An open-source computational and data resource to analyze digital maps of immunopeptidomes

  1. Etienne Caron  Is a corresponding author
  2. Lucia Espona
  3. Daniel J Kowalewski
  4. Heiko Schuster
  5. Nicola Ternette
  6. Adán Alpízar
  7. Ralf B Schittenhelm
  8. Sri H Ramarathinam
  9. Cecilia S Lindestam Arlehamn
  10. Ching Chiek Koh
  11. Ludovic C Gillet
  12. Armin Rabsteyn
  13. Pedro Navarro
  14. Sangtae Kim
  15. Henry Lam
  16. Theo Sturm
  17. Miguel Marcilla
  18. Alessandro Sette
  19. David S Campbell
  20. Eric W Deutsch
  21. Robert L Moritz
  22. Anthony W Purcell
  23. Hans-Georg Rammensee
  24. Stefan Stevanovic
  25. Ruedi Aebersold
  1. ETH Zürich, Switzerland
  2. University of Tübingen, Germany
  3. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  4. Spanish National Biotechnology Centre, Spain
  5. Monash University, Australia
  6. Monash University, United States
  7. La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, United States
  8. University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany
  9. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, United States
  10. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, China
  11. Institute for Systems Biology, United States

Abstract

We present a novel mass spectrometry-based high-throughput workflow and an open-source computational and data resource to reproducibly identify and quantify HLA-associated peptides. Collectively, the resources support the generation of HLA allele-specific peptide assay libraries consisting of consensus fragment ion spectra, and the analysis of quantitative digital maps of HLA peptidomes generated from a range of biological sources by SWATH mass spectrometry (MS). This study represents the first community-based effort to develop a robust platform for the reproducible and quantitative measurement of the entire repertoire of peptides presented by HLA molecules, an essential step towards the design of efficient immunotherapies.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Etienne Caron

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    For correspondence
    caron@imsb.biol.ethz.ch
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lucia Espona

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Daniel J Kowalewski

    Department of Immunology, Interfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Heiko Schuster

    Department of Immunology, Interfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Nicola Ternette

    Target Discovery Institute Mass Spectrometry Laboratory, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Adán Alpízar

    Proteomics Unit, Spanish National Biotechnology Centre, Madrid, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ralf B Schittenhelm

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sri H Ramarathinam

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Clayton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Cecilia S Lindestam Arlehamn

    La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Ching Chiek Koh

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Ludovic C Gillet

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Armin Rabsteyn

    Department of Immunology, Interfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Pedro Navarro

    Institute for Immunology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Sangtae Kim

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Henry Lam

    Division of Biomedical Engineering and Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Theo Sturm

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Miguel Marcilla

    Proteomics Unit, Spanish National Biotechnology Centre, Madrid, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Alessandro Sette

    La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. David S Campbell

    Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Eric W Deutsch

    Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Robert L Moritz

    Institute for Systems Biology, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Anthony W Purcell

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  23. Hans-Georg Rammensee

    Department of Immunology, Interfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  24. Stefan Stevanovic

    Department of Immunology, Interfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  25. Ruedi Aebersold

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Human subjects: Informed consent was obtained in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki protocol. The study was performed according to the guidelines of the local ethics committee (University of Tubingen, Germany).

Copyright

© 2015, Caron et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,845
    views
  • 1,240
    downloads
  • 90
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Etienne Caron
  2. Lucia Espona
  3. Daniel J Kowalewski
  4. Heiko Schuster
  5. Nicola Ternette
  6. Adán Alpízar
  7. Ralf B Schittenhelm
  8. Sri H Ramarathinam
  9. Cecilia S Lindestam Arlehamn
  10. Ching Chiek Koh
  11. Ludovic C Gillet
  12. Armin Rabsteyn
  13. Pedro Navarro
  14. Sangtae Kim
  15. Henry Lam
  16. Theo Sturm
  17. Miguel Marcilla
  18. Alessandro Sette
  19. David S Campbell
  20. Eric W Deutsch
  21. Robert L Moritz
  22. Anthony W Purcell
  23. Hans-Georg Rammensee
  24. Stefan Stevanovic
  25. Ruedi Aebersold
(2015)
An open-source computational and data resource to analyze digital maps of immunopeptidomes
eLife 4:e07661.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07661

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07661

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Eric V Strobl, Eric Gamazon
    Research Article

    Root causal gene expression levels – or root causal genes for short – correspond to the initial changes to gene expression that generate patient symptoms as a downstream effect. Identifying root causal genes is critical towards developing treatments that modify disease near its onset, but no existing algorithms attempt to identify root causal genes from data. RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) data introduces challenges such as measurement error, high dimensionality and non-linearity that compromise accurate estimation of root causal effects even with state-of-the-art approaches. We therefore instead leverage Perturb-seq, or high-throughput perturbations with single-cell RNA-seq readout, to learn the causal order between the genes. We then transfer the causal order to bulk RNA-seq and identify root causal genes specific to a given patient for the first time using a novel statistic. Experiments demonstrate large improvements in performance. Applications to macular degeneration and multiple sclerosis also reveal root causal genes that lie on known pathogenic pathways, delineate patient subgroups and implicate a newly defined omnigenic root causal model.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Liqi Kang, Banghao Wu ... Liang Hong
    Research Article

    Artificial intelligence (AI) models have been used to study the compositional regularities of proteins in nature, enabling it to assist in protein design to improve the efficiency of protein engineering and reduce manufacturing cost. However, in industrial settings, proteins are often required to work in extreme environments where they are relatively scarce or even non-existent in nature. Since such proteins are almost absent in the training datasets, it is uncertain whether AI model possesses the capability of evolving the protein to adapt extreme conditions. Antibodies are crucial components of affinity chromatography, and they are hoped to remain active at the extreme environments where most proteins cannot tolerate. In this study, we applied an advanced large language model (LLM), the Pro-PRIME model, to improve the alkali resistance of a representative antibody, a VHH antibody capable of binding to growth hormone. Through two rounds of design, we ensured that the selected mutant has enhanced functionality, including higher thermal stability, extreme pH resistance, and stronger affinity, thereby validating the generalized capability of the LLM in meeting specific demands. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first LLM-designed protein product, which is successfully applied in mass production.