Division of Vaccine Discovery, La Jolla Institute for Immunology, La Jolla, California 92037, USA.
Fiocruz Ceará, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rua São José s/n, Precabura, Eusébio/CE, Brazil.
Brief Bioinform. 2022 Jul 18;23(4). doi: 10.1093/bib/bbac259.
In 2014, the Immune Epitope Database automated benchmark was created to compare the performance of the MHC class I binding predictors. However, this is not a straightforward process due to the different and non-standardized outputs of the methods. Additionally, some methods are more restrictive regarding the HLA alleles and epitope sizes for which they predict binding affinities, while others are more comprehensive. To address how these problems impacted the ranking of the predictors, we developed an approach to assess the reliability of different metrics. We found that using percentile-ranked results improved the stability of the ranks and allowed the predictors to be reliably ranked despite not being evaluated on the same data. We also found that given the rate new data are incorporated into the benchmark, a new method must wait for at least 4 years to be ranked against the pre-existing methods. The best-performing tools with statistically indistinguishable scores in this benchmark were NetMHCcons, NetMHCpan4.0, ANN3.4, NetMHCpan3.0 and NetMHCpan2.8. The results of this study will be used to improve the evaluation and display of benchmark performance. We highly encourage anyone working on MHC binding predictions to participate in this benchmark to get an unbiased evaluation of their predictors.
2014 年,创建了免疫表位数据库自动化基准测试,以比较 MHC Ⅰ类结合预测器的性能。然而,由于方法的不同和非标准化输出,这并非易事。此外,一些方法对其预测结合亲和力的 HLA 等位基因和表位大小的限制较多,而另一些方法则更为全面。为了解决这些问题如何影响预测器的排名,我们开发了一种评估不同指标可靠性的方法。我们发现,使用百分位排名结果可以提高排名的稳定性,并允许即使不在相同数据上进行评估,也能可靠地对预测器进行排名。我们还发现,鉴于新数据纳入基准的速度,新方法必须等待至少 4 年才能与现有的方法进行排名。在该基准中表现最佳且得分统计学上无法区分的工具是 NetMHCcons、NetMHCpan4.0、ANN3.4、NetMHCpan3.0 和 NetMHCpan2.8。本研究的结果将用于改进基准性能的评估和展示。我们强烈鼓励从事 MHC 结合预测的任何人参与该基准测试,以对其预测器进行公正的评估。