Abstract
Amyloid fibril forming regions in protein sequences are associated with a number of diseases. Experimental evidences compel in favor of the hypothesis that short motif regions are responsible for its amyloidogenic behavior. Thus, identifying these short peptides is critical in understanding the cause of diseases associated with aggregation of proteins and developing sequencetargeted anti-aggregation drugs. Owing to the constraints of wet lab molecular techniques for the identification of amyloid fibril forming targets, computational methods are implemented to offer better and affordable in silico predictions. The present study takes into consideration an assessment and perspective of the recent tools available for predicting a peptide status: amyloidogenic or non-amyloidogenic. To the best of our knowledge, the existing review articles on amyloidogenic prediction tools have not touched upon their effectiveness in terms of true positive rates or false positive rates. In this work, we compare few tools such as Aggrescan, Amylpred and FoldAmyloid to evaluate the performance of their predictability based on the experimentally proved data in terms of specificity, sensitivity, Matthews Correlation Coefficient and Balanced accuracy. As evident from the results, a significant reduction of sensitivity associated with a gain in specificity is noted in all the tools considered under the present study.