Cargando…

An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes

BACKGROUND: Epitope prediction using computational methods represents one of the most promising approaches to vaccine development. Reduction of time, cost, and the availability of completely sequenced genomes are key points and highly motivating regarding the use of reverse vaccinology. Parasites of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Resende, Daniela M, Rezende, Antônio M, Oliveira, Nesley JD, Batista, Izabella CA, Corrêa-Oliveira, Rodrigo, Reis, Alexandre B, Ruiz, Jeronimo C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3543197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23170965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-13-309
_version_ 1782255612353052672
author Resende, Daniela M
Rezende, Antônio M
Oliveira, Nesley JD
Batista, Izabella CA
Corrêa-Oliveira, Rodrigo
Reis, Alexandre B
Ruiz, Jeronimo C
author_facet Resende, Daniela M
Rezende, Antônio M
Oliveira, Nesley JD
Batista, Izabella CA
Corrêa-Oliveira, Rodrigo
Reis, Alexandre B
Ruiz, Jeronimo C
author_sort Resende, Daniela M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Epitope prediction using computational methods represents one of the most promising approaches to vaccine development. Reduction of time, cost, and the availability of completely sequenced genomes are key points and highly motivating regarding the use of reverse vaccinology. Parasites of genus Leishmania are widely spread and they are the etiologic agents of leishmaniasis. Currently, there is no efficient vaccine against this pathogen and the drug treatment is highly toxic. The lack of sufficiently large datasets of experimentally validated parasites epitopes represents a serious limitation, especially for trypanomatids genomes. In this work we highlight the predictive performances of several algorithms that were evaluated through the development of a MySQL database built with the purpose of: a) evaluating individual algorithms prediction performances and their combination for CD8+ T cell epitopes, B-cell epitopes and subcellular localization by means of AUC (Area Under Curve) performance and a threshold dependent method that employs a confusion matrix; b) integrating data from experimentally validated and in silico predicted epitopes; and c) integrating the subcellular localization predictions and experimental data. NetCTL, NetMHC, BepiPred, BCPred12, and AAP12 algorithms were used for in silico epitope prediction and WoLF PSORT, Sigcleave and TargetP for in silico subcellular localization prediction against trypanosomatid genomes. RESULTS: A database-driven epitope prediction method was developed with built-in functions that were capable of: a) removing experimental data redundancy; b) parsing algorithms predictions and storage experimental validated and predict data; and c) evaluating algorithm performances. Results show that a better performance is achieved when the combined prediction is considered. This is particularly true for B cell epitope predictors, where the combined prediction of AAP12 and BCPred12 reached an AUC value of 0.77. For T CD8+ epitope predictors, the combined prediction of NetCTL and NetMHC reached an AUC value of 0.64. Finally, regarding the subcellular localization prediction, the best performance is achieved when the combined prediction of Sigcleave, TargetP and WoLF PSORT is used. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that the combination of B cells epitope predictors is the best tool for predicting epitopes on protozoan parasites proteins. Regarding subcellular localization, the best result was obtained when the three algorithms predictions were combined. The developed pipeline is available upon request to authors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3543197
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35431972013-01-14 An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes Resende, Daniela M Rezende, Antônio M Oliveira, Nesley JD Batista, Izabella CA Corrêa-Oliveira, Rodrigo Reis, Alexandre B Ruiz, Jeronimo C BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Epitope prediction using computational methods represents one of the most promising approaches to vaccine development. Reduction of time, cost, and the availability of completely sequenced genomes are key points and highly motivating regarding the use of reverse vaccinology. Parasites of genus Leishmania are widely spread and they are the etiologic agents of leishmaniasis. Currently, there is no efficient vaccine against this pathogen and the drug treatment is highly toxic. The lack of sufficiently large datasets of experimentally validated parasites epitopes represents a serious limitation, especially for trypanomatids genomes. In this work we highlight the predictive performances of several algorithms that were evaluated through the development of a MySQL database built with the purpose of: a) evaluating individual algorithms prediction performances and their combination for CD8+ T cell epitopes, B-cell epitopes and subcellular localization by means of AUC (Area Under Curve) performance and a threshold dependent method that employs a confusion matrix; b) integrating data from experimentally validated and in silico predicted epitopes; and c) integrating the subcellular localization predictions and experimental data. NetCTL, NetMHC, BepiPred, BCPred12, and AAP12 algorithms were used for in silico epitope prediction and WoLF PSORT, Sigcleave and TargetP for in silico subcellular localization prediction against trypanosomatid genomes. RESULTS: A database-driven epitope prediction method was developed with built-in functions that were capable of: a) removing experimental data redundancy; b) parsing algorithms predictions and storage experimental validated and predict data; and c) evaluating algorithm performances. Results show that a better performance is achieved when the combined prediction is considered. This is particularly true for B cell epitope predictors, where the combined prediction of AAP12 and BCPred12 reached an AUC value of 0.77. For T CD8+ epitope predictors, the combined prediction of NetCTL and NetMHC reached an AUC value of 0.64. Finally, regarding the subcellular localization prediction, the best performance is achieved when the combined prediction of Sigcleave, TargetP and WoLF PSORT is used. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that the combination of B cells epitope predictors is the best tool for predicting epitopes on protozoan parasites proteins. Regarding subcellular localization, the best result was obtained when the three algorithms predictions were combined. The developed pipeline is available upon request to authors. BioMed Central 2012-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3543197/ /pubmed/23170965 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-13-309 Text en Copyright ©2012 Resende et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Resende, Daniela M
Rezende, Antônio M
Oliveira, Nesley JD
Batista, Izabella CA
Corrêa-Oliveira, Rodrigo
Reis, Alexandre B
Ruiz, Jeronimo C
An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title_full An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title_fullStr An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title_full_unstemmed An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title_short An assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
title_sort assessment on epitope prediction methods for protozoa genomes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3543197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23170965
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-13-309
work_keys_str_mv AT resendedanielam anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT rezendeantoniom anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT oliveiranesleyjd anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT batistaizabellaca anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT correaoliveirarodrigo anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT reisalexandreb anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT ruizjeronimoc anassessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT resendedanielam assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT rezendeantoniom assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT oliveiranesleyjd assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT batistaizabellaca assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT correaoliveirarodrigo assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT reisalexandreb assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes
AT ruizjeronimoc assessmentonepitopepredictionmethodsforprotozoagenomes