Novel protein scaffolds as emerging therapeutic proteins: From discovery to clinical proof-of-concept

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 30, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 575-582

  Wurch, Thierry ^a   Pierré, Alain ^a   Depil, Stéphane ^a  

^a INSTITUT DE RECHERCHES SERVIER   (France)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Drug development; Protein engineering; Therapeutic antibody

Indexed keywords

ANTIBODIES; BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING; GENETIC ENGINEERING;

CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT; CLINICAL EFFICACY; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; HEMATOLOGICAL MALIGNANCIES; PROTEIN ENGINEERING; THERAPEUTIC ANTIBODIES; THERAPEUTIC PROTEIN;

SCAFFOLDS (BIOLOGY);

ABCIXIMAB; ADALIMUMAB; AFM 13; ALX 0061; ALX 0081; ALX 0141; ALX 0651; ALX 103; AMG 220; ANKYRIN; BLINATUMOMAB; ECALLANTIDE; ETANERCEPT; FIBRONECTIN; IMMUNOGLOBULIN G; INFLIXIMAB; MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY; MP 0112; MT 110; MT 111; OZORALIZUMAB; PEGDINETANIB; PLACULUMAB; PRS 050; RANIBIZUMAB; RITUXIMAB; SCAFFOLD PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKEMIA; BINDING AFFINITY; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM CANCER; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG MARKETING; FATIGUE; GLIOBLASTOMA; HEART VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCY; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; ISCHIALGIA; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; NAUSEA; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; NONHUMAN; OSTEOPOROSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DOMAIN; PROTEIN ENGINEERING; PROTEINURIA; REVIEW; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SIDE EFFECT; THROMBOSIS; THROMBOTIC THROMBOCYTOPENIC PURPURA;

EID: 84867702136     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.07.006     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Beck A., et al. Strategies and challenges for the next generation of therapeutic antibodies. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2010, 10:345-352.
2. Skerra A. Engineering protein scaffolds for molecular recognition. J. Mol. Recognit. 2000, 13:167-187.
3. Wurch T., et al. Development of novel protein scaffolds as alternatives to whole antibodies for imaging and therapy: status on discovery research and clinical validation. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2008, 9:502-509.
4. Carter P.J. Introduction to current and future protein therapeutics: a protein engineering perspective. Exp. Cell Res. 2011, 371:1261-1269.
5. Löfblom J., et al. Non-immunoglobulin based protein scaffolds. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2011, 22:843-848.
6. Williams A., Baird L.G. DX-88 and HAE: a developmental perspective. Transfus. Apher. Sci. 2003, 29:255-258.
7. Zuraw B., et al. Ecallantide. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2010, 9:189-190.
8. Gebauer M., Skerra A. Anticalins: small engineered binding proteins based on the lipocalin scaffold. Methods Enzymol. 2012, 503:157-188.
9. Schönfeld D., et al. An engineered lipocalin specific for CTLA-4 reveals a combining site with structural and conformational features similar to antibodies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2009, 106:8198-8203.
10. Hohlbaum A.M., Skerra A. Anticalins: the lipocalin family as a novel protein scaffold for the development of next-generation immunotherapies. Expert Rev. Clin. Immunol. 2007, 3:491-501.
11. Mross K., et al. First in Human Phase I study of PRS-050 (Angiocal), a VEGF-A targeting Anticalin, in patients with advanced solid tumors: results of a dose escalation study. Mol. Cancer Ther. Suppl. 2011, 10:A212.
12. Therasse P., et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000, 92:205-216.
13. Boersma Y.L., Plückthun A. DARPins and other repeat protein scaffolds: advances in engineering and applications. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2011, 22:849-857.
14. Merz T., et al. Stabilizing ionic interactions in a full-consensus ankyrin repeat protein. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 376:232-240.
15. Wolf S., et al. Phase I MP0112 wet AMD study: results of a single escalating dose study with DARPin MP0112 in wet AMD. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011, 52. E-abstract 1655.
16. Patel M., et al. Single ascending doses of DARPin®, MP0112, show potential for quarterly dosing in DME. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011, 52. E-abstract 582.
17. Batori V., et al. Exploring the potential of the monobody scaffold: effects of loop elongation on the stability of a fibronectin type III domain. Protein Eng. Des. Sel. 2002, 10:1015-1020.
18. Koide A., et al. Teaching an old scaffold new tricks: monobodies constructed using alternative surfaces of the FN3 scaffold. J. Mol. Biol. 2012, 415:393-405.
19. Lipovsek D. Adnectins: engineered target-binding protein therapeutics. Protein Eng. Des. Sel. 2011, 24:3-9.
20. Tolcher A.W., et al. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of CT-322 (BMS-844203), a targeted Adnectin inhibitor of VEGFR-2 based on a domain of human fibronectin. Clin. Cancer Res. 2011, 17:363-371.
21. Sibille M., et al. A safety grading scale to support dose escalation and define stopping rules for healthy subjects first-entry-into-man studies. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010, 70:736-748.
22. Schiff D., et al. Phase II study of CT-322, a targeted biologic inhibitor of VEGFR-2 based on a domain of human fibronectin, in recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM). J. Clin. Oncol. Suppl. 2010, 28:15s.
23. Silverman J., et al. Multivalent avimer proteins evolved by exon shuffling of a family of human receptor domains. Nat. Biotechnol. 2005, 23:1556-1561.
24. Smith G.P. Filamentous fusion phage: novel expression vectors that display cloned antigens on the virion surface. Science 1985, 228:1315-1317.
25. Thie H., et al. Phage display derived therapeutic antibodies. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2008, 9:439-446.
26. Gai S.A., Wittrup K.D. Yeast surface display for protein engineering and characterization. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2007, 17:467-473.
27. Löfblom J. Bacterial display in combinatorial protein engineering. Biotechnol. J. 2011, 6:1115-1129.
28. Plückthun A. Ribosome display: a perspective. Methods Mol. Biol. 2012, 805:3-28.
29. Brinks V., et al. Immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: the use of animal models. Pharm. Res. 2011, 28:2379-2385.
30. Schellekens H. How to predict and prevent the immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins. Biotechnol. Annu. Rev. 2008, 14:191-202.
31. Harding F.A., et al. The immunogenicity of humanized and fully human antibodies. mAbs 2010, 2:256-265.
32. Shankara G., et al. Scientific and regulatory considerations on the immunogenicity of biologics. Trends Biotechnol. 2006, 24:274-280.
33. Tawara K., et al. Clinical significance of interleukin (IL)-6 in cancer metastasis to bone: potential of anti-IL-6 therapies. Cancer Manag. Res. 2011, 3:177-189.
34. Weisser N.E., Hall J.C. Applications of single-chain variable fragment antibodies in therapeutics and diagnostics. Biotechnol. Adv. 2009, 27:502-520.
35. Holliger P., Hudson P.J. Engineered antibody fragments and the rise of single domains. Nat. Biotechnol. 2005, 23:1126-1136.
36. Prelli F., Frangione B. Franklin's disease: Ig gamma2 H chain mutant BUR. J. Immunol. 1992, 148:949-952.
37. De Genst E., et al. Molecular basis for the preferential cleft recognition by dromedary heavy-chain antibodies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103:4586-4591.
38. Van Bockstaele F., et al. The development of nanobodies for therapeutic applications. Curr. Opin. Investig. Drugs 2009, 10:1212-1224.
39. Sinha G. Ablynx drops lead nanobody. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012, 30:124.
40. Kratz F., Elsadek B. Clinical impact of serum proteins on drug delivery. J. Control. Release 2012, 161:429-445.
41. Holt L.J., et al. Domain antibodies: proteins for therapy. Trends Biotechnol. 2003, 21:484-490.
42. Gay R.D., et al. Anti-TNFα domain antibody construct CEP-37247: full antibody functionality at half the size. mAbs 2010, 2:625-638.
43. Konterman R.E. Dual targeting strategies with bispecific antibodies. mAbs 2012, 4. [Epub ahead of print].
44. Baeuerle P.A., et al. BiTE: A new class of antibodies that recruit T-cells. Drugs Future 2008, 33:137-147.
45. Nagorsen D., Baeuerle P.A. Immunomodulatory therapy of cancer with T cell-engaging BiTE antibody blinatumomab. Exp. Cell Res. 2011, 317:1255-1260.
46. Bargou R., et al. Tumor regression in cancer patients by very low doses of a T cell-engaging antibody. Science 2008, 321:974-977.
47. Topp M.S., et al. Targeted therapy with the T-cell-engaging antibody blinatumomab of chemotherapy-refractory minimal residual disease in B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients results in high response rate and prolonged leukemia-free survival. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29:2493-2498.
48. Handgretinger R., et al. Complete remission after blinatumomab-induced donor T-cell activation in three pediatric patients with post-transplant relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 2011, 25:181-184.
49. Fiedler W.M., et al. A phase I study of EpCAM/CD3-bispecific antibody (MT110) in patients with advanced solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012, 30(Suppl.). abstr. 2504.
50. Cochlovius B., et al. Cure of Burkitt's lymphoma in severe combined immunodeficiency mice by T-cells, tetravalent CD3 x CD19 tandem diabody, and CD28 costimulation. Cancer Res. 2000, 60:4336-4341.
51. Mølhøj M., et al. CD19-/CD3-bispecific antibody of the BiTE class is far superior to tandem diabody with respect to redirected tumor cell lysis. Mol. Immunol. 2007, 44:1935-1943.
52. Moore P.A., et al. Application off dual affinity retargeting molecules to achieve optimal redirected T-cell killing of B-cell lymphoma. Blood 2011, 117:4542-4551.
53. Rader C. DARTs take aim at BiTEs. Blood 2011, 117:4403-4404.
54. Rothe A., et al. A phase I study with the bispecific anti-CD30 x anti-CD16A antibody construct AFM13 in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood (ASH Annu. Meet. Abstracts) 2011, 118:3709.