Cited by 131Protein Structure and DynamicsEnzyme Structure and FunctionMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research

Antibody modeling assessment

Almagro, Juan C., Beavers, Mary Pat, Hernandez‐Guzman, Francisco, Maier, Johannes, Shaulsky, Jodi, Butenhof, Kenneth, Labute, Paul, Thorsteinson, Nels +5 more·2011·Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics

Abstract

A blinded study to assess the state of the art in three‐dimensional structure modeling of the variable region (Fv) of antibodies was conducted. Nine unpublished high‐resolution x‐ray Fab crystal structures covering a wide range of antigen‐binding site conformations were used as benchmark to compare Fv models generated by four structure prediction methodologies. The methodologies included two homology modeling strategies independently developed by CCG (Chemical Computer Group) and Accerlys Inc, and two fully automated antibody modeling servers: PIGS (Prediction of ImmunoGlobulin Structure), based on the canonical structure model, and Rosetta Antibody Modeling, based on homology modeling and Rosetta structure prediction methodology. The benchmark structure sequences were submitted to Accelrys and CCG and a set of models for each of the nine antibody structures were generated. PIGS and Rosetta models were obtained using the default parameters of the servers. In most cases, we found good agreement between the models and x‐ray structures. The average rmsd (root mean square deviation) values calculated over the backbone atoms between the models and structures were fairly consistent, around 1.2 Å. Average rmsd values of the framework and hypervariable loops with canonical structures (L1, L2, L3, H1, and H2) were close to 1.0 Å. H3 prediction yielded rmsd values around 3.0 Å for most of the models. Quality assessment of the models and the relative strengths and weaknesses of the methods are discussed. We hope this initiative will serve as a model of scientific partnership and look forward to future antibody modeling assessments. Proteins 2011; © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/prot.23130

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • MSAs of homologous proteins are not always available, such as with orphan proteins or fast-evolving proteins like antibodies.

    “However, MSAs of homologous proteins are not always available, such as with orphan proteins or fast-evolving proteins like antibodies, and a protein typically folds in a natural setting from its primary amino acid sequence into its three-dimensional structure, suggesting that evolutionary information and MSAs should not be necessary to predict a protein's folded form.”
  • Antibody complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) are the most diverse and variable parts of the molecules.

    “Antibody complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) are the most diverse and variable parts of the molecules (38,39).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Almagro, J. C., Beavers, M. P., Hernandez‐Guzman, F., Maier, J., Shaulsky, J., Butenhof, K., Labute, P., Thorsteinson, N., Kelly, K., Teplyakov, A., Luo, J., Sweet, R., & Gilliland, G. L.
Affiliations
BIOVIA (US)
Corresponding author
Almagro, Juan C.
Venue
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09-21
Volume
79
Issue
11
Pages
3050-3066
ISSN
  • 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0134
OpenAlex
W2025965594
Cited by
131
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Keywords
antibody structure prediction, immunoglobulin variable region, Fab crystal structure, homology modeling, hypervariable loops, framework regions, model accuracy assessment, benchmarking, X-ray structure comparison
MeSH terms
Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Antibodies, Binding Sites, Antibody, Humans, Immunoglobulin Variable Region, Models, Biological, Models, Molecular, Molecular Sequence Data, Protein Conformation, Software, Sequence Alignment, Protein Structure, Secondary, Mice, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review