Advancements in Nanobody Epitope Prediction: A Comparative Study of AlphaFold2Multimer vs AlphaFold3
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Nanobodies have emerged as a versatile class of biologics with promising therapeutic applications, driving the need for robust tools to predict their epitopes, a critical step for in silico affinity maturation and epitope-targeted design. While molecular docking has long been employed for epitope identification, it requires substantial expertise. With the advent of AI driven tools, epitope identification has become more accessible to a broader community increasing the risk of models' misinterpretation. In this study, we critically evaluate the nanobody epitope prediction performance of two leading models: AlphaFold3 and AlphaFold2-Multimer (v.2.3.2), highlighting their strengths and limitations. Our analysis revealed that the overall success rate remains below 50% for both tools, with AlphaFold3 achieving a modest overall improvement. Interestingly, a significant improvement in AlphaFold3's performance was observed within a specific nanobody class. To address this discrepancy, we explored factors influencing epitope identification, demonstrating that accuracy heavily depends on CDR3 characteristics, such as its 3D spatial conformation and length, which drive binding interactions with the antigen. Additionally, we assessed the robustness of AlphaFold3's confidence metrics, highlighting their potential for broader applications. Finally, we evaluated different strategies aimed at improving the prediction success rate. This study can be extended to assess the accuracy of emerging deep learning models adopting an approach similar to that of AlphaFold3.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3
Abramson, J., Adler, J., Dunger, J., Evans, R., Green, T., Pritzel, A., Ronneberger, O., Willmore, L., Ballard, A. J., Bambrick, J., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w · Cited by 15,861 · see citing works
Protein complex prediction with AlphaFold-Multimer
Evans, R., O’Neill, M., Pritzel, A., Antropova, N., Senior, A., Green, T., Žídek, A., Bates, R., Blackwell, S., Yim, J., et al. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.10.04.463034 · Cited by 3,808 · see citing works
Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome
Tunyasuvunakool, K., Adler, J., Wu, Z., Green, T., Zielinski, M., Žídek, A., Bridgland, A., Cowie, A., Meyer, C., Laydon, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1 · Cited by 3,025 · see citing works
ZDOCK: An initial‐stage protein‐docking algorithm
Chen, R., Li, L., & Weng, Z. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10389 · Cited by 1,393 · see citing works
Structural basis of epitope recognition by heavy-chain camelid antibodies
Zavrtanik, U., Lukan, J., Loris, R., Lah, J., & Hadži, S. (2018) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2018.09.002 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
In silico discovery of nanobody binders to a G-protein coupled receptor using AlphaFold-Multimer
Harvey, E. P., Smith, J. S., Hurley, J. D., Granados, A. J., Schmid, E. W., Liang-Lin, J. G., Zhang, H., Meara, E. M., Wren, E. K., Paul, S., et al. (2026) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-026-72093-5 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“Our results areinline with other recent benchmarking studieswhichevaluate theability of AlphaFold-Multimer topredict the structures of nanobodies bound to antigens 32,33 .”
Chomicz, D., Dudzic, P., Wrobel, S., Gawłowski, T., Demharter, S., Spreafico, R., Minoux, H., Phillips, A., & Krawczyk, K. (2025) · doi:10.1101/2025.10.17.683056 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“…Nanobodies®, and their interfaces, ready for deep learning featurization on par with state of the art use-cases for structure predictions (Eshak and Goupil-Lamy 2025; Hitawala and Gray 2024), co-folding (Boitreaud et al. 2024; Wohlwend et al. 2024), diffusive design (Bennett et al.…”
- Authors
- Eshak, F., & Goupil-Lamy, A.
- Affiliations
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Biovia Science Council, Dassault Système
- Corresponding author
- Eshak, Floriane
- Goupil-Lamy, Anne
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2025-02-10
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1782-1797
- ISSN
- 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-960X
- OpenAlex
- W4407322618
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 17
- FWCI
- 10.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
- Keywords
- AlphaFold3, AlphaFold2-Multimer, epitope identification, CDR3 length, confidence measures, deep learning protein structure prediction, affinity maturation
- MeSH terms
- Epitopes, Humans, Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Single-Domain Antibodies, Molecular Docking Simulation
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