Motivation: Computational methods for the prediction of peptide-MHC binding have become an integral and essential component for candidate selection in experimental T cell epitope discovery studies. The sheer amount of published prediction methods-and often discordant reports on their performance-poses a considerable quandary to the experimentalist who needs to choose the best tool for their research. Results: With the goal to provide an unbiased, transparent evaluation of the state-of-the-art in the field, we created an automated platform to benchmark peptide-MHC class II binding prediction tools. The platform evaluates the absolute and relative predictive performance of all participating tools on data newly entered into the Immune Epitope Database (IEDB) before they are made public, thereby providing a frequent, unbiased assessment of available prediction tools. The benchmark runs on a weekly basis, is fully automated, and displays up-to-date results on a publicly accessible website. The initial benchmark described here included six commonly used prediction servers, but other tools are encouraged to join with a simple sign-up procedure. Performance evaluation on 59 data sets composed of over 10 000 binding affinity measurements suggested that NetMHCIIpan is currently the most accurate tool, followed by NN-align and the IEDB consensus method. Availability and implementation: Weekly reports on the participating methods can be found online at: http://tools.iedb.org/auto_bench/mhcii/weekly/. Contact: [email protected]. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

MOTIVATION: Numerous in silico methods predicting peptide binding to major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I molecules have been developed over the last decades. However, the multitude of available prediction tools makes it non-trivial for the end-user to select which tool to use for a given task. To provide a solid basis on which to compare different prediction tools, we here describe a framework for the automated benchmarking of peptide-MHC class I binding prediction tools. The framework runs weekly benchmarks on data that are newly entered into the Immune Epitope Database (IEDB), giving the public access to frequent, up-to-date performance evaluations of all participating tools. To overcome potential selection bias in the data included in the IEDB, a strategy was implemented that suggests a set of peptides for which different prediction methods give divergent predictions as to their binding capability. Upon experimental binding validation, these peptides entered the benchmark study. RESULTS: The benchmark has run for 15 weeks and includes evaluation of 44 datasets covering 17 MHC alleles and more than 4000 peptide-MHC binding measurements. Inspection of the results allows the end-user to make educated selections between participating tools. Of the four participating servers, NetMHCpan performed the best, followed by ANN, SMM and finally ARB. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Up-to-date performance evaluations of each server can be found online at http://tools.iedb.org/auto_bench/mhci/weekly. All prediction tool developers are invited to participate in the benchmark. Sign-up instructions are available at http://tools.iedb.org/auto_bench/mhci/join. CONTACT: [email protected] or [email protected] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.