The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrating MHC Class I visibility targets into the ProteinMPNN protein design process
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1093/protein/gzaf003
Abstract
ProteinMPNN is crucial in many protein design pipelines, identifying amino acid (AA) sequences that fold into given 3D protein backbone structures. We explore ProteinMPNN in the context of designing therapeutic proteins that need to avoid triggering unwanted immune reactions. More specifically, we focus on intra-cellular proteins that face the challenge of evading detection by Cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs) that detect their presence via the MHC Class I (MHC-I) pathway. To reduce visibility of the designed proteins to this immune-system component, we develop a framework that uses the large language model (LLM) tuning method, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), to guide ProteinMPNN in minimizing the number of predicted MHC-I epitopes in its designs. Our goal is to design proteins with low MHC-I immune-visibility while preserving the original structure and function. For our assessment, we first use AlphaFold to predict the 3D structures of designed protein sequences. We then use TM-score, that measures the structural alignment between the predicted design and original protein, to evaluate fidelity to the original protein structure. We find our LLM-based tuning method for constraining MHC-I visibility is able to effectively reduce visibility without compromising structural similarity to the original protein.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
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
Large language models generate functional protein sequences across diverse families
Madani, A., Krause, B., Greene, E. R., Subramanian, S., Mohr, B. P., Holton, J. M., Olmos, J. L., Xiong, C., Sun, Z. Z., Socher, R., et al. (2023) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-022-01618-2 · Cited by 1,078 · cited 1×
“The current machine learning (ML) revolution is leading to a plethora of data-driven approaches using for example LLMs [14, 15], Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) [16] and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) [17] to generate new amino-acid sequences.”
Method
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- 10.1126/science.add2187 · DOI · Paper page
- 2023, De Novo Design of Protein Structure and Function with RFdiffusion, Nature, 620, 1089, 10.1038/s41586-023-06415-8 · DOI · Paper page
- Kevin Eric Wu et al. “Protein Structure Generation via Folding Diffusion”. In: (Feb. 2023). url: https://openreview.net/forum?id=Nkd7AS2USRd (visited on 04/06/2023).
- 10.1038/mt.2014.235 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMoa1000228 · DOI · Paper page
- 2018, Cas9 Immunity Creates Challenges for CRISPR Gene Editing Therapies, Nature Communications, 9, 3497, 10.1038/s41467-018-05843-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1172/JCI36891 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.01.001 · DOI · Paper page
- Rafael Rafailov et al. Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model Is Secretly a Reward Model. May 2023. url: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18290 (visited on 10/16/2023). · arXiv
- Josh Abramson et al. “Accurate Structure Prediction of Biomolecular Interactions with AlphaFold 3”. In: Nature (May 2024), pp. 1–3. url: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07487-w (visited on 05/09/2024).
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-381270-4.00019-6 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0020161 · DOI
- 2022, ProtGPT2 Is a Deep Unsupervised Language Model for Protein Design, Nature Communications, 13, 4348, 10.1038/s41467-022-32007-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 2024, Variational Autoencoder for Design of Synthetic Viral Vector Serotypes, Nature Machine Intelligence, 6, 147, 10.1038/s42256-023-00787-2 · DOI
- 2021, Expanding Functional Protein Sequence Spaces Using Generative Adversarial Networks, Nature Machine Intelligence, 3, 324, 10.1038/s42256-021-00310-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nbt.3988 · DOI · Paper page
- Daniel M. Ziegler et al. Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences. Jan. 2020. url: http://arxiv.org/abs/1909.08593 (visited on 04/09/2023). · arXiv
- John Schulman et al. Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms. Aug. 2017. url: http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.06347 (visited on 04/12/2023). · arXiv
- 10.1093/nar/gkaa379 · DOI · Paper page
- 2024, Guiding a Language-Model Based Protein Design Method towards MHC Class-I Immune-Visibility Targets in Vaccines and Therapeutics, ImmunoInformatics, 14, 100035, 10.1016/j.immuno.2024.100035 · DOI
- Richard Evans et al. Protein Complex Prediction with AlphaFold-Multimer. Oct. 2021. url: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.04.463034v1 (visited on 04/23/2024). · DOI
- 2022, ColabFold: Making Protein Folding Accessible to All, Nature Methods, 19, 679, 10.1038/s41592-022-01488-1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/nar/gki524 · DOI · Paper page
Metadata
- Authors
- Gasser, H.-C., Oyarzún, D. A., Alfaro, J., & Rajan, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- University of Victoria (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Gasser, Hans-Christof
- Alfaro, Javier
- Rajan, Ajitha
- Venue
- Protein Engineering Design and Selection
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2024-06-05
- Volume
- 38
- ISSN
- 0269-2139 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11970896
- OpenAlex
- W4408586797
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 4.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Protein Engineering Design and Selection (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Israel Cancer Research Fund
- UK Research and Innovation (EP/S02431X/1)
- Royal Academy of Engineering (ICRF2122-5-133)
- European Commission (H2020)
- Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej
- Infrastruktura PL-Grid
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
- Intelligence Community Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program
- European Regional Development Fund (H2020)
- 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
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Chemical Synthesis and Analysis
- Keywords
- ProteinMPNN, protein design, MHC class I, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, direct preference optimization
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acid Sequence, Humans, Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Protein Engineering, Histocompatibility Antigens Class I
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