SRP268462 10-07 Review
SRP268462 (GSE153056) · THP-1 CITE-seq + CRISPR screen (ECCITE-seq: RNA, surface protein and guide per cell; Papalexi et al. 2021) · 10x single-cell · P2G runs of 7 Oct 2026 · built 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

21 of 30 contrast × method slots have a scored model (held out: replicate rep3); best held-out AUC 0.926 (PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 all k-mer); best regression Spearman ρ 0.743 (PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)); the combined hash + new screen 1 model beats the hash model in 5 of 5 contrasts

Last updated 2026-10-22 16:00 PST

Results of the 7 Oct 2026 P2G runs for SRP268462 (THP-1 ECCITE-seq: a CITE-seq study, so each cell has RNA, surface-protein tags and its CRISPR guide), read sequence by sequence. Julia's page for the earlier run (tvuiwg) stays separate. 5 contrasts, each with up to six models (hash all k-mer, hash SPLASH, new screen 1 all k-mer, new screen 1 SPLASH, combined, combined dict), 21 models in all. Every dropdown switches between them. For every selected sequence the page shows where it sits on its gene, whether it matches the genome, which base differs, how other isoforms read it, and what a local BLAST search found for the ones that do not align cleanly.

1 · Runs · all models updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

21 models over 5 contrasts, scored on held-out replicate rep3

Dataset: SRP268462 / GEO GSE153056 · CITE-seq (ECCITE-seq) of THP-1 cells, one acute monocytic leukemia cell line, not patient tumour · curated per-cell guide labels and per-cell surface-protein (ADT) counts · 8 SRA runs · 20,729 cells in the metadata · 3 replicates. Counted over: every contrast × method with an output under the S3 prefixes sent for this page. Each contrast keeps only the cells of its classes. The model is trained on replicates rep1 and rep2 and scored on rep3.

Each row is one model. hash is the P2G stage 3 model; new screen 1 ranks targets by presence ratio between the classes; combined fits one lasso on the union of both candidate sets; combined dict averages an all-k-mer model and a SPLASH model. Binary contrasts report held-out AUC; regressions report Spearman ρ (rank agreement of predicted and measured values), Pearson r (straight-line agreement, the measure most RNA→protein papers use) and R² (share of the variance explained compared with predicting the mean); the table under the runs lists all three.

Regression models: Spearman ρ, Pearson r and R² on held-out rep3 cells (5,516)

contrastmodelSpearman ρPearson rR²
PD-L1 protein levelcombined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)0.7430.7440.548
PD-L1 protein levelnew screen 1 all k-mer0.7410.7440.547
PD-L1 protein levelhash all k-mer0.6830.694†0.472
PD-L1 protein levelcombined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH)0.6310.6450.408
PD-L1 protein levelnew screen 1 SPLASH0.3500.4140.139
PD-L1 protein levelhash SPLASHno signal

Pearson r is shown beside Spearman ρ because most RNA→protein papers report Pearson. Both come from the engine’s own metric files on the same held-out cells; the hash all k-mer run saved only Spearman ρ and R², so its Pearson (†) was recomputed afterwards from the final model’s saved coefficients on the same test cells; that rebuild reproduces the engine’s own Spearman to 4–6 decimals. R² below 0 means the model predicts worse than the training average.

1b · Published study updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Papalexi et al. 2021 reports no classifier result, so no published value sits beside P2G's

Goal of the study. Papalexi et al. set out "to explore the molecular networks that regulate PD-L1 expression". THP-1 monocytic leukemia cells were stimulated with IFN-γ and given a pooled CRISPR screen against candidate regulators. Each cell was read by ECCITE-seq for RNA, surface protein (including PD-L1) and guide identity, about 20,700 cells over three transduction replicates. The authors also introduced mixscape, which separates cells where the knockout worked from escapers. The question was which knockouts move PD-L1, not how well RNA predicts PD-L1. Main results: the IFN-γ pathway (IFNGR1/2, JAK2, STAT1, IRF1) is needed for PD-L1 induction. The KEAP1/NRF2 axis regulates PD-L1 upregulation, and CUL3, BRD4 and MYC are negative regulators. Some of this regulation is post-transcriptional, with protein changing without matching mRNA change.
studywhat it measuredAUC / accuracy reported
Papalexi et al. 2021, Nature Genetics · PMID 33649593ECCITE-seq CRISPR screen of PD-L1 regulators in THP-1 cells: guide identity, cDNA and surface protein (including PD-L1) per cell; mixscape KO / NP callsnone: the paper reports no AUC, sensitivity or specificity for predicting guide identity or PD-L1 state
Papalexi et al. 2021 · PD-L1 protein level from RNA (regression)whether the authors predicted the PD-L1 antibody-tag (CITE-seq) value from each cell's RNA, or reported how well CD274 mRNA tracks PD-L1 proteinnone: no regression, R², Pearson or Spearman for PD-L1 protein from RNA. They read PD-L1 protein only as the outcome of each knockout: 5 positive and 3 negative regulators; named in the text are the IFN-γ pathway (IFNGR1, IFNGR2, JAK2, STAT1, IRF1 knockouts lower PD-L1) and NRF2/NFE2L2 on the positive side, CUL3, BRD4 and MYC on the negative side, plus KEAP1 (negative) in the validation screen. CITE-seq PD-L1 and flow cytometry are called "highly concordant" with no coefficient. P2G's best regression, Spearman ρ 0.743 (R² 0.55) on held-out rep3 cells (combined, all k-mer), therefore has no published value to compare against.

PD-L1 protein level from RNA: R², Spearman ρ and Pearson r on held-out rep3 cells (5,516)

sourcemodelR²Spearman ρPearson r
Papalexi et al. 2021none fitnot reportednot reportednot reported
P2Gcombined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)0.5480.7430.744
P2Gnew screen 1 all k-mer0.5470.7410.744
P2Ghash all k-mer0.4720.6830.694†
P2Gcombined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH)0.4080.6310.645
P2Gnew screen 1 SPLASH0.1390.3510.414
RNA baseline (ours, same test cells)elastic net on the 2,000 most variable genes0.5810.7780.766
RNA baseline (ours, same test cells)CD274 mRNA alone0.1230.3960.380
baselinepredict the training mean−0.02——

The authors give no R² or correlation for PD-L1 protein vs RNA, so P2G's R² 0.55 has no published counterpart. The nearest reference points are our own RNA baselines from the study index. A gene-count elastic net reaches ρ 0.778, a little above P2G's 0.743. CD274 mRNA alone reaches only ρ 0.396, so most of the PD-L1 protein signal comes from the IFN-γ-response state rather than from the PD-L1 transcript. That fits the authors' finding of post-transcriptional regulation. Checked against the full text (PMC8011839) on 2026-10-09.

1c · Classes used · all models updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Two kinds of label, neither a cell type: CRISPR guide identity (the KO contrasts) and one protein measurement, PD-L1 (the PD-L1 contrasts); every cell is a THP-1 monocytic cell

Counted over: the cells of each contrast, joined to the exact train and test cell IDs in each run's run_split.rds. A "KO" cell carries a guide against that gene whether or not the knockout worked: the authors' mixscape KO calls are not deposited, so escaping cells stay in the KO class. The PD-L1 contrasts use the PD-L1 antibody tag of each cell: the state contrast compares the top third with the bottom third, and the level contrast predicts the value itself.

2 · Stage 1 · hash models, all anchors updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Stage 1, all anchors: 17 to 212 of about 64,000 anchors pass |r| > 0.2

Counted over: every anchor in each hash run's stage1_pearson_all.tsv.gz, before any selection. Passes per contrast: IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT 17 · STAT1 KO vs NT 37 · IRF1 KO vs NT 18 · PD-L1 protein high vs low 212 · PD-L1 protein level (regression) 196. r is computed on read count × f, so its sign follows f; the page shows |r|. An anchor's gene is the gene of its top target in stage2_cv_pass.tsv.gz.

2b · New screen 1 · all scored targets updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

New screen 1 keeps targets present in enough cells, ranks them by presence ratio, and picks the cut K by training cross-validation

Counted over: every anchor-target pair in each contrast's new screen 1 run, read from its run.log. Exclusive targets are present in one class only; graded targets are present in both and ranked.

3 · Selected sequences · all models updated 2026-10-22 16:00 PST

Selected sequences: 10,646 of 17,399 selected rows (summed over the 21 models) match the genome exactly

Counted over: the sequences each model selected (non-zero weight): 17,399 across the 21 models, out of 24,079 rows in their tables. 3,235 of them have no target recorded.

One bar per model, over its selected sequences: how each one matches the genome.

The HLA share on each bar counts sequences by the gene drawn on the genome. Section 6c lists the HLA and Fc-gamma sequences of every model with their known variants; it also counts HLA sequences found only by BLAST and reads the gene from the aligner, so its shares can differ.

Selected sequences by mismatch count (0 / 1 / 2+), with soft-clipped, unplaced and no-target kept separate

Counted over: the selected sequences by default; switch to all rows. Mismatches are the edit distance from the aligner that gave the position.

Spliced selected sequences: reference junction, annotated alternative, or not annotated

Counted over: selected sequences that STAR splits (star_junction filled). Each junction is looked up among the introns of every GENCODE v46 comprehensive transcript.

The genes that carry the most weight toward each class, summed over the selected sequences on them.

3e · Selected genes vs gene expression · GEO processed counts updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Selected genes vs expression: how much of each model's weight sits on highly expressed genes

Counted over: the genes the selected sequences are drawn on, per model, weighted by summed |weight|. Expression: GSM4633614_ECCITE_cDNA_counts.tsv.gz (GEO GSE153056), normalised to counts per 10,000 per cell.

IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · hash all k-mer: 50 of 57 selected genes in the matrix, 87% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 207 of 256 selected genes in the matrix, 84% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 191 of 239 selected genes in the matrix, 83% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
STAT1 KO vs NT · hash all k-mer: 68 of 77 selected genes in the matrix, 86% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
STAT1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 176 of 219 selected genes in the matrix, 80% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
STAT1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 SPLASH: 0 of 0 selected genes in the matrix, 0% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 113 of 141 selected genes in the matrix, 82% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 176 of 219 selected genes in the matrix, 80% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
IRF1 KO vs NT · hash all k-mer: 30 of 37 selected genes in the matrix, 79% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
IRF1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 189 of 231 selected genes in the matrix, 81% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
IRF1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 155 of 191 selected genes in the matrix, 79% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein high vs low · hash all k-mer: 291 of 346 selected genes in the matrix, 72% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 all k-mer: 343 of 443 selected genes in the matrix, 78% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 SPLASH: 0 of 0 selected genes in the matrix, 0% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 397 of 492 selected genes in the matrix, 77% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 343 of 443 selected genes in the matrix, 78% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · hash all k-mer: 350 of 420 selected genes in the matrix, 76% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · new screen 1 all k-mer: 274 of 357 selected genes in the matrix, 80% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · new screen 1 SPLASH: 0 of 0 selected genes in the matrix, 0% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 384 of 490 selected genes in the matrix, 77% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 274 of 357 selected genes in the matrix, 80% of the weight on the top 10% most-expressed genes
3f · Literature review · 15 heaviest named genes per model updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Literature: what PubMed says about each heavy gene with IFN-γ signalling and PD-L1 / checkpoint

Counted over: the 15 heaviest named genes of each model. PubMed title/abstract searches: gene + IFN-γ signalling, gene + PD-L1 / checkpoint, and gene + both (a paper that names the gene and both topics).

3g · Alternative splicing, mismatches and BLAST-only features · selected sequences, 1% rule updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

120 alternative-splicing, 904 mismatch (1 or more) and 516 BLAST-only features (5 of them imperfect) among the selected sequences of the 21 models

Counted over: the selected sequences (non-zero weight) of every model, after the 1% rule: a sequence present in fewer than 1% of training cells is left out (98 selected sequences, almost all from hash models; new screen 1 already requires at least 5%). (a) crosses a STAR junction that is not in the reference transcript; compatible transcripts have that exact intron, incompatible ones span it but splice differently or keep it. (a) also counts a soft-clipped sequence that is full length only on alternative isoforms. (b) edit distance of 1 or more from the aligner that placed it, on a full-length placement (split into 1 and 2 or more); soft-clipped and unplaced sequences have no comparable edit distance and are left out of (b). (a) or (b) is counted once per sequence, with the overlap shown, over the selected sequences and over all stage 3 rows. This follows section 3h of the GSE123813 instructions (Julia, 2026-10-08). (c) placed by neither aligner, but hit by local BLAST (GENCODE, genome, IPD-IMGT/HLA) or NCBI core_nt; perfect = 100% coverage and 100% identity. A sequence can be in more than one group. The same features for every study are collected on the running feature ledger.

4 · Gene track · all models updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Each selected sequence drawn on its gene, marked by how it matches the genome and how other isoforms read it

Drawn: the selected sequences with a genome position. Listed in the table under the track: every row on that gene, selected or not.

Choose a model, then a gene. Genes are listed by the total weight of their selected sequences. Click a mark or a table row for its card.

Loading the model…

5 · Selected sequences without a clean placement updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

2,282 selected sequences (summed over the 21 models) did not align confidently and were BLASTed locally

Counted over: selected sequences of the chosen model (section 4's model menu). The pool is every sequence without a confident full-length alignment with at most 1 mismatch; sequences with no target recorded are counted but cannot be searched.

Every sequence with 2+ mismatches or soft-clipping, BLASTed against mRNAs, the whole genome and HLA alleles

Counted over: every row with 2 or more mismatches (full length) or any soft-clipping, selected or not. Coverage = aligned bases ÷ sequence length; imperfect values are amber.

5c · Selected sequences never BLASTed, and the ones at a known SNP or with a base change

Counted over: the selected sequences of the model chosen in section 4.

6 · Known variants · selected sequences of the chosen model updated 2026-10-22 16:00 PST

Selected sequences at a known dbSNP site, a ClinVar or COSMIC record, or with a base change called by P2G

Counted over: the selected sequences of the model chosen in section 4 (heaviest 60). Known variants in HLA and Fc-gamma genes, for every model, are in section 6c.

6b · IFN-γ census and guide check · all models updated 2026-10-22 16:00 PST

Do the selected sequences fall on the knocked-out genes, on PD-L1, or on interferon-response genes?

Counted over: the selected sequences of every model, by summed |weight|. Groups: the contrast's knocked-out genes, CD274 and PDCD1LG2, MSigDB HALLMARK_INTERFERON_GAMMA_RESPONSE (M5913) and HALLMARK_INTERFERON_ALPHA_RESPONSE (M5911). The lookup counts every row, selected or not. The guide check compares every row of every model with the authors' guide spacers (49 matches in all). HLA and Fc-gamma genes, which differ between people, are counted per model in section 6c.

IFNGR1, IFNGR2, JAK1, JAK2, STAT1, IRF1, CD274, PDCD1LG2 in every model

Sequences that share a 15-base stretch with a guide spacer

6c · Immune genes that vary between people · all models updated 2026-10-22 16:00 PST

Immune genes that vary between people: how much of each model’s score is in HLA and Fc-gamma genes?

Why this matters: a model can learn which person a cell came from instead of which condition it is in, and HLA is the most variable region of the human genome. All cells here come from one cell line (THP-1), that is from one person, so weight on these genes cannot come from differences between people. HLA genes are switched on by interferon gamma, the pathway these knockouts disrupt, so here they can be real signal.

3 of 21 models are flagged: HLA and Fc-gamma genes make up 5% or more of their score.

modelHLA sequencesFc-gamma sequencesshare of the scoregenes (share of the score)higher inknown dbSNP variantsCOSMIC mutations
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · hash all k-mer4none3.6%HLA-DRA 2.2% · HLA-DRB5 1.4%100% of it higher in non-targeting (NT) cellsnone foundnone found
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer1941.6%HLA-DRA 0.7% · HLA-B 0.3% · FCGR1A 0.2% · HLA-A 0.2% · FCER1G 0.1% and 2 more68% of it higher in non-targeting (NT) cellsnone foundnone found
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)2533.5%HLA-DRA 1.1% · HLA-B 0.5% · HLA-DRB5 0.5% · HLA-A 0.4% · FCGR1A 0.3% and 4 more50% of it higher in IFN-γ pathway KO cellsnone foundnone found
STAT1 KO vs NT · hash all k-mer528.4% 5% or moreFCGR1A 4.3% · HLA-DMA 2.3% · HLA-DRB1 0.9% · HLA-DRB5 0.5% · HLA-E 0.4%68% of it higher in non-targeting (NT) cellsnone foundnone found
STAT1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer1641.9%HLA-DRA 0.9% · HLA-DRB1 0.3% · HLA-E 0.3% · FCGR1A 0.2% · HLA-DPA1 0.2% and 2 more53% of it higher in STAT1 KO cells2 sequences: rs775308685 HLA-DRB1; rs1050556 HLA-A1: COSV69520534 HLA-A
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)3none0.8%HLA-DRB1 0.7% · HLA-DRA 0.1%100% of it higher in non-targeting (NT) cellsnone foundnone found
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH)1641.9%HLA-DRA 0.9% · HLA-DRB1 0.3% · HLA-E 0.3% · FCGR1A 0.2% · HLA-DPA1 0.2% and 2 more53% of it higher in STAT1 KO cells2 sequences: rs775308685 HLA-DRB1; rs1050556 HLA-A1: COSV69520534 HLA-A
IRF1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer39124.1%HLA-DRA 1.2% · FCGR1A 0.9% · HLA-A 0.6% · HLA-C 0.5% · HLA-DRB1 0.3% and 6 more71% of it higher in IRF1 KO cellsnone foundnone found
IRF1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)1653.2%HLA-A 1.0% · FCGR1A 1.0% · HLA-DRA 0.4% · HLA-B 0.3% · HLA-DRB1 0.3% and 3 more66% of it higher in IRF1 KO cellsnone foundnone found
PD-L1 protein high vs low · hash all k-mer3235.3% 5% or moreHLA-K 2.1% · HLA-B 0.5% · FCER1G 0.5% · HLA-DRA 0.4% · HLA-DRB5 0.3% and 8 more57% of it higher in PD-L1 high cells5 sequences: rs41543814 HLA-B; rs1136683 HLA-A2: COSV66110668 HLA-B, COSV65138671 HLA-A
PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 all k-mer47142.9%HLA-B 0.8% · HLA-DRA 0.7% · FCER1G 0.7% · HLA-DRB5 0.2% · HLA-DRB1 0.1% and 9 more75% of it higher in PD-L1 high cells6 sequences: rs1140313 HLA-DPB1; rs1059350 HLA-DPB1; rs1059575 HLA-DRB16: COSV66569317 HLA-DPB1, COSV66612975 HLA-DPB1
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)49123.4%HLA-K 0.7% · HLA-DRA 0.7% · HLA-B 0.6% · FCER1G 0.5% · HLA-DRB1 0.2% and 10 more64% of it higher in PD-L1 high cells4 sequences: rs1131204 HLA-H (ClinVar: benign); rs1140313 HLA-DPB1; rs1136683 HLA-A3: COSV69520472 HLA-H, COSV66569317 HLA-DPB1
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH)47142.5%HLA-B 0.6% · HLA-DRA 0.6% · FCER1G 0.6% · HLA-DRB5 0.1% · HLA-DRB1 0.1% and 9 more75% of it higher in PD-L1 high cells6 sequences: rs1140313 HLA-DPB1; rs1059350 HLA-DPB1; rs1059575 HLA-DRB16: COSV66569317 HLA-DPB1, COSV66612975 HLA-DPB1
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · hash all k-mer2694.1%HLA-K 1.2% · FCER1G 0.9% · HLA-TAP1 0.5% · HLA-A 0.3% · HLA-B 0.3% and 8 more65% of it goes with higher PD-L13 sequences: rs1136683 HLA-A; rs41543814 HLA-B2: COSV65138671 HLA-A, COSV66110668 HLA-B
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · new screen 1 all k-mer43122.6%FCER1G 0.8% · HLA-B 0.6% · HLA-DRA 0.6% · HLA-A 0.3% · HLA-DRB5 0.1% and 7 more76% of it goes with higher PD-L1none foundnone found
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer)50125.7% 5% or moreHLA-K 2.1% · FCER1G 1.0% · HLA-B 1.0% · HLA-DRA 0.5% · HLA-C 0.2% and 9 more54% of it goes with lower PD-L12 sequences: rs1131204 HLA-H (ClinVar: benign); rs1059575 HLA-DRB1; rs1059572 HLA-DRB1 (ClinVar: benign)3: COSV69520472 HLA-H, COSV63513003 HLA-DRB1
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH)43122.0%FCER1G 0.6% · HLA-B 0.5% · HLA-DRA 0.4% · HLA-A 0.2% · HLA-DRB5 0.1% and 7 more76% of it goes with higher PD-L1none foundnone found

4 models select no sequence in these genes: STAT1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 SPLASH; IRF1 KO vs NT · hash all k-mer; PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 SPLASH; PD-L1 protein level (regression) · new screen 1 SPLASH.

The selected sequences in these genes, model by model

Click a model to open its sequences. 17 models have at least one.

Sequences per model (17 models, up to 10 sequences each)
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · hash all k-mer: 4 sequences in these genes make up 3.6% of the score
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
IFN-γ pathway KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1TCTTTGCCATATCCACATGGAAAATCTCATCACCATCAAHLA-DRAaligner1.8%non-targeting (NT) cells16.2% vs 44.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
2GCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGTACTCCCCCACGTHLA-DRB5aligner0.8%non-targeting (NT) cells14.9% vs 37.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3CAGGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGTACTCCCCCAHLA-DRB5aligner0.6%non-targeting (NT) cells12.8% vs 32.4%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4ATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATHLA-DRAaligner0.5%non-targeting (NT) cells12.1% vs 32.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 23 sequences in these genes make up 1.6% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
IFN-γ pathway KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CTTCTTTGCCATATCCACATGGAAAATCTCATCACCATCHLA-DRAaligner0.3%non-targeting (NT) cells16.5% vs 45.8%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
2TCTCTGGCACCTGTATTCACCACTGTCATTGACACTGGCFCGR1Aaligner0.2%IFN-γ pathway KO cells10.5% vs 16.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3GAGCGCTTTGTCATGATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%IFN-γ pathway KO cells4.9% vs 11.8%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4GATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCAAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells5.2% vs 15.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGCTCTATCCATGGCGCHLA-Baligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells9.3% vs 16.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
6AAATTCTTCAAGCCGCCAGACCGTCTCCTTCTTTGCCATHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells9.4% vs 29.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7GTTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGHLA-DRAaligner0.1%IFN-γ pathway KO cells6.3% vs 15.3%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
8CAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGCTCTATCCATGGCGCCCGGHLA-Baligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells10.6% vs 17.5%no base change callednoneC*06:348, C*01:73, B*78:10
9GTGAGTGGGCCTTCACTTTCCGTGTCTCCCCGTCCCAATHLA-ABLAST (HLA allele)0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells12.2% vs 23.6%not placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneA*74:21, A*74:04, A*33:08
10GATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGHLA-Baligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells6.5% vs 15.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
IFN-γ pathway KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 28 sequences in these genes make up 3.5% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
IFN-γ pathway KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CTCCGTCCCGTTGAAGAAATGACACTCATACTTATCCTGHLA-DRB5aligner0.4%IFN-γ pathway KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
2CTTTGCCATATCCACATGGAAAATCTCATCACCATCAAAHLA-DRAaligner0.4%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3TCTCTGGCACCTGTATTCACCACTGTCATTGACACTGGCFCGR1Aaligner0.3%IFN-γ pathway KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
4CCACCGCGGCCCGCCTCTGCTCCAGGAGGTCCTTCTGGCHLA-DRB5 or HLA-DRB1BLAST (HLA allele)0.3%IFN-γ pathway KO cellsnot in this filenot placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneDRB5*02:05, DRB1*15:66:02, DRB1*15:66:01
5GATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGHLA-Baligner0.3%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6CATCACCATCAAAGTCAAACATAAACTCGCCTGATTGGTHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7ATACTCCGGACCCTCCTGCTCTATCCACGGCGCCCGCGGHLA-Baligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
8CACTCGGTGAGTCTGTGAGTGGGCCTTCACTTTCCGTGTHLA-ABLAST (HLA allele)0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this filenot placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneA*74:21, A*29:48, A*26:92
9GTTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGHLA-DRAaligner0.1%IFN-γ pathway KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GGCGCCCGCGGCTCCATCCTCTGGCTCGCGGCGTCGCTGHLA-Aaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
STAT1 KO vs NT · hash all k-mer: 7 sequences in these genes make up 8.4% of the score
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
STAT1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1TCACAGTGCAAGGTTACGGTTTCCTCTTGGAACACGCTGFCGR1Aaligner2.6%non-targeting (NT) cells0.9% vs 8.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
2CACTGGGACTCCCATCCTGGCAGTACACTGTGTGCAGGAHLA-DMAaligner2.3%STAT1 KO cells1.9% vs 5.5%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3ACCACTGTGTAGAGCTGCTCCCAGGCAGATGGAGCACCTFCGR1Aaligner1.7%non-targeting (NT) cells2.2% vs 8.7%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4GCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGAACTCCCCCACGTCGCHLA-DRB1aligner0.9%non-targeting (NT) cells5.9% vs 21.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGTACTCCCCCACGTCGCHLA-DRB5aligner0.5%non-targeting (NT) cells9.9% vs 38.3%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
6CCTGCTCCATCCACGGCGCCCGCGGCACCATCCTCGGACHLA-Ealigner0.4%STAT1 KO cells8.1% vs 17.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7CAGGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGTACTCCCCCAHLA-DRB5alignerunder 0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells9.0% vs 32.4%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
STAT1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 20 sequences in these genes make up 1.9% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
STAT1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GGAGCGCTTTGTCATGATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACHLA-DRAaligner0.4%STAT1 KO cells4.3% vs 11.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
2AAGAAATGACACTCCCTCTTAGGCTGCCACAGGAAACGTHLA-DRB1aligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cells0.6% vs 12.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3AAATTCTTCAAGCCGCCAGACCGTCTCCTTCTTTGCCATHLA-DRAaligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cells6.2% vs 29.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TCCCCTGTTGGTCTATGCGTCTGTACAAACGCGGCATAAHLA-DPA1aligner0.2%STAT1 KO cells4.3% vs 9.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5ACCGCGGCCCGCCTCTGCTCCAGGAGGTCCTTCTGGCTGHLA-DRB5 or HLA-DRB1BLAST (HLA allele)0.1%STAT1 KO cells4.3% vs 9.7%not placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneDRB5*02:05, DRB1*15:66:02, DRB1*15:66:01
6TTGGTTTTCAGAATGGTGAGGTTAGAATTCCAGTGGAAAFCGR1Aaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells1.6% vs 14.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7CCCTCCTGCTCCATCCACGGCGCCCGCGGCACCATCCTCHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cells6.8% vs 17.5%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
8CGGCACCATCCTCGGACTCGCGGCGTCGTTGTCGAAGCGHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cells5.9% vs 13.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
9CACGGCGCCCGCGGCACCATCCTCGGACTCGCGGCGTCGHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cells7.4% vs 16.4%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GTTTTCAGAATGGTGAGGTTAGAATTCCAGTGGAAAAACFCGR1Aaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cells1.6% vs 14.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 3 sequences in these genes make up 0.8% of the score
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
STAT1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1AAGAAATGACACTCCCTCTTAGGCTGCCACAGGAAACGTHLA-DRB1aligner0.7%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
2CACCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATCGTCCAAATTCTTHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3CTTTGCCATATCCACATGGAAAATCTCATCACCATCAAAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
STAT1 KO vs NT · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 20 sequences in these genes make up 1.9% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
STAT1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GGAGCGCTTTGTCATGATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACHLA-DRAaligner0.4%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
2AAGAAATGACACTCCCTCTTAGGCTGCCACAGGAAACGTHLA-DRB1aligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3AAATTCTTCAAGCCGCCAGACCGTCTCCTTCTTTGCCATHLA-DRAaligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TCCCCTGTTGGTCTATGCGTCTGTACAAACGCGGCATAAHLA-DPA1aligner0.2%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5ACCGCGGCCCGCCTCTGCTCCAGGAGGTCCTTCTGGCTGHLA-DRB5 or HLA-DRB1BLAST (HLA allele)0.1%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this filenot placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneDRB5*02:05, DRB1*15:66:02, DRB1*15:66:01
6TTGGTTTTCAGAATGGTGAGGTTAGAATTCCAGTGGAAAFCGR1Aaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7CCCTCCTGCTCCATCCACGGCGCCCGCGGCACCATCCTCHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
8CGGCACCATCCTCGGACTCGCGGCGTCGTTGTCGAAGCGHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9CACGGCGCCCGCGGCACCATCCTCGGACTCGCGGCGTCGHLA-Ealigner0.1%STAT1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GTTTTCAGAATGGTGAGGTTAGAATTCCAGTGGAAAAACFCGR1Aaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
IRF1 KO vs NT · new screen 1 all k-mer: 51 sequences in these genes make up 4.1% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
IRF1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGCCCGCGGCTCCATCCTCTGGCTCGCGGCGTCGCTGTCHLA-Aaligner0.3%IRF1 KO cells20.1% vs 25.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
2TCTCTGGCACCTGTATTCACCACTGTCATTGACACTGGCFCGR1Aaligner0.3%IRF1 KO cells24.7% vs 16.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3AATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGCTCCACCCACGGCGCCCGCGHLA-Caligner0.2%IRF1 KO cells12.3% vs 17.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4CCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATCGTCCAAATTCTTCAHLA-DRAaligner0.2%IRF1 KO cells19.0% vs 26.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5AAATTCTTCAAGCCGCCAGACCGTCTCCTTCTTTGCCATHLA-DRAaligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cells15.2% vs 29.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
6TGGGGGTCGAGGTCTGAGTGGCTGTGCCATTGAGAAACCFCGR1Aaligner0.2%IRF1 KO cells29.9% vs 21.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7GATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACATGTTCTTHLA-DRAaligner0.2%IRF1 KO cells15.5% vs 24.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
8TCTGTCCAGGAACCGCACCCGCTCCGTCCCATTGAAGAAHLA-DRB1aligner0.2%IRF1 KO cells11.7% vs 17.3%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
9CTCATCACCATCAAAGTCAAACATAAACTCGCCTGATTGHLA-DRAaligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cells15.3% vs 24.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGHLA-Baligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cells8.2% vs 15.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
IRF1 KO vs NT · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 21 sequences in these genes make up 3.2% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
IRF1 KO cells vs non-targeting (NT) cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGCCCGCGGCTCCATCCTCTGGCTCGCGGCGTCGCTGTCHLA-Aaligner0.6%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
2TGGGGGTCGAGGTCTGAGTGGCTGTGCCATTGAGAAACCFCGR1Aaligner0.4%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3CACTCGGTGAGTCTGTGAGTGGGCCTTCACTTTCCGTGTHLA-ABLAST (HLA allele)0.4%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this filenot placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneA*74:21, A*29:48, A*26:92
4GATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCTCCTGHLA-Baligner0.3%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5TCTCTGGCACCTGTATTCACCACTGTCATTGACACTGGCFCGR1Aaligner0.2%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6GCTCCCAGGCAGATGGAGCACCTCACAGTGCAAGGTTACFCGR1Aaligner0.2%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7TCTGTCCAGGAACCGCACCCGCTCCGTCCCATTGAAGAAHLA-DRB1aligner0.2%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
8AAATTCTTCAAGCCGCCAGACCGTCTCCTTCTTTGCCATHLA-DRAaligner0.2%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9AGAAACCACTGTGTAGAGCTGCTCCCAGGCAGATGGAGCFCGR1Aaligner0.1%IRF1 KO cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10TTTGCCATATCCACATGGAAAATCTCATCACCATCAAAGHLA-DRAaligner0.1%non-targeting (NT) cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein high vs low · hash all k-mer: 35 sequences in these genes make up 5.3% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
PD-L1 high cells vs PD-L1 low cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGAACTGCGTGTCGTCCACGTAGCCCACTGCGATGAAGTHLA-Kaligner2.1%PD-L1 low cells0.2% vs 0.2%no base change callednoneC*16:121, C*16:70, C*16:34
2GGCTGGAAGAACCAGAAGCCAAAGAAGAATATGACCGCAFCER1Galigner0.3%PD-L1 high cells70.7% vs 36.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3GTTCCAGTACTCGGCATCAGGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACHLA-DQB1aligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells6.3% vs 0.9%no base change callednoneDRB5*01:110, DRB5*01:01:10, DRB4*01:03:26
4CCCCACGTCGCTGTCGAAGCGCACGGACTCCTCCTGGTTHLA-DRB1aligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells13.5% vs 3.4%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5TTCCAGTACTCGGCATCAGGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCHLA-DPB1aligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells24.8% vs 5.7%no base change callednoneDRB5*01:110, DRB5*01:01:10, DRB4*01:03:26
6GTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATCGHLA-DRAaligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells40.4% vs 12.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7GTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGCAGGCTCACTCGGTCAGTCTGHLA-Baligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells6.5% vs 1.4%rs41543814COSV66110668 p.A97Tnot BLASTed
8TCTGGTTGTAGTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGCAGGCTCACTCHLA-Caligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells14.8% vs 3.8%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
9CTGTTCCTGAGCCCAGTCAGCAAATTCGGGCAGGCGAGGHLA-DMAaligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells4.2% vs 1.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACCGCCCGGTACTCCCCCACGHLA-DRB5aligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells45.6% vs 14.8%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein high vs low · new screen 1 all k-mer: 61 sequences in these genes make up 2.9% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
PD-L1 high cells vs PD-L1 low cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GAGAGACACATCAGAGCCCTGGGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCHLA-Baligner0.2%PD-L1 high cells10.7% vs 4.6%no base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
2AGGATGGCATCCAGGATATAGCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCFCER1Galigner0.2%PD-L1 high cells25.1% vs 12.6%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
3TGGTCAGGATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.2%PD-L1 low cells28.2% vs 15.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TTGTAGATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cells24.9% vs 8.7%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACATGTTCTTHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 low cells27.0% vs 14.2%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
6ATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 high cells42.7% vs 12.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
7TAGCTGGTTATAGCTGCCTTTCGCACTTGGATCTTCAGTFCER1Galigner0.1%PD-L1 high cells38.7% vs 16.3%no base change callednoneno exact match
8TAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACATGTTCTTCTTTGATAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 low cells17.0% vs 9.1%no base change callednoneDRA*01:20, DRA*01:19:01:02, DRA*01:19:01:01
9GGCCTCGCTCTGGTTGTAGTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGCAGHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cells40.3% vs 14.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCTGCTTGTTCAACFCER1Galigner0.1%PD-L1 high cells10.2% vs 4.3%no base change callednoneno exact match
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 61 sequences in these genes make up 3.4% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
PD-L1 high cells vs PD-L1 low cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGAACTGCGTGTCGTCCACGTAGCCCACTGCGATGAAGTHLA-Kaligner0.7%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneC*16:121, C*16:70, C*16:34
2GAGAGACACATCAGAGCCCTGGGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCHLA-Baligner0.3%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
3TGGTCAGGATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.2%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GAAATCCTGCATCTCGGTCCCTCACAAGACAGCTGTCTCHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6CTCTGGAGGTACATTGGTGATCGGAGTATAGTTGGAGCGHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneDRA*01:19:01:02, DRA*01:19:01:01, DRA*01:18
7CAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCTGCTTGTTCAACCFCER1Galigner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
8CCCACGTCGCTGTCGAAGCGCACGGACTCCTCTTGGTTAHLA-DRB1aligner0.1%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9ACCTCCTCACATTATGCTAACAGGGACGCAGACACATTCHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10TCGCTCTGGTTGTAGTAGCCGCGCAGGGTCCCCAGGTCCHLA-Aaligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein high vs low · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 61 sequences in these genes make up 2.5% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
PD-L1 high cells vs PD-L1 low cells
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GAGAGACACATCAGAGCCCTGGGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCHLA-Baligner0.2%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
2AGGATGGCATCCAGGATATAGCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCFCER1Galigner0.2%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3TGGTCAGGATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.2%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TTGTAGATCTGTGTGTTCCGGTCCCAATACTCCGGCCCCHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACATGTTCTTHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6ATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAGCCTCAAAGCTGGCAAATHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7TAGCTGGTTATAGCTGCCTTTCGCACTTGGATCTTCAGTFCER1Galigner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
8TAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACATGTTCTTCTTTGATAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%PD-L1 low cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneDRA*01:20, DRA*01:19:01:02, DRA*01:19:01:01
9GGCCTCGCTCTGGTTGTAGTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGCAGHLA-Baligner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10GCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCTGCTTGTTCAACFCER1Galigner0.1%PD-L1 high cellsnot in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · hash all k-mer: 35 sequences in these genes make up 4.1% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level) vs lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGAACTGCGTGTCGTCCACGTAGCCCACTGCGATGAAGTHLA-Kaligner1.2%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)0.3% vs 0.3%no base change callednoneC*16:121, C*16:70, C*16:34
2GCTTTCGTACAGGAGCTGCTCCACCTGTAACTGGCTGTTHLA-TAP1BLAST (HLA allele)0.5%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)1.7% vs 0.6%not placed on the genome, so no base change was callednoneTAP1*06:01, TAP1*05:01, TAP1*04:01
3GATCACAGCTCCAAAGAGAACCAGGCCAGCAATGATGCCHLA-Aaligner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)1.7% vs 0.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
4GGCTGGAAGAACCAGAAGCCAAAGAAGAATATGACCGCAFCER1Galigner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)65.0% vs 39.4%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
5TGTCGAAGCGCACGAACTGGGTGTCGTCCACGTAGCCCAHLA-Ealigner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)7.4% vs 4.9%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
6CCCGGCCTCGCTCTGGTTGTAGTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGHLA-Baligner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)15.5% vs 6.0%1 base change, no dbSNP matchnonenot BLASTed
7GTCTTTAACAGGGAGGAGGAACCACTGGTGTATATTAATFCER1Galigner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)9.0% vs 2.3%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
8GGGTAGGGCCAGCTGGTGTTAATGGCATGCAGGCATATGFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)36.4% vs 15.0%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
9GTTCCAGTACTCGGCATCAGGCCGCCCCAGCTCCGTCACHLA-DQB1aligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)5.4% vs 1.1%no base change callednoneDRB5*01:110, DRB5*01:01:10, DRB4*01:03:26
10GTAGCCGCGCAGGTTCCGCAGGCTCTCTCGGTAAGTCTGHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)18.2% vs 7.1%no base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · new screen 1 all k-mer: 55 sequences in these genes make up 2.6% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level) vs lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GAGAGACACATCAGAGCCCTGGGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCHLA-Baligner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
2GCGGCTCCATCCTCTGGCTCGCGGCGTCGCTGTCGAACCHLA-Aaligner0.2%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3TAGCTGGTTATAGCTGCCTTTCGCACTTGGATCTTCAGTFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
4ATGATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCHLA-DRAaligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GATGCCAACCATGAGGGCTGGAAGAACCAGAAGCCAAAGFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6TGGTCAGGATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7GGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCAGCCTGAGAGTAGCTCCCTCCHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
8GTTTCTCATGCTTCAGAGTCTCGTAAGTCTCCTGGTTCCFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9ATCCAGGATATAGCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10AGGGGTCACAGTGGACACAAGGGTGGGCTGTCTCTCCACHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined (hash + new screen 1, all k-mer): 62 sequences in these genes make up 5.7% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level) vs lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1CGAACTGCGTGTCGTCCACGTAGCCCACTGCGATGAAGTHLA-Kaligner2.1%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneC*16:121, C*16:70, C*16:34
2GAAATCCTGCATCTCGGTCCCTCACAAGACAGCTGTCTCHLA-Baligner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3GTTGGTCTATGCGTCTGTACAAACGCGGCATAAGTTGACHLA-DPA1aligner0.2%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
4TGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCAATGCACCTTGAGHLA-DRAaligner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5CATCCAGGATATAGCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGFCER1Galigner0.2%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6ACCTCCTCACATTATGCTAACAGGGACGCAGACACATTCHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7AGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCTGCTTGTTCAACCAAAFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
8GGAACCACTGGTGTATATTAATTTAGGACACAGGATCATFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9GATGCCAACCATGAGGGCTGGAAGAACCAGAAGCCAAAGFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10CCTCCTGCTCTATCCACGGCGCCCGCGGCTCCATCCTCTHLA-Aaligner0.1%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
PD-L1 protein level (regression) · combined dict (all k-mer + SPLASH): 55 sequences in these genes make up 2.0% of the score; the 10 with the largest share are shown
#sequence (anchor and target)genefound byshare of the scorehigher intraining cells that carry it
higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level) vs lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)
dbSNP (ClinVar)COSMICHLA alleles matched exactly
1GAGAGACACATCAGAGCCCTGGGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
2GCGGCTCCATCCTCTGGCTCGCGGCGTCGCTGTCGAACCHLA-Aaligner0.1%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
3TAGCTGGTTATAGCTGCCTTTCGCACTTGGATCTTCAGTFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneno exact match
4ATGATTTCCAGGTTGGCTTTGTCCACAGCTATGTTGGCCHLA-DRAaligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
5GATGCCAACCATGAGGGCTGGAAGAACCAGAAGCCAAAGFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
6TGGTCAGGATTCAGATAGAACTCGGCCTGGATGATCACAHLA-DRAaligner0.1%lower PD-L1 (lowers the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
7GGCACTGTCGCTGGACGCAGCCTGAGAGTAGCTCCCTCCHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednoneB*82:04, B*82:02:01:02, B*82:02:01:01
8GTTTCTCATGCTTCAGAGTCTCGTAAGTCTCCTGGTTCCFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
9ATCCAGGATATAGCAGAGCTGAGGCTCTCCCAGGGCCGCFCER1Galigner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
10AGGGGTCACAGTGGACACAAGGGTGGGCTGTCTCTCCACHLA-Baligner0.1%higher PD-L1 (raises the predicted level)not in this fileno base change callednonenot BLASTed
How this was counted (9 rules)
  • Genes: HLA-A, -B, -C, -E, -F, -G, the class II genes (DR, DQ, DP, DM, DO) and the other HLA loci. Antisense genes ending in -AS1 are left out.
  • Fc-gamma genes: FCGR1A, FCGR1B, FCGR2A, FCGR2B, FCGR2C, FCGR3A, FCGR3B and FCER1G.
  • A sequence counts when the aligner placed it in one of these genes. A sequence the aligner could not place counts when the local BLAST matched it full length to one of these mRNAs, or exactly to alleles of one HLA gene (IPD-IMGT/HLA). The found by column says which.
  • Share of the score: the sequence’s weight as a part of the model’s summed weight. The weight is the same as everywhere on this page: the coefficient times f for the hash method, and the coefficient for the other methods. A model is flagged when these genes make up 5% or more of its score.
  • Higher in: the group the sequence’s weight points to.
  • Known dbSNP variants: each base change against GRCh38 called by P2G was looked up in Ensembl VEP. It counts only when a dbSNP record has the same base. ClinVar comes from the same record.
  • COSMIC: P2G’s own match against COSMIC v104, from the run file. An ID that matches the position but not the base is not counted.
  • Training cells that carry it: the share of training cells in each group that contain the sequence, from the run file. Only the hash and new screen 1 lists record it.
  • HLA alleles matched exactly: the local BLAST against IPD-IMGT/HLA (section 5b). It was run only for sequences with 2 or more mismatches, soft-clipping or no placement; not BLASTed means the aligner placed the sequence cleanly.

Built with the shared tool immune_variants.py, run on this page’s own model tables. Section 6b and the bars in section 3 count HLA only by the gene drawn on the genome, so their HLA shares can differ from the ones here.

7 · Checks updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Checks run on this build (they inform, they never block)

Counted over: every model table read for this page.

Annotation coverage per model (rows with a value)

8 · Source files and method updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Every file this page was built from, with its S3 path

Read: the files below, the GEO expression matrix and guide barcodes, GENCODE v46, GRCh38.p13, IPD-IMGT/HLA 3.65.0, NCBI gene_info and MSigDB hallmark sets.

9 · All instructions updated 2026-10-08 16:32 PST

Every rule this page followed

Source

Built to match the GSE123813 sequence-review page (artifact 6ChpFqMvKXfBMEbrJT1LsV) and the page instructions in rosabiocom/rosa-skills (population-comparison-site, *_PAGE_INSTRUCTIONS.md). The original build scripts are not in the skill, so this page was rebuilt: Julia's page code (renderer, gene_track_annot.js, styles) is reused, and every data file is regenerated by the shared build in website-artifact/sites/study-build (build_rows.py, run_blast.sh, blast_classify.py, expr_stats.py, lit_fetch.py, build_page.py, assemble.py).

Models

One page per study, every contrast on it. Each contrast has up to six models, chosen in every dropdown: hash all k-mer and hash SPLASH (P2G stage 3, stage3_annotated_target.tsv.gz of each dictionary), new screen 1 all k-mer and new screen 1 SPLASH (presence-ratio final-selected tables), combined (Combined_selected_seq: hash + new screen 1 candidates in one lasso) and combined dict (all-k-mer + SPLASH dictionaries, equal-weight). A slot without an output is listed in section 1 with the reason.

Scores

Binary contrasts: held-out AUC (hash: roc_auc of test_evaluation.tsv at feature_level = anchor_target; the anchor-level AUC of summary_row.tsv is shown for reference). Regressions: Spearman ρ between predicted and measured values on held-out cells, and R², the share of the variance explained compared with predicting the mean.

Weight and direction

hash: lasso_coef × f; the other three: the model coefficient. Positive pushes toward the first class of the contrast, negative toward the second. For a regression, positive raises the predicted value and negative lowers it.

Rows

One aligner per sequence (minimap2 when it placed the sequence, otherwise bowtie2); CIGAR, edit distance and cs all from that aligner. A dotted or empty cell is "none". Gene = GENCODE v46 gene overlapping the drawn position, protein-coding before lncRNA before pseudogene, named before ENSG-only. Rows with no target sequence are "no target recorded" and never placed or searched. SPLASH features of the combined-dictionary model take their sequence from the SPLASH new screen 1 table when it has one.

Isoforms

GENCODE v46 comprehensive. The reference row is MANE Select, else Ensembl canonical. An isoform row is kept only when it reads a selected sequence differently (stopping short is not a different reading); identical readings are collapsed; at most 8 rows; every transcript is accounted for in the caption.

Junctions

STAR star_junction matched exactly to the introns of every GENCODE v46 transcript: reference, annotated alternative, or not annotated (new pairing, one new site, no annotated site).

BLAST

Local first: GENCODE v46 transcripts (blastn-short, dust off, E ≤ 1, ≥ 90% identity, up to 500 targets), GRCh38.p13 top level with alternate haplotypes and patches (word size 11, E ≤ 10, ≥ 95% identity) and IPD-IMGT/HLA 3.65.0. Pool = no confident full-length alignment with ≤ 1 mismatch. Rescue bar: ≥ 30 bases at ≥ 97% identity; transcripts first, then the genome (E ≤ 1e-4). A tie across genes is ambiguous; a genome locus is a position, never a gene. Every sequence no local search explains, and every 5b "no closer match" or "clipped bases unexplained" sequence, was then searched remotely in NCBI core_nt (megablast, word size 16, E ≤ 1e-3, up to 25 targets); the card shows the best hit, its organism and the tie count. Other pool sequences were not sent remotely; a sequence still unsearched would be marked "would need a remote search".

Expression

GEO GSM4633614_ECCITE_cDNA_counts.tsv.gz (GEO GSE153056), CP10K per cell. Each model's two groups are its own train + test cells from run_split.rds (a regression is split at the median of the response). Matrix columns are matched to P2G cells by barcode. Ranks are among genes expressed in the two groups together; a GENCODE name missing from the matrix is matched through NCBI synonyms.

Literature

PubMed title/abstract counts for gene + IFN-γ signalling, gene + PD-L1 / checkpoint, and both, for the 15 heaviest named genes of each model (symbol, full name, NCBI synonyms of 4+ characters with a digit or hyphen). Up to three papers per gene with the abstract sentence that names the gene, verbatim. Each linked paper has a one-line conclusion written from its title and abstract only, with a relevance tag (central, finding, gene list only, unrelated match, no abstract).

Gene census

Groups: the contrast's knocked-out genes, CD274 and PDCD1LG2, MSigDB HALLMARK_INTERFERON_GAMMA_RESPONSE (M5913) and HALLMARK_INTERFERON_ALPHA_RESPONSE (M5911). The lookup counts every row, selected or not.

Literature: splicing, mismatches and BLAST per gene

Requested 2026-10-08. For each of the 15 heaviest genes in the literature table (3f), two columns summarise that gene's selected sequences (non-zero weight) in the chosen model: alternative splicing (STAR junctions classed against GENCODE v46, plus sequences exonic only in non-reference isoforms and the mRNA-search junction verdict) and mismatches · BLAST (edit-distance strata 0 / 1 / 2+, soft-clipped and unplaced counts, the local BLAST verdicts, and NCBI core_nt hits). A sequence belongs to the gene when it lies in the gene's track, or its stage-3 gene_name, junction annotation or BLAST transcript hit names the gene.

Feature report (section 3g) and the running ledger

Requested 2026-10-08. Every rebuild runs feature_report.py on the selected sequences (non-zero weight) of every model and keeps the ones in three groups: (a) alternative splicing, a STAR junction not in the reference transcript, with the GENCODE v46 transcripts compatible with it (that exact intron) and incompatible (span it, splice differently or keep it); (b) 1 or more mismatches from the aligner that placed the sequence; (c) no aligner placement but a BLAST hit (local, then NCBI core_nt), perfect or imperfect. The 1% rule is applied: a sequence present in fewer than 1% of training cells is left out (hash rows: Train_prev weighted by class size; new screen 1 already requires 5%; combined rows take the share of the same sequence in the hash or new screen 1 table). build_ledger.py then collates every study into the running feature ledger with study, phenotype, label basis, model, gene, direction, target rank, coefficient, weight and share of cells.

Not done

Cell-type marker status is not computed: both classes are THP-1 cells, so it cannot separate them. LitVar2 variant papers were not run. Never downloaded raw reads.

Published study

Papalexi et al. 2021 (PMID 33649593, PMC8011839) reports no AUC, sensitivity or specificity for guide identity or PD-L1 state.