Evaluation of the Ability of AlphaFold to Predict the Three-Dimensional Structures of Antibodies and Epitopes
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Being able to accurately predict the three-dimensional structure of an Ab can facilitate Ab characterization and epitope prediction, with important diagnostic and clinical implications. In this study, we evaluated the ability of AlphaFold to predict the structures of 222 recently published, high-resolution Fab H and L chain structures of Abs from different species directed against different Ags. We show that although the overall Ab prediction quality is in line with the results of CASP14, regions such as the complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) of the H chain, which are prone to higher variation, are predicted less accurately. Moreover, we discovered that AlphaFold mispredicts the bending angles between the variable and constant domains. To evaluate the ability of AlphaFold to model Ab–Ag interactions based only on sequence, we used AlphaFold-Multimer in combination with ZDOCK to predict the structures of 26 known Ab–Ag complexes. ZDOCK, which was applied on bound components of both the Ab and the Ag, succeeded in assembling 11 complexes, whereas AlphaFold succeeded in predicting only 2 of 26 models, with significant deviations in the docking contacts predicted in the rest of the molecules. Within the 11 complexes that were successfully predicted by ZDOCK, 9 involved short-peptide Ags (18-mer or less), whereas only 2 were complexes of Ab with a full-length protein. Docking of modeled unbound Ab and Ag was unsuccessful. In summary, our study provides important information about the abilities and limitations of using AlphaFold to predict Ab–Ag interactions and suggests areas for possible improvement.
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 83 · Cited by 41
- Authors
- Polonsky, K., Pupko, T., & Freund, N. T.
- Affiliations
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Pupko, Tal
- Freund, Natalia T
- Venue
- The Journal of Immunology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2023-10-02
- Volume
- 211
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1578-1588
- ISSN
- 0022-1767 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-6606
- OpenAlex
- W4387241968
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 83
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15
- FWCI
- 3.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Journal of Immunology (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Israel Science Foundation (2818/21, 3136/22)
- United States - Israel Binational Science Foundation (01031771)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
- Keywords
- AlphaFold, antibody structure prediction, epitope prediction, Fab fragment, hypervariable region, antigen-antibody reaction, protein-protein docking, ZDOCK, AlphaFold-Multimer, antibody characterization
- MeSH terms
- Antibodies, Epitopes, Peptides, Complementarity Determining Regions
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