Thermodynamic stability contributes to immunoglobulin specificity

Trends in Biochemical Sciences

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 2014, Pages

  Dimitrov, Jordan D ^a,b,c   Kaveri, Srinivas V ^a,b,c   Lacroix Desmazes, Sébastien ^a,b,c  

^a CENTRE DE RECHERCHE DES CORDELIERS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^c SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Conformational dynamism; Immunoglobulins; Interaction promiscuity; Thermodynamic stability

Indexed keywords

IMMUNOGLOBULIN; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION;

ANTIBODY COMBINING SITE; ANTIBODY SPECIFICITY; ANTIGEN ANTIBODY REACTION; ANTIGEN BINDING; ANTIGEN RECOGNITION; BINDING AFFINITY; BINDING SITE; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; ENZYME ACTIVITY; HUMAN; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STABILITY; REVIEW; SOMATIC MUTATION; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; THERMODYNAMICS; THERMOSTABILITY; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; IMMUNOLOGY;

ANIMALS; ANTIBODY SPECIFICITY; HUMANS; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION; IMMUNOGLOBULINS; PROTEIN STABILITY; THERMODYNAMICS;

EID: 84899939721     PISSN: 09680004     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibs.2014.02.010     Document Type: Review

References (62)

1. Van Regenmortel M.H. From absolute to exquisite specificity. Reflections on the fuzzy nature of species, specificity and antigenic sites. J. Immunol. Methods 1998, 216:37-48.
2. Cohen I.R. Tending Adam's Garden. Evolving The Cognitive Immune Self 2004, Elsevier Academic Press.
3. Notkins A.L. Polyreactivity of antibody molecules. Trends Immunol. 2004, 25:174-179.
4. Dimitrov J.D., et al. Antibody polyspecificity: what does it matter?. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2013, 750:213-226.
5. Dimitrov J.D., et al. Antibody polyreactivity in health and disease: statu variabilis. J. Immunol. 2013, 191:993-999.
6. Greenspan N.S. Cohen's Conjecture, Howard's Hypothesis, and Ptashne's Ptruth: an exploration of the relationship between affinity and specificity. Trends Immunol. 2010, 31:138-143.
7. Cohen I.R. Real and artificial immune systems: computing the state of the body. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2007, 7:569-574.
8. Eisen H.N., Chakraborty A.K. Evolving concepts of specificity in immune reactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:22373-22380.
9. Rajewsky K. Clonal selection and learning in the antibody system. Nature 1996, 381:751-758.
10. Di Noia J.M., Neuberger M.S. Molecular mechanisms of antibody somatic hypermutation. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2007, 76:1-22.
11. Avrameas S. Natural autoantibodies: from 'horror autotoxicus' to 'gnothi seauton'. Immunol. Today 1991, 12:154-159.
12. Coutinho A., et al. Natural autoantibodies. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 1995, 7:812-818.
13. Schettino E.W., et al. VHDJH gene sequences and antigen reactivity of monoclonal antibodies produced by human B-1 cells: evidence for somatic selection. J. Immunol. 1997, 158:2477-2489.
14. Berland R., Wortis H.H. Origins and functions of B-1 cells with notes on the role of CD5. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 2002, 20:253-300.
15. Manivel V., et al. Maturation of an antibody response is governed by modulations in flexibility of the antigen-combining site. Immunity 2000, 13:611-620.
16. Manivel V., et al. The primary antibody repertoire represents a linked network of degenerate antigen specificities. J. Immunol. 2002, 169:888-897.
17. Nguyen H.P., et al. Germline antibody recognition of distinct carbohydrate epitopes. Nat. Struct. Biol. 2003, 10:1019-1025.
18. Yin J., et al. Structural plasticity and the evolution of antibody affinity and specificity. J. Mol. Biol. 2003, 330:651-656.
19. Wardemann H., et al. Predominant autoantibody production by early human B cell precursors. Science 2003, 301:1374-1377.
20. Tsuiji M., et al. A checkpoint for autoreactivity in human IgM+ memory B cell development. J. Exp. Med. 2006, 203:393-400.
21. Tiller T., et al. Autoreactivity in human IgG+ memory B cells. Immunity 2007, 26:205-213.
22. Haynes B.F., et al. Cardiolipin polyspecific autoreactivity in two broadly neutralizing HIV-1 antibodies. Science 2005, 308:1906-1908.
23. Mouquet H., et al. Polyreactivity increases the apparent affinity of anti-HIV antibodies by heteroligation. Nature 2010, 467:591-595.
24. Mascola J.R., Haynes B.F. HIV-1 neutralizing antibodies: understanding nature's pathways. Immunol. Rev. 2013, 254:225-244.
25. Klein F., et al. Antibodies in HIV-1 vaccine development and therapy. Science 2013, 341:1199-1204.
26. Scheid J.F., et al. Broad diversity of neutralizing antibodies isolated from memory B cells in HIV-infected individuals. Nature 2009, 458:636-640.
27. Scheid J.F., et al. Sequence and structural convergence of broad and potent HIV antibodies that mimic CD4 binding. Science 2011, 333:1633-1637.
28. James L.C., Tawfik D.S. Conformational diversity and protein evolution: a 60-year-old hypothesis revisited. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2003, 28:361-368.
29. Nobeli I., et al. Protein promiscuity and its implications for biotechnology. Nat. Biotechnol. 2009, 27:157-167.
30. Schreiber G., Keating A.E. Protein binding specificity versus promiscuity. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2011, 21:50-61.
31. Cumberworth A., et al. Promiscuity as a functional trait: intrinsically disordered regions as central players of interactomes. Biochem. J. 2013, 454:361-369.
32. Foote J., Milstein C. Conformational isomerism and the diversity of antibodies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91:10370-10374.
33. James L.C., et al. Antibody multispecificity mediated by conformational diversity. Science 2003, 299:1362-1367.
34. Jimenez R., et al. Flexibility and molecular recognition in the immune system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100:92-97.
35. Jimenez R., et al. Protein dynamics and the immunological evolution of molecular recognition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101:3803-3808.
36. Schuermann J.P., et al. Evidence for structural plasticity of heavy chain complementarity-determining region 3 in antibody-ssDNA recognition. J. Mol. Biol. 2005, 347:965-978.
37. Wedemayer G.J., et al. Structural insights into the evolution of an antibody combining site. Science 1997, 276:1665-1669.
38. Schmidt A.G., et al. Preconfiguration of the antigen-binding site during affinity maturation of a broadly neutralizing influenza virus antibody. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:264-269.
39. Schellman J.A. The thermodynamic stability of proteins. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biophys. Chem. 1987, 16:115-137.
40. Dill K.A. Dominant forces in protein folding. Biochemistry 1990, 29:7133-7155.
41. Chi E.Y., et al. Physical stability of proteins in aqueous solution: mechanism and driving forces in nonnative protein aggregation. Pharm. Res. 2003, 20:1325-1336.
42. Kamerzell T.J., Middaugh C.R. The complex inter-relationships between protein flexibility and stability. J. Pharm. Sci. 2008, 97:3494-3517.
43. Tokuriki N., Tawfik D.S. Stability effects of mutations and protein evolvability. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2009, 19:596-604.
44. Tokuriki N., Tawfik D.S. Protein dynamism and evolvability. Science 2009, 324:203-207.
45. Tokuriki N., et al. Do viral proteins possess unique biophysical features?. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2009, 34:53-59.
46. Khersonsky O., Tawfik D.S. Enzyme promiscuity: a mechanistic and evolutionary perspective. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2010, 79:471-505.
47. Risso V.A., et al. Hyperstability and substrate promiscuity in laboratory resurrections of Precambrian beta-lactamases. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135:2899-2902.
48. Tokuriki N., et al. How protein stability and new functions trade off. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2008, 4:e1000002.
49. Fromer M., Shifman J.M. Tradeoff between stability and multispecificity in the design of promiscuous proteins. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2009, 5:e1000627.
50. Wang X., et al. Evolution of an antibiotic resistance enzyme constrained by stability and activity trade-offs. J. Mol. Biol. 2002, 320:85-95.
51. Chen Y., et al. Atomic resolution structures of CTX-M beta-lactamases: extended spectrum activities from increased mobility and decreased stability. J. Mol. Biol. 2005, 348:349-362.
52. Dellus-Gur E., et al. What makes a protein fold amenable to functional innovation? Fold polarity and stability trade-offs. J. Mol. Biol. 2013, 425:2609-2621.
53. Bershtein S., et al. Intense neutral drifts yield robust and evolvable consensus proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 2008, 379:1029-1044.
54. Wang F., et al. Somatic hypermutation maintains antibody thermodynamic stability during affinity maturation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:4261-4266.
55. Sun S.B., et al. Mutational analysis of 48G7 reveals that somatic hypermutation affects both antibody stability and binding affinity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135:9980-9983.
56. Klein F., et al. Somatic mutations of the immunoglobulin framework are generally required for broad and potent HIV-1 neutralization. Cell 2013, 153:126-138.
57. Jolly C.J., et al. The targeting of somatic hypermutation. Semin. Immunol. 1996, 8:159-168.
58. Teilum K., et al. Protein stability, flexibility and function. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2011, 1814:969-976.
59. Elias M., et al. The universality of enzymatic rate-temperature dependency. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2013, 39:1-7.
60. Csermely P., et al. Induced fit, conformational selection and independent dynamic segments: an extended view of binding events. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2010, 35:539-546.
61. Becktel W.J., Schellman J.A. Protein stability curves. Biopolymers 1987, 26:1859-1877.
62. Dimitrov J.D., et al. Transition towards antigen-binding promiscuity of a monospecific antibody. Mol. Immunol. 2007, 44:1854-1863.