https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2516-8689
Figures
Abstract
Introduction
The parasite Cryptosporidium spp. causes cryptosporidiosis, a diarrheal disease in humans and animals. This study describes the development of mRNA vaccine targeting antigens from C. hominis and C. parvum, important gut pathogens. This vaccine was designed with reverse vaccinology and immunoinformatics as no FDA-approved vaccine exists for cryptosporidiosis.
Materials and methods
Initially, a thorough literature review was conducted to identify five pathogenic proteins (aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoproteins) associated with these two parasites. Next, a multiple sequence alignment was conducted, and the conserved sequences were used to design a novel multiepitope mRNA vaccine against these two parasites, combining the best CD8+, CD4+, and continuous B-cell epitopes. Additionally, structural prediction, docking, dynamics, and immune simulation, as well as cloning, were conducted.
Result
The vaccine demonstrated standard biophysical properties, indicating that the protein is soluble and stable. Both two-dimensional (substantial alpha helix, beta sheet, and coil structures) and three-dimensional structures (Ramachandran score of 83.1% and a Z score of −7.39) of the vaccine were standard. The docking energy for TLR-2 (−1151.9) and TLR-4 (−1028.3) exhibited significant interactions. Furthermore, MM-GBSA and dynamics simulation both verified their stability, compactness, and flexibility. Next, codon optimization for Escherichia coli expression yielded promising results, with the vaccine demonstrating substantial expression, as evidenced by a GC content of 46.97% and a CAI of 0.988. Afterwards, immune simulation demonstrated robust immune response amplification upon repeated exposures. In addition, the vaccine exhibited stability in its mRNA structures.
Conclusion
This study developed an in-silico multiepitope novel mRNA vaccine candidate for C. hominis and C. parvum with excellent structural stability, antigenicity, receptor-binding affinity, and expected immune responses. These findings offer a novel approach due to numerous species target but with significant drawbacks like no validation beyond simulation, uncertainty of long-term immunity, protein quality, stability and safety, requiring experimental validation.
Citation: Mahdeen AA, Hossain I, Masum MHU, Rabbi TMF, Islam S (2026) A novel mRNA-based multiepitope vaccine candidate against Cryptosporidium hominis and Cryptosporidium parvum employing reverse-vaccinology and immunoinformatics approaches. PLoS One 21(2): e0343643. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643
Editor: Shahina Akter, Bangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, BANGLADESH
Received: April 21, 2025; Accepted: February 9, 2026; Published: February 25, 2026
Copyright: © 2026 Mahdeen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information file.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
1. Introduction
Cryptosporidiosis is an ubiquitous, parasitic, zoonotic and opportunistic infection caused by Cryptosporidium spp that can be transmitted between animals and humans [1]. There are a lot of species of Cryptosporidium but Cryptosporidium hominis and Cryptosporidium parvum cause infection in humans frequently [2]. Humans are the main natural host of C. hominis while C. parvum infects both bovines and humans [3]. This parasite causes the infection by infecting the microvillous region of epithelial cells lining the digestive and respiratory organs of vertebrates significantly contributing to 20% cause of diarrhea in humans and animals and also poses a significant risk to individuals with weakened immune systems, particularly those with AIDS [4,5]. Moreover, up to 24% of individuals globally with both AIDS and diarrhea are affected by this parasite [6]. The common symptoms are diarrhea, stomach cramps, nausea, vomiting, fever, weight loss, dehydration etc and the severe symptoms are chronic cryptosporidiosis, life-threatening problems with digesting foods and absorbing nutrients [7].
Cryptosporidiosis was initially identified in humans during the late 1970s, predominantly impacting immunocompromised individuals, with a significant rise in cases noted at the onset of the AIDS epidemic in the early 1980s [8]. Since 2005, reported cases in the United States have increased significantly, partly attributable to the emergence of the C. hominis subtype IaA28R4 [8]. Surveillance data reveal significant fluctuations in incidence, with marked rises in outbreaks and related hospitalizations across several states, especially in the Great Lakes region. Beyond human health, cryptosporidiosis continues to be a significant issue in veterinary medicine, with bovine infections representing a primary source of calf enteritis globally, thereby exerting substantial economic pressures on livestock production systems [9,10]. Given the need, this study focuses on designing a potential vaccine candidate to overcome the effects of cryptosporidiosis.
The comparison of the genomes of C. hominis and C. parvum revealed a high degree of similarity, with just a 3–5% difference in their genetic sequences in terms of major insertions, deletions, or rearrangements. Indeed, the gene complements of the two species are virtually indistinguishable, as the small number of C. parvum genes that are absent in C. hominis are located around known gaps in the sequence [11].
Cryptosporidium has a straightforward life cycle since it only needs one host to complete its asexual and sexual stages, and it infects cells lining the intestines [12]. It progresses through six distinct stages of development [13]. The life cycle of the parasite progresses through several distinct stages. First, excystation occurs as stomach acids or intestinal enzymes break the oocyst’s tough outer shell, releasing infective sporozoites. These sporozoites then enter intestinal epithelial cells, initiating merogony, a process of asexual reproduction that increases the parasite population. Following merogony, some merozoites develop into male or female gametocytes, initiating gametogony. If the sexual cycle occurs, microgametocytes produce motile male gametes, which fertilize macrogametes, resulting in zygote formation. The fertilized zygote encysts and forms a thick wall, leading to the formation of an oocyst wall. These environmentally resistant oocysts can be shed in feces, allowing the parasite to resume its life cycle. Finally, sporogony occurs within the fertilized oocyst, completing the cycle [14]. Cryptosporidium infection results from ingesting a tiny number of oocysts. However, the infectious dose for primate can be as little as 10 oocysts [15]. Notably, the parasite attachment to host cells is a crucial first stage in the establishment of infection. It has been determined and demonstrated that two kinds of proteins—mucin-like glycoproteins and thrombospondin-related adhesive proteins—mediate adhesion [14]. By adhering to or invading the intestinal epithelial cells, or by generating toxins that increase intestinal secretion, infectious organisms can change intestinal ion transport. The infection might potentially change the ability of intestinal epithelial cells to transport substances and/or trigger a neurohormonal, endocrine, or immunological response that modifies the ratio of intestinal absorption to secretion [16]. However, there are several proteins of the parasites that aid in pathogenesis [17]. To cite an example, aminopeptidases are the proteins that break down host peptides into smaller units for nutrient acquisition and also can modulate the immune system of the host [17]. Next, heat shock proteins, especially heat shock proteins 70 and 90, are expressed under stressful conditions, such as oxidative stress or heat, and help the parasite maintain protein folding, prevent denaturation, and modulate the host’s immune response [18,19]. Subsequently, the P23 is the protein for aiding the parasite to attach to the enterocyte of the host intestine, initiating infection [20]. The serine proteases play a role in modulating host immune response and extracellular matrix breakdown for host tissue penetration and replication [21,22]. The sporozoite glycoproteins are also critical for host cell attachment, immune modulation, and invasion [23].
There is no approved vaccine against cryptosporidiosis, and the role of antiparasitic medications in its treatment is unclear. The clinical and parasitological responses to treatment vary significantly with the patient’s immune status, the duration of treatment, and the concomitant use of other medications [24]. However, Nitazoxanide demonstrated efficacy in treating cryptosporidiosis in individuals with a normal immune system and likely in those with a damaged immune system. Nevertheless, it is insufficient as a standalone treatment for the condition [25]. Notably, vaccinations can provide effective treatment for cryptosporidiosis. Vaccines are essential for maintaining global health because they stop the spread of many diseases and infections by stimulating the immune system [26]. From Edward Jenner (1796) to SARS-CoV-2 (2019), vaccination has saved the lives of millions of people [27]. Compared with other types of vaccines, including subunit, killed, live-attenuated, toxoid, viral vector-based, and DNA-based vaccines, mRNA-based vaccines offer several advantages, including stability, affordability, and lack of integration into DNA [28–31]. The mRNA vaccine and reverse vaccinology (RV) methods received substantial attention when the FDA granted emergency use authorization for the initial SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 Spikevax (Moderna). In recognition of their groundbreaking work in mRNA technology, Professors Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2023 for their pivotal contributions to vaccine development [32–34].
Nowadays, vaccine is constructed using RV and immunoinformatics approaches [35]. The term “RV” was coined to describe the approach of using computer-based genetic information to initiate vaccine research, rather than working directly with the pathogen in a laboratory [35]. The strategic development of vaccines targeting specific epitopes, using AI for both B- and T-cells, is a critical step in this process. This method provides a potent, immunogenic vaccine that confers protection against autoimmunity and other adverse outcomes across different ethnicities, pregnant women, and susceptible age groups [36].
At present, there is no efficacious vaccine available to prevent bovine cryptosporidiosis. However, a recombinant C. parvum gp40 protein was evaluated as a vaccine in pregnant heifers during late gestation where vaccinated cows exhibited significantly superior health, with reduced severity and duration of diarrhea, as well as enhanced weight gain compared to controls indicating, good efficacy of the vaccine [37].
Consequently, the aim of this study was to develop a novel mRNA vaccine candidate for the treatment of cryptosporidiosis using RV, as no mRNA vaccine is currently approved by the FDA. This current vaccine will probably elicit good immune responses against two potent species of cryptosporidiosis. The efficacy of mRNA vaccines and RV served as a substantial impetus for us, as both approaches facilitate the identification of ideal vaccine constituents and yield safe, stable and effective vaccines [33,34,38,39]. However, the research gaps of this study are of no validation beyond simulation, uncertainty of long-term immunity, protein quality, stability and safety, requiring experimental validation.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Obtaining of sequence and alignment
The amino acid sequences of the aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoites glycoprotein of the C. hominis with accession numbers of XP_666607.1, V9QET8, Q5CHW5, PPS97477.1, and Q4VY80, respectively, were obtained employing the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) and saved in FASTA [40]. The same procedure was followed for the same proteins of C. parvum with accession numbers of A0A7S7LGW5, B5STM2, F8UW66, A0A7G2HIR5, and Q4VY88, respectively. Next, the consensus sequences were generated from all the aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoprotein sequences of both parasites using the BioEdit 7.2 program [41]. Subsequently, all targeted protein sequences were saved as individual FASTA files for the next steps.
2.2. Prediction of CD8+ (MHC-I), CD4+ (MHC-II) and continuous B-cell epitopes
The Immune Epitope Database (IEDB) (http://tools.immuneepitope.org/mhci/) was used to prediction the CD8+ and CD4+ binding epitopes for the conserved sequences of aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoprotein in both parasites [42–54]. This server is a detailed database offering details regarding antibodies, B-cell epitopes, T-cell epitopes, MHC molecules, and MHC binding ligands in humans and numerous animal species, including primates and mice [42–55]. Subsequently, the 9-mer, 15-mer and <1.00 percentile ranked epitopes (threshold) were selected for subsequent analysis, respectively. Moreover, the continuous B-cell epitopes of the targeted conserved sequences from the same proteins were predicted using the ABCpred (https://webs.iiitd.edu.in/raghava/abcpred/) server [56]. This server employs neural network technology for predicting MHC-II binding epitopes. [57,58]. Afterwards, the antigenicity, allergenicity and toxicity were predicted employing VaxiJen 2.0 (http://www.ddg-pharmfac.net/vaxijen/VaxiJen/VaxiJen.html) (threshold 0.4), AllerTOP v.2.0 (https://www.ddg-pharmfac.net/AllerTOP/index.html) (threshold <0.00) and ToxinPred (https://webs.iiitd.edu.in/raghava/toxinpred/algo.php) servers (threshold <0.00), respectively [59–61]. VaxiJen 2.0, AllerTOP v.2.0, and ToxinPred have exhibited reliable accuracy in predicting bacterial and viral antigens, with performance varying depending on the particular pathogen. Nonetheless, the accuracy of these tools depends on the quality and diversity of the dataset employed during training. Predictions may be less dependable for proteins that do not resemble known antigens or possess atypical folds [62].
2.3. Analysis of the population coverage of the selected epitope
The development of a multiepitope vaccine is profoundly shaped by population coverage analysis, as the high polymorphism of HLA alleles restricts the proportion of individuals capable of responding to a specific antigen; consequently, analyzing the population coverage for T-cell epitopes reveals their potential to stimulate T-cell responses in a substantial number of individuals across diverse geographical regions [63–66]. However, the population coverage of the selected epitopes was determined using the Population Coverage Analysis tool by IEDB (http://tools.iedb.org/population) with the standard threshold of >97% for MHC-I and >99% for MHC-II epitopes and a standard 27 reference set of human HLA alleles [67]. The coverage of populations from all regions of the globe was also determined [68,69]. Based on HLA (Human Leukocyte Antigen) frequencies, binding predictions (MHC-I & II), and T-cell response data, this tool predicts the proportion of specified worldwide populations projected to respond to a set of epitopes. Using allele frequencies from external databases and binomial distribution and Hardy-Weinberg to determine genotype frequencies, it identifies binders for different HLA types and sums population coverage, outputting fractions recognizing zero, one, or multiple epitopes and vaccine design metrics like PC90 (epitopes recognized by 90% of the population) [68,69].
2.4. Construction of vaccine candidate
Vaccine construction was achieved by targeting highly prioritized epitopes from conserved sequences of aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoprotein of both parasites. Linkers such as EAAAK were implemented for ligating the CD8+ epitopes with adjuvant 50S ribosomal protein L7/L12, AYY was used for ligating CD8+ epitopes, AK was used for ligating the CD4+ epitopes, and KFER was used for ligating continuous B-cell epitopes [70–73].
2.5. Validation of biophysical qualities
The Expasy ProtParam server (http://web.expasy.org/protparam/) provided an analysis of the vaccine’s biophysical properties, including the number of atoms, molecular mass, net charge, instability, aliphatic index, isoelectric point, and grand average of hydropathicity (GRAVY) [74]. Next, the allergenicity was evaluated by AlgPred (https://webs.iiitd.edu.in/raghava/algpred/submission.html) [75], AllerTOP v. 2.0 (https://www.ddg-pharmfac.net/AllerTOP/) [61] and AllergenFP v.1.0 (http://ddg-pharmfac.net/AllergenFP/) servers [76,77]. The antigenicity was determined by VaxiJen 2.0 (http://www.ddg-pharmfac.net/vaxijen/VaxiJen/VaxiJen.html) servers [60] and ANTIGENpro (http://sc.ratch.proteomics.ics.uci.edu) servers [78].
2.6. Modelling of two-dimensional structure
The PSIPRED (http://bioinf.cs.ucl.ac.uk/psipred/), GOR4 (https://npsa-prabi.ibcp.fr/cgi-bin/npsa_automat.pl?page=/NPSA/npsa_gor4.html) and the SOPMA (https://npsa-prabi.ibcp.fr/cgi-bin/npsa_automat.pl?page=/NPSA/npsa_sopma.html) were utilized to generate the two-dimensional structure [79–82]. The PSIPRED server utilizes two feed-forward neural networks to evaluate the output from PSI–BLAST (Protein Specific Iterated Basic Local Alignment Search Tool) for the prediction of two-dimensional structure [83]. Moreover, the GOR4 utilizes the theory of information and Bayesian statistical methods in order to predict the secondary structure of a protein. [84]. Conversely, the SOPMA server is capable of predicting approximately 69.5% of amino acids within a protein sequence concerning a three-state representation (alpha-helix, beta-sheet, and coil) of the two-dimensionalstructure [81]. The accuracy of PSIPRED, GOR4, and SOPMA in predicting two-dimensionalstructures generally falls between 75% and 85%. PSIPRED and GOR4 usually exhibit superior accuracy; however, all three tools may encounter difficulties with intrinsically disordered regions, flexible structures, or sequences exhibiting low homology to known proteins, which may result in less reliable predictions in such instances [62].
2.7. Modelling, refinement and validation of three-dimensional structure
The I-TASSER server (https://zhanggroup.org/I-TASSER/) was utilized for modelling the three-dimensional structure of the vaccine [54,85]. This server conducts multiple threading alignments and iterative template fragment assembly simulations to anticipate the three-dimensional structure of a protein [54,85]. Subsequently, the refinement was conducted on GalaxyWEB (https://galaxy.seoklab.org/cgi-bin/submit.cgi?type=REFINE) server [86]. Additionally, the validation of structure was conducted on SAVES v6.0 (https://saves.mbi.ucla.edu/) for the Ramachandran and ERRAT score analysis and ProSA server (https://prosa.services.came.sbg.ac.at/prosa.php) for the Z score analysis in terms of protein quality [87–92]. The reliability of SAVES v6.0 and ProSA in assessing protein models is generally sound; however, these tools may fail to identify nuanced errors, especially in flexible or atypical protein regions. Their predictions should be interpreted alongside experimental data for enhanced accuracy [62].
2.8. Prediction of discontinuous B-cell epitopes
For the prediction of discontinuous B-cell epitopes, the Ellipro (http://tools.iedb.org/ellipro/) server was utilized [93,94]. This server predicted the epitopes through surface accessibility analysis and the integration of three algorithms [93]. Nonetheless, the precision of this tool is contingent upon the integrity of the input protein structure. If the structure is inaccurately predicted or lacks high-resolution data, the reliability of epitope prediction may diminish [62].
2.9. Docking interaction analysis
The ClusPro 2.0 server (cluspro.bu.edu/login.php) was employed for molecular docking analysis [95–98]. First, three-dimensional structures of human TLR-2 (PDB: 2Z7X) and TLR-4 (PDB: 3FXI) were selected from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) database (www.rcsb.org). Subsequently, the visualization and analysis of the complexes were conducted in BIOVIA Discovery Studio Visualizer (https://discover.3ds.com/discovery-studio-visualizer-download) and PDBsum (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/thornton-srv/databases/pdbsum/Generate.html) [99–101].
2.10. Dynamics simulation of the molecules
The dynamics simulation of the molecules elucidates the coordinated functional movements of macromolecules [102,103]. Therefore, the iMODS (http://imods.chaconlab.org/) server was applied to run a dynamics simulation of molecules for the vaccine-TLR-2 along with vaccine-TLR-4 complexes [103]. The server offers an extensive array of robust motion configurations, including affine-model arrows, vector fields, and modal animations. Moreover, this server calculates a range of properties, including mobility (B-factor), deformability, eigenvalues, covariance maps, and linkage matrices [103]. The B-factor elucidates the extent to which atoms deviate from their structural equilibrium [100]. Moreover, the deformability graph serves as a graphical representation of flexibility of protein, particularly for coil or domain linkers [104]. Additionally, the eigenvalue serves as a criterion for the stability of the complex, with elevated values signifying a greater degree of stability [103,105].
2.11. Post-simulation analysis (MM-GBSA)
Molecular mechanics employing the generalized Born and surface area solvation (MM-GBSA) approaches was employed to compute the negative free energy associated with the interactions of docked complexes [106]. In this step, electrostatic, Van Der Waals, solvation and surface area energies were calculated by the HawkDock server (http://cadd.zju.edu.cn/hawkdock/) [107–109]. Nevertheless, the efficacy of this tool is contingent upon the quality of the input structures and the selected force field; inaccuracies may occur if the protein-ligand complex is not adequately optimized [62].
2.12. Optimization and cloning of the DNA sequence of vaccine
The Java Codon Adaptation software (http://www.jcat.de/Start.jsp) was applied to standardize the vaccine DNA by making use of the E. coli K12 [110]. By determining the GC percentages and the codon adaptation index (CAI) of a protein, the server evaluated the protein’s expression probability [101,110]. Subsequently, the standardized DNA was inserted into the pET-28a(+) vector, with the restriction sites Eco53I and FspI ligated into the vaccine DNA, and cloning was performed in SnapGene (https://www.snapgene.com/free-trial/) [111]. This software is robust for viewing and modifying DNA sequences; nevertheless, it may have constraints for processing exceedingly big or intricate sequences [62].
2.13. Immune response simulation
The vaccine-induced immune response simulation was assessed using the C-ImmSim server (https://kraken.iac.rm.cnr.it/C-IMMSIM/) [112,113]. It possesses the ability to simulate the immune response elicited by an epitope that engages with a T cell receptor. The server is capable of simulating three components of the mammalian immune system: the bone marrow, thymus, and lymph nodes. The three administrations of the vaccine were spaced apart by intervals of 1, 84, and 168 time-steps, respectively. However, the three vaccine doses were administered at intervals of 0, 28, and 56 days, corresponding to a real-life time-step equivalence of 8 hours [114,115]. Nevertheless, the simulation parameters were ultimately established as follows: a simulation step of 1000, a simulation volume of 50, and a random seed of 12,345 [62,116].
2.14. Modelling of messenger RNA backbones
Initially, the transcription into RNA sequences was carried out utilizing the Biomodel server (http://biomodel.uah.es/en/lab/cybertory/analysis/trans.htm) [71]. Next, the RNA sequence was submitted to the RNAfold server (http://rna.tbi.univie.ac.at/cgi-bin/RNAWebSuite/RNAfold.cgi) for structure modelling [111,117].
3. Results
3.1. Obtaining of sequence and alignment
The amino acid sequences of aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoprotein from both C. hominis and C. parvum were obtained, and conserved sequences were generated by multiple sequence alignment. These sequences were utilized throughout the study (Fig 1).
3.2. Prediction of CD8+ (MHC-I) epitope
The IEDB database was implemented to predict the best CD8+ epitopes of the aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease and sporozoites glycoprotein. A net of ten 9-mer length epitopes were chosen in accordance with their percentile rank (≤1.00), antigenic (threshold = 0.4), non-allergenic (threshold=<0.00) and non-toxic properties (threshold=<0.00) (Table 1).
3.3. Prediction of CD4+ (MHC-II) epitopes
A net of ten 15-mer length epitopes were derived from the targeted proteins based on percentile rank (≤1.00), antigenic (threshold = 0.4), non-allergenic (threshold = 0.5) and non-toxic properties (threshold = 0.5) (Table 2).
3.4. Prediction of continuous B-cell epitope
A net of ten epitopes were selected based on antigenic, non-allergenic and non-toxic properties (Table 3).
3.5. Analysis of the population coverage of the selected epitope
The vaccine is predicted to have 100% population exposure for both MHC class-I (CD8+) and class-II alleles (CD4+) in regions including the Central America, the South America, the North America, the Oceania, the West Indies, the North Africa, the Central Africa, the West Africa, the East Africa, the Europe, the South Asia, and the Northeast Asia. Following this, Southeast Asia exhibited a coverage of 99.98%, while Southwest Asia reached 99.99%, with global coverage of 100% for combined alleles, 98.55% for MHC class-I alleles, and 99.99% for MHC class-II alleles (S1 Fig).
3.6. Construction of vaccine candidate
The vaccine construct was generated by selecting the most relevant epitopes from the aminopeptidase, heat shock protein, P23 protein, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoprotein. To join the selected adjuvants and epitopes in the designed vaccine, linkers consisting of EAAAK, AYY, AK, and KFER were used to bridge epitopes and enhance vaccine stability (Fig 2).
3.7. Validation of biophysical characteristics
The molar mass of the vaccine was 57570.04 Da, and it comprises 523 amino acids (Table 4). The vaccine’s isoelectric point was 5.34, indicating a pH below 7. Next, the GRAVY and hydrophobicity scores were −0.829 and −0.345, respectively. Additionally, the solubility overexpression score was 639636. Subsequently, the aliphatic and instability indices were 53.17 and 38, respectively (Table 4). The lack of allergenic reactions to this vaccine was confirmed by the AllerTOP v. 2.0, AllergenFP v. 1.0, and AlgPred servers (Table 4). The vaccine was also recognized by the ANTIGENpro and VaxiJen 2.0 servers as a possible antigen (Table 4).
3.8. Prediction of two-dimensional structure
A combination of the GOR4, SOPMA, and PSIPRED servers was deployed to anticipate the two-dimensional structure of the vaccine. As to the GOR4, the percentage of alpha helices was 43.02%, random coils accounted for 46.65%, and extended strands (beta sheet) accounted for 10.33%. Additionally, the SOPMA predicted that the two-dimensional structure of the vaccine would comprise 37.67% alpha helices, 12.62% extended strands, and 42.45% random coils (Fig 3 and S1 Table).
Yellow represents the beta-sheet, pink the helix, and grey the vaccine’s coil structure in the second bar (Cart). The three separate amino acid sequences and structural aspects are represented by the third (Pred) and fourth (AA) bars, respectively. Additionally, the amount of the helix, sheet, coil and turn by GOR4 (B) and SOPMA (C) servers.
3.9. Modelling, refining and validation of three-dimensional structure
From the five structures modelled by the I-TASSER server, the first structure was chosen for a superior template modelling value of 0.65 ± 0.13, a confidence value of −0.52, and an RMSD of 8.6 ± 4.5 Å (Fig 4A). Subsequently, the refined three-dimensional structure was obtained from the GalaxyWEB server (Fig 4B). The stability of the three-dimensional structure was supported by a Ramachandran favoured region of 90.6%, an RMSD value of 0.547, and a MolProbity score of 1.973, all of which reflect its high quality. This result confirmed that the refined model is appropriate for subsequent analysis. Next, the refined structure obtained a Z-score of −7.39, which signifies its high quality (Fig 4C). Conversely, the Ramachandran plot showed that the refined structure placed 83.1% of the amino acid residues in the most favoured regions, 13% in the additionally allowed regions, and 2.2% in the generously allowed regions (Fig 4D). Additionally, this vaccine also exhibited an ERRAT score of 82.328, as confirmed by the SAVES server (Fig 4E).
3.10. Prediction of discontinuous B-cell epitopes
From a net of 621 amino acids in the vaccine, the Discotope 2.0 server detected 259 discontinuous B-cell epitopes ranging from 0.528 to 0.993 (Fig 5 and S2 Table).
Yellow-color showcases the discontinuous B cell epitopes and the grey sticks represents the vaccine.
3.11. Docking interaction analysis
Using the ClusPro 2.0 server, the coupling procedure between the vaccine construct and human receptors (TLR-2 and TLR-4) was executed. However, ClusPro 2.0 generated 40 models for each complex. Among the models considered, the one with the lowest pose energy of −1151.9 and the central pose energy of −1151.9 was selected for the vaccine-TLR-2 complex (Table 5). Subsequently, the model with the lowest pose energy value of −1028.3 and the central pose energy value of −902.6 kJ/mol was selected for the vaccine-TLR-4 complex (Fig 6 and Table 5). Next, the vaccine-TLR-2 complex contained 2, 2, 120 salt bridges, hydrogen bonds, and non-bond contacts, respectively (Table 5). Subsequently, the vaccine-TLR-4 complex contained 1, 23, 225 salt bridges, hydrogen bonds, and non-bond contacts, respectively (Table 5).
3.12. MM-GBSA analysis
In the case of vaccine-TLR-2, the total negative energy (MM-GBSA) was −63.3 kcal/mol, while the Van der Waals, electrostatic, generalized born, and surface area energies were −125.07 kcal/mol, 528.6 kcal/mol, −451.22 kcal/mol, and −15.61 kcal/mol, respectively. For the vaccine-TLR-4, the total negative energy was calculated to be −70.17 kcal/mol, while Van der Waals, electrostatic, generalized born, and surface area energies were −187.78 kcal/mol, 1082.03 kcal/mol, −940.48 kcal/mol, and −23.94 kcal/mol, respectively (S3 Table).
3.13. Dynamic simulation of the molecules
To evaluate structural integrity and modifications, the iMODS server conducted molecular dynamics simulations of the vaccine-bound complexes with TLR-2 and TLR-4. The covariance maps generated during the analysis of molecular dynamics simulations depicted the correlated, uncorrelated, and anti-correlated shifts between residue pairs in the docked complexes of the vaccine with TLR-2 and TLR-4, utilizing red, white, and blue hues to represent these relationships, respectively (Figs 7A and 7B). Subsequently, the elastic map of the docked complexes showed interactions between atoms as darker grey patches, suggesting more rigid regions (Figs 7C and 7D). However, an eigenvalue measures the impact of specific deformation motions on the protein’s overall dynamics. Additionally, an elevated eigenvalue indicates significant displacement, whereas a reduced eigenvalue indicates collective conformational changes in the protein complex.
A representation of (A) covariance graph (correlated, uncorrelated, and anti-correlated motions are represented by red, white, and blue regions, respectively, (C) network of elasticity, (E) B factor, (G) deformability, (I) eigenvalue, and (K) the variance of vaccine-TLR-2 complex. There exists another representation of (B) covariance graph (correlated, uncorrelated, and anti-correlated motions are represented by red, white, and blue regions, respectively, (D) network of elasticity, (F) B factor, (H) deformability, (J) eigenvalue, (L) variance of vaccine-TLR-4 complex.
Next, the B-factor graph showed simulations of the docked complexes involving NMA and the PDB sector, where B-factor values indicated the amplitude of atomic displacements, revealing higher deformability in the vaccine-TLR-2 and vaccine-TLR-4 docked complexes, suggesting greater flexibility (Figs 7E and 7F). Using graphical peaks, the deformability graph showed that the flexible portions of the docked complexes were more deformable in vaccine-TLR-4 than in vaccine-TLR-2 (Figs 7G and 7H). Furthermore, the eigenvalues of the vaccine-TLR-2 and vaccine-TLR-4 docked complexes indicated their structural stability, with the lowest eigenvalues of 7.294630e-08 and 7.919248e-06, respectively (Figs 7I and 7J). The amplitude of each mode’s fluctuation in normal mode analysis (NMA) is inversely related to the mode’s eigenvalue, which is used to assess molecular flexibility, and this relationship is statistically represented by the variance. The variance graph illustrated the cumulative variance in cyan and the individual variance in purple. In the vaccine-TLR-2 complex, the initial two modes, out of a total of twenty, account for 80% of the observed variance, whereas in the vaccine-TLR-4 complex, the first seven modes contribute 80% of the observed variance (Figs 7K and 7L).
3.14. Optimization and cloning of the DNA sequence of vaccine
The Java Codon Adaptation software was employed to optimize codon usage in E. coli K12, thereby enhancing protein expression for vaccine development. However, the server predicted that a codon sequence of 981 nucleotides was optimized. Additionally, the overall GC percentage of 47.02% and the codon adaptation index (CAI) of 0.9664 for the adapted sequence indicated that the protein would exhibit elevated expression. However, the cloning was completed by inserting the adapted codon sequences into the plasmid vector pET-28a(+) using SnapGene software (Fig 8).
The depiction was about the (A) vector, (B) DNA of sequence of the vaccine and (C) cloned construct of the vaccine.
3.15. Immune response simulation
The B-cell population in the vaccine group increased significantly and stayed active after the triple-dose regimen, suggesting prolonged protection (Fig 9A). T-cell responses, including both TH and TC cells, were enhanced by the vaccine. Active TH cell levels peaked on day 50, then gradually declined, persisting for almost a year (Fig 9B). Active and resting TR cells rose after the initial dose, declined after day one, yet remained present for a year (Fig 9C). Active TC levels increased after vaccination and sustained activity for a year (S2 Figs C and D). In contrast, NK, DC, and MA cell levels remained steady during the simulation (Figs 9D-9F). IgM + IgG concentrations steadily increased, peaking after vaccination (S2 Fig A). Lastly, the vaccine activated several cytokines, notably in the IFN and IL-2 families (S2 Fig B).
3.16. Modelling of messenger RNA backbones
The mRNA vaccine had an MFE score of −388.70 kcal/mol (optimal structure) and −250.50 kcal/mol (centroid structure). Subsequently, the predicted thermodynamic free energy was −414.35 kcal/mol. Additionally, the vaccine’s MFE structures were associated with a frequency of 0.00% in the ensemble (Fig 10).
The centroid structures of the vaccine with the base pair probabilities (A and B) and the positional entropy (C and D).
4. Discussion
The significance of vaccination’s influence on the well-being of the global population is difficult to overstate. Aside from potable water, no other method has had such a significant impact on reducing mortality rates and increasing population growth [118]. In recent years, RV and immunoinformatics have transformed vaccine research into a cutting-edge approach by identifying optimal epitopes without growing pathogens in the laboratory [119].
Cryptosporidiosis, the primary cause of endemic and pandemic diarrheal disease worldwide, is increasingly identified in immunosuppressed Americans [120]. Persistent gastroenteritis is the primary cause of mortality among children under the age of five in developing nations, contributing to 30–50 percent of such fatalities [121]. Additionally, C. parvum causes gastrointestinal disease in juvenile ruminant livestock, with neonatal calves most affected [122]. Currently, the absence of vaccines and the impracticality of chemotherapeutics make immunoprophylactic agents and treatments for cryptosporidiosis critical concerns [123]. The primary aim of this study was to construct a multiepitope mRNA vaccine against C. hominis and C. parvum using RV and immunoinformatics techniques.
However, only three RV-based vaccines have been specifically designed against cryptosporidiosis. In these three studies, (1) Sethi, G., et al., (2025) targeted Cp15, Cp23, and CpP2 proteins, (2) Karimzadeh, F., et al., (2025) focused on some experimentally identified epitopes of Cryptosporidium spp, and (3) Dhal, Ajit Kumar., et al., (2019) designed the vaccine by targeting seven proteins out of thirty-eight proteins of the parasite [124–126].
In our study, five conserved proteins (aminopeptidase, heat shock, P23, serine protease, and sporozoite glycoproteins) were targeted of the C. hominis and C. parvum to predict the best CD8+, CD4+, and continuous B-cell epitopes based on antigenicity, allergenicity, toxicity, and percentile rank. As five of the vital proteins were targeted specifically along with dual species of parasites, this current study is novel and superior to the previously mentioned studies. To initiate host immune responses against intracellular infections and virus-infected cells, CD8+ epitopes are essential. To activate their response, CD8+ cells attach to MHC-I molecules. Therefore, intracellular infections can be effectively eradicated by MHC-I epitopes of vaccines, which can significantly activate CD8 + T cells [127]. Furthermore, CD4+ epitopes are essential for delivering peptides to the surface of CD4+ T cells, enabling interaction with T-cell receptors (TCR) and driving both antibody-mediated and cellular immune responses. Moreover, the TCR and MHC-II molecules are instrumental in preventing microbial infections, rejecting transplants, and monitoring cancer progression [104,128–131]. Therefore, the recognition of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells is a prerequisite for the use of mRNA vaccines [132–134]. Furthermore, the critical function that B-cell epitopes play in the interaction between antigens and antibodies has been widely recognized as a critical element of vaccine development [135–137]. Consequently, the combined CD8+ and CD4+ epitopes exhibited high global coverage across Oceania, the United States, Asia, Europe, the West Indies, and Africa, indicating that our vaccine will likely encompass a larger segment of the global population. However, the population coverage was conducted only on the (1) mentioned study where they also found good coverages of combined MHC-I and MHC-II epitopes [126]. But the mentioned (2) and (3) studies are lack of population coverages so the current study is superior to those studies [124,125].
For the vaccine construction, all the mentioned (1), (2) and (3) utilized identical linkers including EAAAK, AYY etc which provide high solubility and stability but all of those studies utilized different adjuvants compared to this current study (large ribosomal subunit protein of Mycobacterium tuberculosis) which provides high immunogenicity [100,101,111,124–126].
Based on biophysical features, this vaccine was soluble; thus, its functional stability in the human system was apparent [132,138]. The vaccine exhibited significant heat stability, as evidenced by an aliphaticity index of 53.30 [104,132,139]. The vaccine’s hydrophilic character was indicated by a GRAVY score of −0.829 where the (1), (2) and (3) mentioned studies had the GRAVY scores of −0.106, −0.492 and 0.091 meaning that the vaccine of this current study is more hydrophilic and soluble compared to others [94,124–126]. Subsequently, both the two-dimensional and three-dimensional structures of the vaccine were modeled to assess their significance in protein folding [71]. The vaccine’s two-dimensional structure comprises a considerable quantity of alpha helices (43.02%) and coils (10.33%), rendering it a highly stable protein. However, the mentioned (1) study has better quantity of alpha helices (64.67%) and (32%) compared to this current study [126]. Furthermore, the Ramachandran plot assessment demonstrated that a substantial amount (83.1%) of the amino acid residues remained in the most favored areas, thereby ensuring the validity of its three-dimensional structure. Notably, the mentioned (1), (2) and (3) studies had better Ramachandran plot outcome as 93.8%, 85.7% and 89.2% in the most favored regions, indicating better structural features of the vaccine compared to the current study [124–126]. The Z-score of −7.39 further indicates the overall good quality (negative means high quality) of the vaccine model. However, the mentioned (1) and (2) had Z scores of −8.83 and −1.88, respectively, indicating that the model of (1) study had better quality [125,126]. In addition, the ERRAT score of 82.328 was determined to be indicative of a high-quality structure, as scores >50 indicate excellent quality [70]. Next, the human TLR-2 and TLR-4 were used in a docking analysis to assess the binding affinity between the vaccine and TLRs expressed on immune cells. Nevertheless, the vaccine exhibited notable binding affinity for TLR-2 (lowest energy of −1151.9) and TLR-4 (lowest energy of −1028.3). However, in the (1), (2) and (3) studies, the docking scores were −1328.5 kcal/mol, −214.8 and −966.9 kcal/mol, respectively indicating the better interactions of (1) and (3) compared to the current study [124–126]. The docking result was validated by the MM-GBSA scores of −63.3 kcal/mol (vaccine-TLR-2) and −70.17 kcal/mol (vaccine-TLR-4). Thereafter, the iMODs server conducted dynamics simulations of the molecules for docked complexes of the vaccine-TLR-2 and vaccine-TLR-4. An eigenvalue measures the influence of certain deformation movements on the protein’s overall motion. A higher eigenvalue signifies significant displacement, whereas a lower eigenvalue is associated with collective conformational alterations in the protein complex [140]. Additionally, the docked complexes of vaccine-TLR-2 and vaccine-TLR-4 demonstrated the lowest eigenvalues of 7.294630e-08 and 7.919248e-06, respectively. The results indicated that both complexes were biologically stable. However, the amplitude of fluctuations for each mode in normal mode analysis (NMA) has an inverse relationship with the eigenvalue, a relationship crucial for evaluating molecular flexibility and expressed numerically as variance. In the vaccine-TLR-2, the initial 2 modes account for 80% of the whole variation, but in the vaccine-TLR-4, the first 8 modes account for 80% of the total variance. Additionally, the deformability of a protein complex is crucial for achieving structural compatibility with substrates while maintaining its functional integrity, allosteric regulation, and protein-protein interactions [141,142]. Nonetheless, the vaccine-TLR-4 exhibited greater deformability than vaccine-TLR-2, indicating that vaccine-TLR-4 is functionally more stable. Subsequently, the B factor is a metric that measures the deviation of atoms from their average position, and it serves as a crucial indicator of the region’s activity, thermal stability, solvent accessibility, and protein flexibility [143]. The B-factor scores indicate the extent of atomic displacement and indicate that vaccine-TLR-2 and vaccine-TLR-4 demonstrated greater deformability and flexibility. However, the vaccine-TLR-2 had Van der Waals, electrostatic, generalized born, and surface area energies of −125.07 kcal/mol, 528.6 kcal/mol, −451.22 kcal/mol, and −15.61 kcal/mol, respectively. For the vaccine-TLR-4, the Van der Waals, electrostatic, generalized born, and surface area energies were −187.78 kcal/mol, 1082.03 kcal/mol, −940.48 kcal/mol, and −23.94 kcal/mol, respectively. All of the energy scores of MM-GBSA were strong because <−80 (Van der Waals), more negative value (electrostatic), (<−200) and <−5–10 (surface area energies) benchmarks indicate strong binding interactions [106].
Consequently, the vaccine’s DNA sequence was optimized to assess the likelihood of expression in the vector. The results demonstrated that the vaccine showed high expression in the vector, as evidenced by a GC content of 47.02% and a CAI of 0.9664. Consequently, the vaccine has shown the capacity to provoke both innate and adaptive immune responses, evidenced by the detectable presence of continuous B cells and memory B and T cells for one year. The initial rise in IFN-γ and IL-2 levels after the initial injection, and their sustained levels with recurrent antigen exposure, were evident features of TH cell activation and the subsequent release of IFN-γ and IL-2. In addition, the data suggested the existence of a humoral immune response, as evidenced by the synthesis of antibodies (IgM and IgG). However, this current vaccine was superior to the mentioned (1), (2) and (3) studies as it could elicit higher immune cells compared to theirs [124–126]. At last, the lowest free energy of the mRNA structure of the vaccine was −388.70 kcal/mol for the optimal structure and −250.00 kcal/mol for the centroid structure, thus demonstrating the stability of the vaccine upon entry, transcription, and expression in the host. However, the mentioned (1) study had the free energy values of −430.30 kcal/mol for MFE and −312.42 kcal/mol for centroid structures, respectively indicating better outcome compared to the current study. However, this study was mainly focused on computational prediction, which has a number of limitations. These drawbacks include a lack of long-term immunity prediction, structural prediction errors, ambiguity about adjuvant interactions, inconsistent epitopes, unstable proteins, unintended allergenicity and toxicity etc. As a result, validation of this work requires both preclinical and clinical trials with long term precise inspection by the regulatory bodies such as the Food and Drug Administrations of USA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention etc.
5. Conclusion
The development of innovative vaccines has been substantially advanced by advances in immunoinformatics and RV, which have also improved disease prevention strategies. A novel mRNA vaccine for cryptosporidiosis is introduced in this study, demonstrating the potential of an in-silico strategy for selecting and transcribing antigens into mRNA. This vaccine was specifically designed from the best epitopes of the two prevalent parasites associated with this infection, thereby demonstrating high population coverage worldwide and optimal biophysical characteristics. Additionally, docking analyses demonstrated robust interactions between TLR-2 and TLR-4 receptors, findings validated by MM-GBSA and dynamic simulation analyses. The vaccine was potential in activating various immune cells (T and B cells), cytokines and antibodies. Finally, based on the mRNA structure prediction, this vaccine is likely to maintain sufficient stability upon entry, transcription, and expression in the host. These findings provide invaluable insights into the attributes and uses of an effective computationally designed mRNA vaccine for the treatment of cryptosporidiosis. Nevertheless, this study focused solely on computational prediction, which has some limitations, including a lack of long-term immunity prediction, structural prediction errors, and uncertainty about adjuvant interactions, and thus requires preclinical and clinical trials for validation.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. The population coverage of the identified epitopes (MHC-I, MHC-II and combined) that met the criterion for inclusion in the vaccine design.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643.s001
(TIF)
S2 Fig. The simulation of the immune response for vaccine where the illustration is depicted as (A) The antigen and antibody titer count, (B) Cytokine level count, (C) TC cell population and (D) TC cell population per state.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643.s002
(TIF)
S1 Table. The two-dimensional structures of the vaccine.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643.s003
(DOCX)
S2 Table. The predicted discontinuous B-cell epitopes for vaccine.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643.s004
(DOCX)
S3 Table. The energy scores of MM-GBSA for the complexes.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0343643.s005
(DOCX)
References
- 1. Ondriska F, Vrabcová I, Brinďáková S, Kváč M, Ditrich O, Boldiš V, et al. The first reported cases of human cryptosporidiosis caused by Cryptosporidium hominis in Slovak Republic. Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2013;58(1):69–73. pmid:22826020
- 2. Cama VA, Bern C, Roberts J, Cabrera L, Sterling CR, Ortega Y, et al. Cryptosporidium species and subtypes and clinical manifestations in children, Peru. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(10):1567–74. pmid:18826821
- 3. Xiao L, Fayer R, Ryan U, Upton SJ. Cryptosporidium taxonomy: recent advances and implications for public health. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004;17(1):72–97. pmid:14726456
- 4. Dong S, Yang Y, Wang Y, Yang D, Yang Y, Shi Y, et al. Prevalence of Cryptosporidium Infection in the Global Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Acta Parasitol. 2020;65(4):882–9. pmid:32514837
- 5. Tawana M, Onyiche TE, Ramatla T, Nkhebenyane SJ, Grab DJ, Thekisoe O. Cryptosporidium Species Infections Detected from Fecal Samples of Animal and Human Hosts in South Africa: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Microorganisms. 2024;12(12):2426. pmid:39770629
- 6. Chen X-M, Keithly JS, Paya CV, LaRusso NF. Cryptosporidiosis. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(22):1723–31. pmid:12037153
- 7.
CDC. Symptoms of crypto. 2024.
- 8. Solo‐Gabriele H, Neumeister SJ. US outbreaks of cryptosporidiosis. J Am Water Works Assoc. 1996;88(9):76–86.
- 9. Gharpure R, Perez A, Miller AD, Wikswo ME, Silver R, Hlavsa MC. Cryptosporidiosis outbreaks — United States, 2009–2017. American Journal of Transplantation. 2019;19(9):2650–4.
- 10. Yoder JS, Harral C, Beach MJ, Control C f D, Summ PJMS. Cryptosporidiosis surveillance—United States, 2006–2008. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2010;59(6):1–14.
- 11. Xu P, Widmer G, Wang Y, Ozaki LS, Alves JM, Serrano MG, et al. The genome of Cryptosporidium hominis. Nature. 2004;431(7012):1107–12. pmid:15510150
- 12. Pinto DJ, Vinayak S. Cryptosporidium: Host-Parasite Interactions and Pathogenesis. Curr Clin Microbiol Rep. 2021;8(2):62–7. pmid:33585166
- 13. Current WL, Garcia LS. Cryptosporidiosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1991;4(3):325–58. pmid:1889046
- 14. Bouzid M, Hunter PR, Chalmers RM, Tyler KM. Cryptosporidium pathogenicity and virulence. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013;26(1):115–34. pmid:23297262
- 15. Zu SX, Fang GD, Fayer R, Guerrant RL. Cryptosporidiosis: Pathogenesis and immunology. Parasitol Today. 1992;8(1):24–7. pmid:15463522
- 16. Clark DP, Sears CLJPT. The pathogenesis of cryptosporidiosis. 1996;12(6):221–5.
- 17. Padda RS, Tsai A, Chappell CL, Okhuysen PC. Molecular cloning and analysis of the Cryptosporidium parvum aminopeptidase N gene. Int J Parasitol. 2002;32(2):187–97. pmid:11812496
- 18. Sulaiman IM, Morgan UM, Thompson RC, Lal AA, Xiao L. Phylogenetic relationships of Cryptosporidium parasites based on the 70-kilodalton heat shock protein (HSP70) gene. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66(6):2385–91. pmid:10831415
- 19. Al-Jubouri AIJ, Zangana AJM, Al-Jubouri YHOJHN. Measuring concentration of heat shock protein hsp90 and cysteine proteinase in patients with cryptosporidium and giardia lamblia. J Med Microbiol. 2022;22(2):2401–4.
- 20. Askari N, Shayan P, Mokhber-Dezfouli MR, Ebrahimzadeh E, Lotfollahzadeh S, Rostami A, et al. Evaluation of recombinant P23 protein as a vaccine for passive immunization of newborn calves against Cryptosporidium parvum. Parasite Immunol. 2016;38(5):282–9. pmid:27012710
- 21. Singh P, Mirdha BR, Srinivasan A, Rukmangadachar LA, Singh S, Sharma P, et al. Identification of invasion proteins of Cryptosporidium parvum. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015;31(12):1923–34. pmid:26492887
- 22. Sanderson SJ, Xia D, Prieto H, Yates J, Heiges M, Kissinger JC, et al. Determining the protein repertoire of Cryptosporidium parvum sporozoites. Proteomics. 2008;8(7):1398–414. pmid:18306179
- 23. Winter G, Gooley AA, Williams KL, Slade MB. Characterization of a major sporozoite surface glycoprotein of Cryptosporidum parvum. Funct Integr Genomics. 2000;1(3):207–17. pmid:11793239
- 24. Editorial introductions. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 2010;23(2):vi.
- 25. Editorial introductions. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases. 2004;17(4):i.
- 26. Knisely JM, Erbelding E. Vaccines for Global Health: Progress and Challenges. J Infect Dis. 2025;232(1):25–7. pmid:39422259
- 27. Gebre MS, Brito LA, Tostanoski LH, Edwards DK, Carfi A, Barouch DH. Novel approaches for vaccine development. Cell. 2021;184(6):1589–603. pmid:33740454
- 28. Guan S, Rosenecker J. Nanotechnologies in delivery of mRNA therapeutics using nonviral vector-based delivery systems. Gene Ther. 2017;24(3):133–43. pmid:28094775
- 29. Karikó K, Muramatsu H, Welsh FA, Ludwig J, Kato H, Akira S, et al. Incorporation of pseudouridine into mRNA yields superior nonimmunogenic vector with increased translational capacity and biological stability. Mol Ther. 2008;16(11):1833–40. pmid:18797453
- 30. Kauffman KJ, Webber MJ, Anderson DG. Materials for non-viral intracellular delivery of messenger RNA therapeutics. J Control Release. 2016;240:227–34. pmid:26718856
- 31. Thess A, Grund S, Mui BL, Hope MJ, Baumhof P, Fotin-Mleczek M, et al. Sequence-engineered mRNA Without Chemical Nucleoside Modifications Enables an Effective Protein Therapy in Large Animals. Mol Ther. 2015;23(9):1456–64. pmid:26050989
- 32. Anand P, Stahel VP. Review the safety of Covid-19 mRNA vaccines: a review. Patient Saf Surg. 2021;15(1):20. pmid:33933145
- 33. Negahdaripour M, Shafiekhani M, Moezzi SMI, Amiri S, Rasekh S, Bagheri A, et al. Administration of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients. Int Immunopharmacol. 2021;99:108021. pmid:34352567
- 34.
PRIZE TN. Press release. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2023/press-release/. 2023. Accessed 2024 August 14.
- 35. Goodswen SJ, Kennedy PJ, Ellis JT. A guide to current methodology and usage of reverse vaccinology towards in silico vaccine discovery. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2023;47(2):fuad004. pmid:36806618
- 36.
Parihar A, Malviya S, Khan R. Immunoinformatics and reverse vaccinomic approaches for effective design. In: Parihar A, Khan R, Kumar A, Kaushik AK, Gohel H, editors. Computational Approaches for Novel Therapeutic and Diagnostic Designing to Mitigate SARS-CoV-2 Infection. Academic Press. 2022:357–78.
- 37. Timmermans M, Hubers W, Schroer D, Gevers K, Segers RP, Niessen R, et al. The first commercially approved efficacious cryptosporidium vaccine protecting New-Born calves from severe diarrhea. Veterinary Vaccine. 2024;3(1):100054.
- 38. Parvizpour S, Pourseif MM, Razmara J, Rafi MA, Omidi Y. Epitope-based vaccine design: a comprehensive overview of bioinformatics approaches. Drug Discov Today. 2020;25(6):1034–42. pmid:32205198
- 39. Annand EJ, Horsburgh BA, Xu K, Reid PA, Poole B, de Kantzow MC, et al. Novel Hendra Virus Variant Detected by Sentinel Surveillance of Horses in Australia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022;28(3):693–704. pmid:35202527
- 40. Sayers EW, Bolton EE, Brister JR, Canese K, Chan J, Comeau DC, et al. Database resources of the national center for biotechnology information. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50(D1):D20–6. pmid:34850941
- 41. Alzohairy A. BioEdit: An important software for molecular biology. GERF Bulletin of Biosciences. 2011;2:60–1.
- 42. Abdelmageed MI, Abdelmoneim AH, Mustafa MI, Elfadol NM, Murshed NS, Shantier SW, et al. Design of a Multiepitope-Based Peptide Vaccine against the E Protein of Human COVID-19: An Immunoinformatics Approach. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:2683286. pmid:32461973
- 43. Buus S, Lauemøller SL, Worning P, Kesmir C, Frimurer T, Corbet S, et al. Sensitive quantitative predictions of peptide-MHC binding by a “Query by Committee” artificial neural network approach. Tissue Antigens. 2003;62(5):378–84. pmid:14617044
- 44. Jurtz V, Paul S, Andreatta M, Marcatili P, Peters B, Nielsen M. NetMHCpan-4.0: Improved Peptide-MHC Class I Interaction Predictions Integrating Eluted Ligand and Peptide Binding Affinity Data. J Immunol. 2017;199(9):3360–8. pmid:28978689
- 45. Kim Y, Ponomarenko J, Zhu Z, Tamang D, Wang P, Greenbaum J, et al. Immune epitope database analysis resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(Web Server issue):W525–30. pmid:22610854
- 46. Kim Y, Sidney J, Pinilla C, Sette A, Peters B. Derivation of an amino acid similarity matrix for peptide: MHC binding and its application as a Bayesian prior. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009;10:394. pmid:19948066
- 47. Lundegaard C, Lamberth K, Harndahl M, Buus S, Lund O, Nielsen M. NetMHC-3.0: accurate web accessible predictions of human, mouse and monkey MHC class I affinities for peptides of length 8-11. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36(Web Server issue):W509–12. pmid:18463140
- 48. Moutaftsi M, Peters B, Pasquetto V, Tscharke DC, Sidney J, Bui H-H, et al. A consensus epitope prediction approach identifies the breadth of murine T(CD8+)-cell responses to vaccinia virus. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24(7):817–9. pmid:16767078
- 49. Nielsen M, Lundegaard C, Worning P, Lauemøller SL, Lamberth K, Buus S, et al. Reliable prediction of T-cell epitopes using neural networks with novel sequence representations. Protein Sci. 2003;12(5):1007–17. pmid:12717023
- 50. Peters B, Sette A. Generating quantitative models describing the sequence specificity of biological processes with the stabilized matrix method. BMC Bioinformatics. 2005;6:132. pmid:15927070
- 51. Sidney J, Assarsson E, Moore C, Ngo S, Pinilla C, Sette A, et al. Quantitative peptide binding motifs for 19 human and mouse MHC class I molecules derived using positional scanning combinatorial peptide libraries. Immunome Res. 2008;4:2. pmid:18221540
- 52. Vita R, Mahajan S, Overton JA, Dhanda SK, Martini S, Cantrell JR, et al. The Immune Epitope Database (IEDB): 2018 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(D1):D339–43. pmid:30357391
- 53. Yazdani Z, Rafiei A, Irannejad H, Yazdani M, Valadan R. Designing a novel multiepitope peptide vaccine against melanoma using immunoinformatics approach. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2022;40(7):3312–24. pmid:33226282
- 54. Zhang Q, Wang P, Kim Y, Haste-Andersen P, Beaver J, Bourne PE, et al. Immune epitope database analysis resource (IEDB-AR). Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36(Web Server issue):W513-8. pmid:18515843
- 55. Lundegaard C, Lund O, Nielsen M. Accurate approximation method for prediction of class I MHC affinities for peptides of length 8, 10 and 11 using prediction tools trained on 9mers. Bioinformatics. 2008;24(11):1397–8. pmid:18413329
- 56. Singh H, Ansari HR, Raghava GPS. Improved method for linear B-cell epitope prediction using antigen’s primary sequence. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e62216. pmid:23667458
- 57. Reynisson B, Alvarez B, Paul S, Peters B, Nielsen M. NetMHCpan-4.1 and NetMHCIIpan-4.0: improved predictions of MHC antigen presentation by concurrent motif deconvolution and integration of MS MHC eluted ligand data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(W1):W449–54. pmid:32406916
- 58. Reynisson B, Barra C, Kaabinejadian S, Hildebrand WH, Peters B, Nielsen M. Improved Prediction of MHC II Antigen Presentation through Integration and Motif Deconvolution of Mass Spectrometry MHC Eluted Ligand Data. J Proteome Res. 2020;19(6):2304–15. pmid:32308001
- 59. Sharma N, Naorem LD, Jain S, Raghava GPS. ToxinPred2: an improved method for predicting toxicity of proteins. Brief Bioinform. 2022;23(5):bbac174. pmid:35595541
- 60. Doytchinova IA, Flower DR. VaxiJen: a server for prediction of protective antigens, tumour antigens and subunit vaccines. BMC Bioinformatics. 2007;8:4. pmid:17207271
- 61. Dimitrov I, Bangov I, Flower DR, Doytchinova I. AllerTOP v.2--a server for in silico prediction of allergens. J Mol Model. 2014;20(6):2278. pmid:24878803
- 62. Mahdeen AA, Arpa SH, Hasan MdR, Barua L, Ferdous J, Masum MdHU. Next-gen vaccine design: Integrating proteomics and bioinformatics for japanese encephalitis. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Reports. 2025;2:100049.
- 63. Misra N, Panda PK, Shah K, Sukla LB, Chaubey P. Population coverage analysis of T-Cell epitopes of Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B from Iron acquisition proteins for vaccine design. Bioinformation. 2011;6(7):255–61. pmid:21738325
- 64. Maenaka K, Jones EY. MHC superfamily structure and the immune system. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 1999;9(6):745–53. pmid:10607669
- 65. Ovsyannikova IG, Jacobson RM, Poland GA. Variation in vaccine response in normal populations. Pharmacogenomics. 2004;5(4):417–27. pmid:15165177
- 66. Reche PA, Reinherz EL. Sequence variability analysis of human class I and class II MHC molecules: functional and structural correlates of amino acid polymorphisms. J Mol Biol. 2003;331(3):623–41. pmid:12899833
- 67. Bui H-H, Sidney J, Dinh K, Southwood S, Newman MJ, Sette A. Predicting population coverage of T-cell epitope-based diagnostics and vaccines. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006;7:153. pmid:16545123
- 68. Hayat C, Shahab M, Khan SA, Liang C, Duan X, Khan H, et al. Design of a novel multiple epitope-based vaccine: an immunoinformatics approach to combat monkeypox. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2023;41(19):9344–55. pmid:36331082
- 69. Naveed M, Ali A, Aziz T, Fatima N, Amjad S, Fatima F, et al. Development of a novel multiepitope vaccine against Menangle virus (MenV) using in-silico approaches by targeting its transmembrane proteins. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):13715. pmid:40258886
- 70. Rahman MM, Masum MHU, Parvin R, Das SC, Talukder A. Designing of an mRNA vaccine against high-risk human papillomavirus targeting the E6 and E7 oncoproteins exploiting immunoinformatics and dynamic simulation. PLoS One. 2025;20(1):e0313559. pmid:39761277
- 71. Masum MdHU, Wajed S, Hossain MdI, Moumi NR, Talukder A, Rahman MdM. An mRNA vaccine for pancreatic cancer designed by applying in silico immunoinformatics and reverse vaccinology approaches. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(7):e0305413.
- 72. Naveed M, Jabeen K, Aziz T, Hanif N, Waseem M, Khan AA, et al. Computational Design of a Multi Epitope Vaccine Against Staphylococcus warneri for Combatting Recurrent UTIs and Skin Infections. Mol Biotechnol. 2025. pmid:40622662
- 73. Barua A, Masum MHU, Mahdeen AA. A Reverse Vaccinology and Immunoinformatic Approach for the Designing of a Novel mRNA Vaccine Against Stomach Cancer Targeting the Potent Pathogenic Proteins of Helicobacter pylori. Bioinform Biol Insights. 2025;19. pmid:40290636
- 74. Wilkins MR, Gasteiger E, Bairoch A, Sanchez JC, Williams KL, Appel RD, et al. Protein identification and analysis tools in the ExPASy server. Methods Mol Biol. 1999;112:531–52. pmid:10027275
- 75. Saha S, Raghava GPS. AlgPred: prediction of allergenic proteins and mapping of IgE epitopes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34(Web Server issue):W202-9. pmid:16844994
- 76. Dimitrov I, Naneva L, Doytchinova I, Bangov I. AllergenFP: allergenicity prediction by descriptor fingerprints. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(6):846–51. pmid:24167156
- 77. Masum MHU, Mahdeen AA, Barua A. Revolutionizing Chikungunya Vaccines: mRNA Breakthroughs With Molecular and Immune Simulations. Bioinform Biol Insights. 2025;19. pmid:40182080
- 78. Dhanda SK, Vir P, Raghava GPS. Designing of interferon-gamma inducing MHC class-II binders. Biol Direct. 2013;8:30. pmid:24304645
- 79. Buchan DWA, Jones DT. The PSIPRED Protein Analysis Workbench: 20 years on. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(W1):W402–7. pmid:31251384
- 80. Combet C, Blanchet C, Geourjon C, Deléage G. NPS@: network protein sequence analysis. Trends Biochem Sci. 2000;25(3):147–50. pmid:10694887
- 81. Geourjon C, Deléage G. SOPMA: significant improvements in protein secondary structure prediction by consensus prediction from multiple alignments. Comput Appl Biosci. 1995;11(6):681–4. pmid:8808585
- 82. Jones DT. Protein secondary structure prediction based on position-specific scoring matrices. J Mol Biol. 1999;292(2):195–202. pmid:10493868
- 83. McGuffin LJ, Bryson K, Jones DT. The PSIPRED protein structure prediction server. Bioinformatics. 2000;16(4):404–5. pmid:10869041
- 84. Garnier J, Gibrat JF, Robson B. GOR method for predicting protein secondary structure from amino acid sequence. Methods Enzymol. 1996;266:540–53. pmid:8743705
- 85. Ghahremanifard P, Afzali F, Rostami A, Nayeri Z, Bambai B, Minuchehr Z. Designing a Novel Multi-epitope T Vaccine for “Targeting Protein for Xklp-2” (TPX2) in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on Immunoinformatics Approach. Int J Pept Res Ther. 2019;26(2):1127–36.
- 86. Ko J, Park H, Heo L, Seok C. GalaxyWEB server for protein structure prediction and refinement. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(Web Server issue):W294–7. pmid:22649060
- 87. Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Moss DS, Thornton JM. PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr. 1993;26(2):283–91.
- 88. Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Thornton JMJ. PROCHECK: validation of protein‐structure coordinates. J Int Comp Biol. 2012;2012:684–7.
- 89. Laskowski RA, Rullmannn JA, MacArthur MW, Kaptein R, Thornton JM. AQUA and PROCHECK-NMR: programs for checking the quality of protein structures solved by NMR. J Biomol NMR. 1996;8(4):477–86. pmid:9008363
- 90. Morris AL, MacArthur MW, Hutchinson EG, Thornton JM. Stereochemical quality of protein structure coordinates. Proteins. 1992;12(4):345–64. pmid:1579569
- 91. Sippl MJ. Recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Proteins. 1993;17(4):355–62. pmid:8108378
- 92. Wiederstein M, Sippl MJ. ProSA-web: interactive web service for the recognition of errors in three-dimensional structures of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(Web Server issue):W407-10. pmid:17517781
- 93. Ponomarenko J, Bui H-H, Li W, Fusseder N, Bourne PE, Sette A, et al. ElliPro: a new structure-based tool for the prediction of antibody epitopes. BMC Bioinformatics. 2008;9:514. pmid:19055730
- 94. Rahman MM, Masum MHU, Talukder A, Akter R. An in silico reverse vaccinology approach to design a novel multiepitope peptide vaccine for non-small cell lung cancers. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked. 2023;37:101169.
- 95. Desta IT, Porter KA, Xia B, Kozakov D, Vajda S. Performance and Its Limits in Rigid Body Protein-Protein Docking. Structure. 2020;28(9):1071–1081.e3. pmid:32649857
- 96. Kozakov D, Beglov D, Bohnuud T, Mottarella SE, Xia B, Hall DR, et al. How good is automated protein docking? Proteins. 2013;81(12):2159–66. pmid:23996272
- 97. Kozakov D, Hall DR, Xia B, Porter KA, Padhorny D, Yueh C, et al. The ClusPro web server for protein-protein docking. Nat Protoc. 2017;12(2):255–78. pmid:28079879
- 98. Vajda S, Yueh C, Beglov D, Bohnuud T, Mottarella SE, Xia B, et al. New additions to the ClusPro server motivated by CAPRI. Proteins. 2017;85(3):435–44. pmid:27936493
- 99. Laskowski RA, Jabłońska J, Pravda L, Vařeková RS, Thornton JM. PDBsum: Structural summaries of PDB entries. Protein Sci. 2018;27(1):129–34. pmid:28875543
- 100. Parvin R, Habib Ullah Masum M, Ferdous J, Mahdeen AA, Shafiqul Islam Khan M. Designing of a chimeric multiepitope vaccine against bancroftian lymphatic filariasis through immunoinformatics approaches. PLoS One. 2024;19(9):e0310398. pmid:39298468
- 101. Masum MHU, Mahdeen AA, Barua L, Parvin R, Heema HP, Ferdous J. Developing a chimeric multiepitope vaccine against Nipah virus (NiV) through immunoinformatics, molecular docking and dynamic simulation approaches. Microb Pathog. 2024;197:107098. pmid:39521154
- 102. Das NC, Sen Gupta PS, Biswal S, Patra R, Rana MK, Mukherjee S. In-silico evidences on filarial cystatin as a putative ligand of human TLR4. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2022;40(19):8808–24. pmid:33955317
- 103. López-Blanco JR, Miyashita O, Tama F, Chacón P. Normal Mode Analysis Techniques in Structural Biology. eLS.
- 104. Masum MHU, Ferdous J, Lokman S, Siddiki AZ. Designing of a multiepitope-based chimeric vaccine against dengue virus serotype 3 (DENV-3) through next generation reverse vaccinology approaches. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked. 2024;44:101422.
- 105. Abdelli I, Hassani F, Bekkel Brikci S, Ghalem S. In silico study the inhibition of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor of COVID-19 by Ammoides verticillata components harvested from Western Algeria. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2021;39(9):3263–76. pmid:32362217
- 106. Genheden S, Ryde U. The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2015;10(5):449–61. pmid:25835573
- 107. Chen F, Sun H, Wang J, Zhu F, Liu H, Wang Z, et al. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 8. Predicting binding free energies and poses of protein-RNA complexes. RNA. 2018;24(9):1183–94. pmid:29930024
- 108. Hou T, Wang J, Li Y, Wang W. Assessing the performance of the MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 1. The accuracy of binding free energy calculations based on molecular dynamics simulations. J Chem Inf Model. 2011;51(1):69–82. pmid:21117705
- 109. Sun H, Li Y, Tian S, Xu L, Hou T. Assessing the performance of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods. 4. Accuracies of MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methodologies evaluated by various simulation protocols using PDBbind data set. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2014;16(31):16719–29. pmid:24999761
- 110. Grote A, Hiller K, Scheer M, Münch R, Nörtemann B, Hempel DC, et al. JCat: a novel tool to adapt codon usage of a target gene to its potential expression host. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(Web Server issue):W526-31. pmid:15980527
- 111. Mahdeen AA, Hossain I, Masum MHU, Islam S, Rabbi TMF. Designing novel multiepitope mRNA vaccine targeting Hendra virus (HeV): An integrative approach utilizing immunoinformatics, reverse vaccinology, and molecular dynamics simulation. PLoS One. 2024;19(10):e0312239. pmid:39441880
- 112. Rapin N, Lund O, Castiglione F. Immune system simulation online. Bioinformatics. 2011;27(14):2013–4. pmid:21685045
- 113. Rapin N, Lund O, Bernaschi M, Castiglione F. Computational immunology meets bioinformatics: the use of prediction tools for molecular binding in the simulation of the immune system. PLoS One. 2010;5(4):e9862. pmid:20419125
- 114. Ud-Din M, Albutti A, Ullah A, Ismail S, Ahmad S, Naz A, et al. Vaccinomics to Design a Multi-Epitopes Vaccine for Acinetobacter baumannii. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(9):5568. pmid:35564967
- 115. Naveed M, Toheed M, Aziz T, Asim M, Qadir P, Rehman HM, et al. Rational computational design and development of an immunogenic multiepitope vaccine incorporating transmembrane proteins of Fusobacterium necrophorum. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):15587. pmid:40320394
- 116. Parvin R, Masum MHU, Heema HP, Akter A, Hossain MA, Siddiki AMAMZ. Designing of a multiepitope-based vaccine against echinococcosis utilizing the potent Ag5 antigen: Immunoinformatics and simulation approaches. PLoS One. 2025;20(2):e0310510. pmid:39937717
- 117. Gruber AR, Lorenz R, Bernhart SH, Neuböck R, Hofacker IL. The Vienna RNA websuite. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36(Web Server issue):W70–4. pmid:18424795
- 118. Plotkin SA. Vaccines: past, present and future. Nat Med. 2005;11(4 Suppl):S5-11. pmid:15812490
- 119. Adu-Bobie J, Capecchi B, Serruto D, Rappuoli R, Pizza M. Two years into reverse vaccinology. Vaccine. 2003;21(7–8):605–10. pmid:12531326
- 120. Fahey T. Cryptosporidiosis. Primary Care Update for OB/GYNS. 2003;10(2):75–80.
- 121. Snelling WJ, Xiao L, Ortega-Pierres G, Lowery CJ, Moore JE, Rao JR. Cryptosporidiosis in developing countries. Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2007;1(03):242–56.
- 122. Thomson S, Hamilton CA, Hope JC, Katzer F, Mabbott NA, Morrison LJ, et al. Bovine cryptosporidiosis: impact, host-parasite interaction and control strategies. Vet Res. 2017;48(1):42. pmid:28800747
- 123. Manque PA, Tenjo F, Woehlbier U, Lara AM, Serrano MG, Xu P, et al. Identification and immunological characterization of three potential vaccinogens against Cryptosporidium species. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2011;18(11):1796–802. pmid:21918117
- 124. Dhal AK, Pani A, Mahapatra RK, Yun S-I. An immunoinformatics approach for design and validation of multi-subunit vaccine against Cryptosporidium parvum. Immunobiology. 2019;224(6):747–57. pmid:31522782
- 125. Karimzadeh F, Heidari R, Lamooki FM, Soureshjani EH, Aziz S, Mirzaei SA. Design of a multi-epitope vaccine against intestinal parasites associated with colorectal cancer using immunoinformatics approaches. Sci Rep. 2025;16(1):1487. pmid:41360964
- 126. Sethi G, Lakra AK, Nirmal K, Hwang JH. In silico design of a multi-epitope vaccine against Cryptosporidium parvum using structural and immunoinformatics approaches. PLoS One. 2025;20(11):e0334754. pmid:41252394
- 127. Comber JD, Philip R. MHC class I antigen presentation and implications for developing a new generation of therapeutic vaccines. Ther Adv Vaccines. 2014;2(3):77–89. pmid:24790732
- 128. Blum JS, Wearsch PA, Cresswell P. Pathways of antigen processing. Annu Rev Immunol. 2013;31:443–73. pmid:23298205
- 129. Duffy EB, Drake JR, Harton JA. Evolving Insights for MHC Class II Antigen Processing and Presentation in Health and Disease. Curr Pharmacol Rep. 2017;3(5):213–20.
- 130. Roche PA, Furuta K. The ins and outs of MHC class II-mediated antigen processing and presentation. Nat Rev Immunol. 2015;15(4):203–16. pmid:25720354
- 131. Unanue ER, Turk V, Neefjes J. Variations in MHC Class II Antigen Processing and Presentation in Health and Disease. Annu Rev Immunol. 2016;34:265–97. pmid:26907214
- 132. Bibi S, Ullah I, Zhu B, Adnan M, Liaqat R, Kong W-B, et al. In silico analysis of epitope-based vaccine candidate against tuberculosis using reverse vaccinology. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1249. pmid:33441913
- 133. Patankar YR, Sutiwisesak R, Boyce S, Lai R, Lindestam Arlehamn CS, Sette A, et al. Limited recognition of Mycobacterium tuberculosis-infected macrophages by polyclonal CD4 and CD8 T cells from the lungs of infected mice. Mucosal Immunol. 2020;13(1):140–8. pmid:31636345
- 134. Russell SL, Lamprecht DA, Mandizvo T, Jones TT, Naidoo V, Addicott KW, et al. Compromised Metabolic Reprogramming Is an Early Indicator of CD8+ T Cell Dysfunction during Chronic Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection. Cell Rep. 2019;29(11):3564–3579.e5. pmid:31825836
- 135. El-Manzalawy Y, Dobbs D, Honavar V. Predicting linear B-cell epitopes using string kernels. J Mol Recognit. 2008;21(4):243–55. pmid:18496882
- 136. Krocova Z, Plzakova L, Pavkova I, Kubelkova K, Macela A, Ozanic M, et al. The role of B cells in an early immune response to Mycobacterium bovis. Microb Pathog. 2020;140:103937. pmid:31862393
- 137. Lu LL, Suscovich TJ, Fortune SM, Alter G. Beyond binding: antibody effector functions in infectious diseases. Nat Rev Immunol. 2018;18(1):46–61. pmid:29063907
- 138. Khatoon N, Pandey RK, Prajapati VK. Exploring Leishmania secretory proteins to design B and T cell multi-epitope subunit vaccine using immunoinformatics approach. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):8285. pmid:28811600
- 139. Meza B, Ascencio F, Sierra-Beltrán AP, Torres J, Angulo C. A novel design of a multi-antigenic, multistage and multi-epitope vaccine against Helicobacter pylori: An in silico approach. Infect Genet Evol. 2017;49:309–17. pmid:28185986
- 140. Bevacqua A, Bakshi S, Xia Y. Principal component analysis of alpha-helix deformations in transmembrane proteins. PLoS One. 2021;16(9):e0257318. pmid:34525125
- 141. Frauenfelder H, Sligar SG, Wolynes PG. The energy landscapes and motions of proteins. Science. 1991;254(5038):1598–603. pmid:1749933
- 142. Koshland DE. Application of a Theory of Enzyme Specificity to Protein Synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1958;44(2):98–104. pmid:16590179
- 143. Pandey A, Liu E, Graham J, Chen W, Keten S. B-factor prediction in proteins using a sequence-based deep learning model. Patterns (N Y). 2023;4(9):100805. pmid:37720331