↓ Skip to main content

Beyond Hot Spots: Biases in Antibody Somatic Hypermutation and Implications for Vaccine Design

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Beyond Hot Spots: Biases in Antibody Somatic Hypermutation and Implications for Vaccine Design
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01876
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chaim A. Schramm, Daniel C. Douek

Abstract

The evolution of antibodies in an individual during an immune response by somatic hypermutation (SHM) is essential for the ability of the immune system to recognize and remove the diverse spectrum of antigens that may be encountered. These mutations are not produced at random; nucleotide motifs that result in increased or decreased rates of mutation were first reported in 1992. Newer models that estimate the propensity for mutation for every possible 5- or 7-nucleotide motif have emphasized the complexity of SHM targeting and suggested possible new hot spot motifs. Even with these fine-grained approaches, however, non-local context matters, and the mutations observed at a specific nucleotide motif varies between species and even by locus, gene segment, and position along the gene segment within a single species. An alternative method has been provided to further abstract away the molecular mechanisms underpinning SHM, prompted by evidence that certain stereotypical amino acid substitutions are favored at each position of a particular V gene. These "substitution profiles," whether obtained from a single B cell lineage or an entire repertoire, offer a simplified approach to predict which substitutions will be well-tolerated and which will be disfavored, without the need to consider path-dependent effects from neighboring positions. However, this comes at the cost of merging the effects of two distinct biological processes, the generation of mutations, and the selection acting on those mutations. Since selection is contingent on the particular antigens an individual has been exposed to, this suggests that SHM may have evolved to prefer mutations that are most likely to be useful against pathogens that have co-evolved with us. Alternatively, the ability to select favorable mutations may be strongly limited by the biases of SHM targeting. In either scenario, the sequence space explored by SHM is significantly limited and this consequently has profound implications for the rational design of vaccine strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Master 8 10%
Professor 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 16 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 15%
Engineering 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 24 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2018.
All research outputs
#16,219,090
of 26,375,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#15,891
of 33,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,542
of 345,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#373
of 619 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,375,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,013 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 619 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.