Schumacher Lab
schumacher-lab.bsky.social
Schumacher Lab
@schumacher-lab.bsky.social
We use a technology-based approach to understand how our T cells recognize cancer. @nkinl.bsky.social | Tweets from lab members
13/ In contrast, TCRbridge could not reliably distinguish whether non-validating (mislabeled) TCRs were reactive to YLQ or GLC.
This demonstrates how TCRvdb helps reveal that models like AlphaFold3 may perform better than previously assumed—if tested on validated data.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
12/ We also show that TCRbridge can distinguish whether validating TCRs are reactive to YLQ or GLC.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
11/ We introduce TCRbridge, a model that combines AlphaFold3’s per-residue confidence metrics at TCR–peptide interfaces.
TCRbridge revealed strong ability to distinguish validating from non-validating GLC-annotated TCRs, despite AlphaFold3 not being trained for this task.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
10/ Can more complex models like AlphaFold3 distinguish validating from non-validating GLC-annotated TCRs? Interestingly, AlphaFold3 assigned lower confidence to non-validating TCR structures.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
9/ tcrdist3 groups TCRs by sequence similarity. tcrdist3 distinguishes truly YLQ-reactive TCRs from non-validating ones, but its performance for GLC-reactive TCRs is modest, likely due to validating and non-validating GLC- annotated TCRs being similar in sequence space.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
8/ We introduce TCRvdb, a functionally validated TCR-pMHC database to support TCR specificity model development, along with a standardized platform for rapid expansion. Using TCRvdb, we evaluated the performance of tcrdist3 and AlphaFold-based models.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
7/ Why do some TCRs validate and others don’t? One key predictor: studies with more donors who had recent or ongoing COVID-19 showed a higher fraction of truly YLQ-reactive TCRs.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
6/ Strikingly, this functional analysis demonstrates that claimed TCR reactivity is only confirmed for 50% of evaluated entries.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
5/ To generate a high-confidence dataset for TCR specificity modeling, we validated TCRs annotated as reactive to YLQ (SARS-CoV-2) and GLC (EBV) epitopes using pooled functional genetic screening.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
4/ Nanopore QC analysis of 5 TCR libraries showed 96.9% successful assembly, with an average of 74.2% sequence-perfect unique TCRs. Libraries were highly uniform—only 5.6-fold difference between the 5th and 95th percentiles.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
3/ To create a Nanopore TCR QC pipeline with single base error detection capacity, we designed a UMI-based sequence error correction method to create highly accurate TCR UMI consensus sequences.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
2/ Comprehensive QC of TCR libraries requires full-length TCR sequencing to resolve correct Vα–CDR3α–Jα and Vβ–CDR3–Jβ pairings. While Nanopore can sequence full-length TCRs, its raw base-call accuracy isn’t sufficient to detect mispairings, mutations, or indels.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM
1/ To evaluate a large fraction of TCR-pMHC entries in the database without bias from T cell phenotype or TCR abundance, we developed and utilized a high-throughput synthetic platform for TCR assembly.
May 2, 2025 at 3:57 PM