysis Resource (CEDAR), we analyzed over 16,000 neo-peptides tested in more than 20,000 T cell assays across 180 studies. We analyzed frequently utilized assay types, the genes neo- epitopes are derived from, and their driver gene status, variations across cancer types, mutation patterns and their physicochemical properties, HLA restrictions, and predicted MHC binding. We found that validated neo-epitope frequencies varied across cancer types, with the highest rates in skin and lung and the lowest in colorectal cancer. Neo-epitopes were enriched in driver genes such as TP53 and KRAS. However, testing frequency correlated with mutation prevalence, revealing a bias toward recurrent mutations. Despite the high sequence similarity among RAS family members, validated neo-epitope overlap was minimal, challenging pan-RAS strategies. Shared neo-epitopes across cancer types are rare, with only 16 validated in more than one cancer type. While most assays involved HLA class I, class II alleles presented a higher proportion of validated neo-epitopes. Specific alleles, including HLA-B*40:01 and HLA- DRB1*11:01, were enriched for presenting neo-epitopes, whereas others, like HLA-A*02:01, were enriched for presenting neo-peptides that are not recognized by T cells. Finally, amino acid substitutions that altered hydrophobicity or charge were more common in neo-epitopes. Citation Format: Zeynep Kosaloglu-Yalcin, Ibel Carri, Bjoern Peters, Alessandro Sette. Meta-Analysis of Neoantigens: Insights from the Cancer Epitope Database and Analysis Resource (CEDAR) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Mechanisms of Cancer Immunity and Cancer-related Autoimmunity; 2025 Sep 24-27; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2025;13(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PR-09.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.276 · 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