Cited by 34vaccines and immunoinformatics approachesProtein Structure and DynamicsMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research

Advancements in Nanobody Epitope Prediction: A Comparative Study of AlphaFold2Multimer vs AlphaFold3

Open access
Eshak, Floriane, Goupil-Lamy, Anne·2025·Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Published 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01877

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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
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
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