MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414494490 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0332950

Framework for analyzing MAE-derived immunopeptidomes from cell lines with shared HLA haplotypes

2025· article· en· W4414494490 on OpenAlexaff
Queenie W. T. Chan, Teesha C. Baker, Chia-Wei Kuan, H. Yu, Leonard J. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenHaplotypeImmune systemCell cultureAntigenT cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The goal in vaccinology is to identify candidate antigens for clinical trials that will elicit an immune response for a significant portion of the target population. Unfortunately, promising data generated at the preclinical level often cannot be replicated in larger sample sizes. The goal of this project was to develop a methodology for processing MAE-generated data to identify MHC epitopes, minimize non-specific contaminants, find binding motifs, and utilize genetic connections among donors to determine which peptides were presented by specific MHC alleles. RESULTS: Our approach demonstrated that mild acid elution of peptides from seven consanguineous B-lymphocyte lines accurately reflects the HLA genotypes within family members, highlighting the specificity of MAE. Additionally, the data successfully reproduced known MHC binding motifs and partially deconvoluted the originating HLA alleles of the epitopes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that our approach could be applied to numerous cell lines globally to evaluate a wide array of HLA haplotypes. This may help to reveal candidate vaccine antigens that induce immune protection for a wider population.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesFrench-language works237,207