It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV) virus has highlighted the need for fast and efficacious vaccine development. Stimulation of a proper immune response that leads to protection is highly dependent on presentation of epitopes to circulating T-cells via the HLA complex. SARS-CoV-2 is a large RNA virus and testing of all of its overlapping peptides in vitro to deconvolute an immune response is not feasible. Therefore HLA-binding prediction tools are often used to narrow down the number of peptides to test. We tested NetMHC suite tools' predictions by using an in vitro peptide-MHC stability assay. We assessed 777 peptides that were predicted to be good binders across 11 MHC alleles in a complex-stability assay and tested a selection of 19 epitope-HLA-binding prediction tools against the assay. In this investigation of potential SARS-CoV-2 epitopes we found that current prediction tools vary in performance when assessing binding stability, and they are highly dependent on the MHC allele in question. Designing a COVID-19 vaccine where only a few epitope targets are included is therefore a very challenging task. Here, we present 174 SARS-CoV-2 epitopes with high prediction binding scores, validated to bind stably to 11 HLA alleles. Our findings may contribute to the design of an efficacious vaccine against COVID-19.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Copenhagen University Hospital, Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.4973.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0646 7373); University of Copenhagen, Bioinformatics Centre, Department of Biology, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.5254.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 0674 042X); Immunitrack ApS, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.5254.6)
2 Immunitrack ApS, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.5254.6)
3 INTAVIS Peptide Services GmbH & Co.KG, Tübingen, Germany (GRID:grid.5254.6)
4 Copenhagen University Hospital, Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.4973.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0646 7373); University of Copenhagen, Bioinformatics Centre, Department of Biology, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.5254.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 0674 042X); Technical University of Denmark, Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark (GRID:grid.5170.3) (ISNI:0000 0001 2181 8870)
5 Copenhagen University Hospital, Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark (GRID:grid.4973.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0646 7373); UKBB Universitats-Kinderspital, Basel, Department of Biomedicine, Basel, Switzerland (GRID:grid.412347.7) (ISNI:0000 0004 0509 0981); Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Basel, Basel, Switzerland (GRID:grid.419765.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2223 3006)