T cell recognition of a cognate peptide-major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) presented on the surface of infected or malignant cells is of the utmost importance for mediating robust and long-term immune responses. Accurate predictions of cognate pMHC targets for T cell receptors would greatly facilitate identification of vaccine targets for both pathogenic diseases and personalized cancer immunotherapies. Predicting immunogenic peptides therefore has been at the center of intensive research for the past decades but has proven challenging. Although numerous models have been proposed, performance of these models has not been systematically evaluated and their success rate in predicting epitopes in the context of human pathology has not been measured and compared. In this study, we evaluated the performance of several publicly available models, in identifying immunogenic CD8+ T cell targets in the context of pathogens and cancers. We found that for predicting immunogenic peptides from an emerging virus such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, none of the models perform substantially better than random or offer considerable improvement beyond HLA ligand prediction. We also observed suboptimal performance for predicting cancer neoantigens. Through investigation of potential factors associated with ill performance of models, we highlight several data- and model-associated issues. In particular, we observed that cross-HLA variation in the distribution of immunogenic and non-immunogenic peptides in the training data of the models seems to substantially confound the predictions. We additionally compared key parameters associated with immunogenicity between pathogenic peptides and cancer neoantigens and observed evidence for differences in the thresholds of binding affinity and stability, which suggested the need to modulate different features in identifying immunogenic pathogen versus cancer peptides. Overall, we demonstrate that accurate and reliable predictions of immunogenic CD8+ T cell targets remain unsolved; thus, we hope our work will guide users and model developers regarding potential pitfalls and unsettled questions in existing immunogenicity predictors.

BACKGROUND: In high-throughput experimental biology, it is widely acknowledged that while expression levels measured at the levels of transcriptome and the corresponding proteome do not, in general, correlate well, messenger RNA levels are used as convenient proxies for protein levels. Our interest is in developing data-driven computational models that can bridge the gap between these two levels of measurement at which different mechanisms of regulation may act on different molecular species causing any observed lack of correlations. To this end, we build data-driven predictors of protein levels using mRNA levels and known proxies of translation efficiencies as covariates. Previous work showed that in such a setting, outliers with respect to the model are reliable candidates for post-translational regulation. RESULTS: Here, we present and compare two novel formulations of deriving a protein concentration predictor from which outliers may be extracted in a systematic manner. The first approach, outlier rejecting regression, allows explicit specification of a certain fraction of the data as outliers. In a regression setting, this is a non-convex optimization problem which we solve by deriving a difference of convex functions algorithm (DCA). With post-translationally regulated proteins, one expects their concentrations to be affected primarily by disruption of protein stability. Our second algorithm exploits this observation by minimizing an asymmetric loss using quantile regression and extracts outlier proteins whose measured concentrations are lower than what a genome-wide regression would predict. We validate the two approaches on a dataset of yeast transcriptome and proteome. Functional annotation check on detected outliers demonstrate that the methods are able to identify post-translationally regulated genes with high statistical confidence.