Tumor-specific antigens emerging through somatic genomic rearrangements, known as neoantigens, play a critical role in current anticancer immunotherapy. They may or may not elicit an immune response when presented on the tumor cell surface bound to the MHC-I molecule, whose strength has been assumed as an indicator of immunogenicity. Several in silico peptide-MHC-I binding affinity predictors are used to prioritize putative immunogenic neoantigens to be experimentally and clinically explored either as biomarkers or targets for anticancer vaccines. This claims for a fair evaluation of such predictors, making essential the development of appropriate databases with experimentally validated, immunogenic/non-immunogenic neoantigens. Thus far, such a database is lacking. We herein present ITSNdb, a new and curated immunogenic neoantigen database and use it to benchmark current neoantigen immunogenicity predictors. Benchmark results failed to support the application of the predicted peptide- MHC-I binding affinity or its derived metrics as a tool to estimate neoantigen immunogenicity and the tumor neoantigen burden as an immunotherapy response biomarker. Moreover, binding affinity based immunogenicity definition leads to identifying wild-type peptide counterparts as predictors of immunotherapy response. We demonstrate that MHC-I binding affinity is insufficient to define neoantigen immunogenicity, despite being necessary for neoantigen tumor cell presentation suggesting that a paradigm shift for the emergence of new rules to identify immunogenic neoantigens is required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nibeyro et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: