0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Surface patches induce nonspecific binding and phase separation of antibodies

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Significance

          The susceptibility of antibodies to bind unwanted off-targets is a key issue in the development of therapeutic antibodies. Although the mechanisms have yet to be resolved, such unwanted interactions are linked to aberrant assembly processes, which can impact storage and administration as well as the potency of antibodies. In our work, we quantify these nonspecific interactions to correlate them with the protein surface properties, and link nonspecific off-target interactions to the propensity of antibodies to undergo heteromolecular phase separation. We show that both phenomena are governed by the nature and size of surface patches and demonstrate that modulations in surface patches can vastly change nonspecific binding as well as macroscopic behavior as manifested by phase separation.

          Abstract

          Nonspecific interactions are a key challenge in the successful development of therapeutic antibodies. The tendency for nonspecific binding of antibodies is often difficult to reduce by rational design, and instead, it is necessary to rely on comprehensive screening campaigns. To address this issue, we performed a systematic analysis of the impact of surface patch properties on antibody nonspecificity using a designer antibody library as a model system and single-stranded DNA as a nonspecificity ligand. Using an in-solution microfluidic approach, we find that the antibodies tested bind to single-stranded DNA with affinities as high as K D = 1 µM. We show that DNA binding is driven primarily by a hydrophobic patch in the complementarity-determining regions. By quantifying the surface patches across the library, the nonspecific binding affinity is shown to correlate with a trade-off between the hydrophobic and total charged patch areas. Moreover, we show that a change in formulation conditions at low ionic strengths leads to DNA-induced antibody phase separation as a manifestation of nonspecific binding at low micromolar antibody concentrations. We highlight that phase separation is driven by a cooperative electrostatic network assembly mechanism of antibodies with DNA, which correlates with a balance between positive and negative charged patches. Importantly, our study demonstrates that both nonspecific binding and phase separation are controlled by the size of the surface patches. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of surface patches and their role in conferring antibody nonspecificity and its macroscopic manifestation in phase separation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references77

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

          Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody to the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) that blocks its binding to RANK, inhibiting the development and activity of osteoclasts, decreasing bone resorption, and increasing bone density. Given its unique actions, denosumab may be useful in the treatment of osteoporosis. We enrolled 7868 women between the ages of 60 and 90 years who had a bone mineral density T score of less than -2.5 but not less than -4.0 at the lumbar spine or total hip. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either 60 mg of denosumab or placebo subcutaneously every 6 months for 36 months. The primary end point was new vertebral fracture. Secondary end points included nonvertebral and hip fractures. As compared with placebo, denosumab reduced the risk of new radiographic vertebral fracture, with a cumulative incidence of 2.3% in the denosumab group, versus 7.2% in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.41; P<0.001)--a relative decrease of 68%. Denosumab reduced the risk of hip fracture, with a cumulative incidence of 0.7% in the denosumab group, versus 1.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.97; P=0.04)--a relative decrease of 40%. Denosumab also reduced the risk of nonvertebral fracture, with a cumulative incidence of 6.5% in the denosumab group, versus 8.0% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95; P=0.01)--a relative decrease of 20%. There was no increase in the risk of cancer, infection, cardiovascular disease, delayed fracture healing, or hypocalcemia, and there were no cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw and no adverse reactions to the injection of denosumab. Denosumab given subcutaneously twice yearly for 36 months was associated with a reduction in the risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures in women with osteoporosis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00089791.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Paul Ehrlich's magic bullet concept: 100 years of progress.

            Exceptional advances in molecular biology and genetic research have expedited cancer drug development tremendously. The declared paradigm is the development of 'personalized and tailored drugs' that precisely target the specific molecular defects of a cancer patient. It is therefore appropriate to revisit the intellectual foundations of the development of such agents, as many have shown great clinical success. One hundred years ago, Paul Ehrlich, the founder of chemotherapy, received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. His postulate of creating 'magic bullets' for use in the fight against human diseases inspired generations of scientists to devise powerful molecular cancer therapeutics.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Antibody therapy of cancer.

              The use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for cancer therapy has achieved considerable success in recent years. Antibody-drug conjugates are powerful new treatment options for lymphomas and solid tumours, and immunomodulatory antibodies have also recently achieved remarkable clinical success. The development of therapeutic antibodies requires a deep understanding of cancer serology, protein-engineering techniques, mechanisms of action and resistance, and the interplay between the immune system and cancer cells. This Review outlines the fundamental strategies that are required to develop antibody therapies for cancer patients through iterative approaches to target and antibody selection, extending from preclinical studies to human trials.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
                Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
                PNAS
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
                National Academy of Sciences
                0027-8424
                1091-6490
                3 April 2023
                11 April 2023
                3 October 2023
                : 120
                : 15
                : e2210332120
                Affiliations
                [1] aYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, Centre for Misfolding Diseases, University of Cambridge , Cambridge CB2 1EW, United Kingdom
                [2] bResearch and Development, Chemical Computing Group, Montreal , Quebec H3A 2R7, Canada
                [3] cGlobal Research Technologies, Novo Nordisk A/S 2760 Måløv, Denmark
                [4] dDepartment of Physics, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge , Cambridge CB3 0HE, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: tpjk2@ 123456cam.ac.uk .

                Edited by William Eaton, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD; received June 21, 2022; accepted February 6, 2023

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0762-8872
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9626-7636
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7817-5722
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8333-0045
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5917-9349
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5285-871X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1894-1859
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1332-3090
                Article
                202210332
                10.1073/pnas.2210332120
                10104583
                37011217
                f0ce8367-68b4-4542-bdf4-db80972e9370
                Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.

                This article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND).

                History
                : 21 June 2022
                : 06 February 2023
                Page count
                Pages: 11, Words: 8814
                Funding
                Funded by: EC | ERC | HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council (ERC), FundRef 100019180;
                Award ID: no841466
                Award Recipient : Georg Krainer
                Categories
                dataset, Dataset
                research-article, Research Article
                biophys-phys, Biophysics and Computational Biology
                Physical Sciences
                Biophysics and Computational Biology

                nonspecificity,surface patches,phase separation,antibody development,nanoscale clusters

                Comments

                Comment on this article