Table 1.
Prediction of CTL epitopes from antigens by two different servers
| Antigen | Servers | Start position | Sequence | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEA | Score (ANN/SVM) | |||
| CTLpred | 216 | ETQNPVSAR | 1.000 | |
| 605 | YLSGANLNL | 1.000 | ||
| 87 | QQATPGPAY | 0.990 | ||
| Best joint Z-value in the region | ||||
| PAComplex | 554 | RTLTLFNV | 4.96 | |
| 376 | RTLTLLSV | 4.4 | ||
| MTDH | Score (ANN/SVM) | |||
| CTLpred | 1122 | NQYKTEAAS | 1.000 | |
| 45 | VPSSTEKNA | 0.990 | ||
| 126 | PAPGSTAPP | 0.990 | ||
| Best joint Z-value in the region | ||||
| PAComplex | 1050 | SNLQFNSS | 4.64 | |
| MUC-1 | Score (ANN/SVM) | |||
| CTLpred | 1122 | NQYKTEAAS | 1.000 | |
| 45 | VPSSTEKNA | 0.990 | ||
| 126 | PAPGSTAPP | 0.990 | ||
| Best joint Z-value in the region | ||||
| PAComplex | 1050 | SNLQFNSS | 4.64 | |
| 1207 | SEYPTYHT | 4.17 | ||
| 1119 | TQFNQYKT | 4.01 |