MoFvAb: Modeling the Fv region of antibodies

mAbs

Volumn 7, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 838-852

  Bujotzek, Alexander ^a   Fuchs, Angelika ^a   Qu, Changtao ^b   Benz, Jö Org ^c   Klostermann, Stefan ^a   Antes, Iris ^d   Georges, Guy ^a  

^a ROCHE INNOVATION CENTER MUNICH   (Germany)

^b ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GMBH   (Germany)

^c F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

^d TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Amino acid sidechain conformation; Antibody structure; Homology modeling; Macromolecular modeling; Protein domain orientation; Protein engineering; Protein structure prediction

Indexed keywords

ARGININE; ASPARTIC ACID; GLUTAMIC ACID; LEUCINE; PHENYLALANINE; SINGLE CHAIN FRAGMENT VARIABLE ANTIBODY; TYROSINE; VALINE; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION;

ALGORITHM; ANTIBODY ENGINEERING; ANTIBODY STRUCTURE; ANTIGEN BINDING; ARTICLE; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; GEOMETRY; HEAVY CHAIN; LIGHT CHAIN; MODEL; PROTEIN ASSEMBLY; STRUCTURAL HOMOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; DRUG DESIGN; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION; MOLECULAR MODEL; PROCEDURES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; X RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHY;

ALGORITHMS; CRYSTALLOGRAPHY, X-RAY; DRUG DESIGN; IMMUNOGLOBULIN VARIABLE REGION; MODELS, MOLECULAR; PROTEIN CONFORMATION;

EID: 84954311002     PISSN: 19420862     EISSN: 19420870     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19420862.2015.1068492     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Bassing CH, Swat W, Alt FW. The mechanism and regulation of chromosomal V (D) J recombination. Cell 2002; 109: S45-S55; PMID:11983152; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/S0092-8674(02)00675-X
2. Li Z, Woo CJ, Iglesias-Ussel MD, Ronai D, Scharff MD. The generation of antibody diversity through somatic hypermutation and class switch recombination. Genes Dev 2004; 18: 1-11; PMID:14724175; http:// dx. doi. org/10. 1101/gad. 1161904
3. Schatz DG, Ji Y. Recombination centres and the orchestration of V (D) J recombination. Nat Rev Immunol 2011; 11: 251-63; PMID:21394103; http:// dx. doi. org/10. 1038/nri2941
4. Borrebaeck CA. Antibodies in diagnostics-from immunoassays to protein chips. Immunol Today 2000; 21: 379-82; PMID:10916140; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1016/S0167-5699(00)01683-2
5. Brekke OH, Sandlie I. Therapeutic antibodies for human diseases at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2003; 2: 52-62; PMID:12509759; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1038/nrd984
6. Beck A, Wurch T, Bailly C, Corvaia N. Strategies and challenges for the next generation of therapeutic antibodies. Nat Rev Immunol 2010; 10: 345-52; PMID:20414207; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1038/nri2747
7. Reichert JM. Marketed therapeutic antibodies compendium. mAbs 2012; 4: 413-5; PMID:22531442; http:// dx. doi. org/10. 4161/mabs. 19931
8. Hayden MS, Gilliland LK, Ledbetter JA. Antibody engineering. Curr Opin Immunol 1997; 9: 201-12; PMID:9099794; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/S0952-7915(97)80136-7
9. Kim SJ, Park Y, Hong HJ. Antibody engineering for the development of therapeutic antibodies. Mol Cells 2005; 20: 17-29; PMID:16258237
10. Presta LG. Engineering of therapeutic antibodies to minimize immunogenicity and optimize function. Adv Drug Delivery Rev 2006; 58: 640-56; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. addr. 2006. 01. 026
11. Niwa R, Satoh M. The current status and prospects of antibody engineering for therapeutic use: focus on glycoengineering technology. J Pharm Sci 2015; 104 (3):930-41; PMID:25583555
12. Kuroda D, Shirai H, Jacobson MP, Nakamura H. Computer-aided antibody design. Protein Eng Des Sel 2012; 25(10):507-21; gzs024; PMID:22661385
13. Dunbar J, Krawczyk K, Leem J, Baker T, Fuchs A, Georges G, Shi J, Deane CM. SAbDab: the structural antibody database. Nucleic Acids Res 2014; 42: D1140-6; PMID:24214988; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1093/nar/gkt1043
14. Lippow SM, Wittrup KD, Tidor B. Computational design of antibody-affinity improvement beyond in vivo maturation. Nat Biotechnol 2007; 25: 1171-6; PMID:17891135; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1038/ nbt1336
15. Pedotti M, Simonelli L, Livoti E, Varani L. Computational docking of antibody-antigen complexes, opportunities and pitfalls illustrated by influenza hemagglutinin. Int J Mol Sci 2011; 12: 226-51; PMID:21339984; http://dx. doi. org/10. 3390/ ijms12010226
16. Lauer TM, Agrawal NJ, Chennamsetty N, Egodage K, Helk B, Trout BL. Developability index: a rapid in silico tool for the screening of antibody aggregation propensity. J Pharm Sci 2012; 101: 102-15; PMID:21935950; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ jps. 22758
17. Almagro JC, Beavers MP, Hernandez-Guzman F, Maier J, Shaulsky J, Butenhof K, Labute P, Thorsteinson N, Kelly K, Teplyakov A, Luo J, Sweet R, Gilliland GL. Antibody modeling assessment. Proteins 2011; 79: 3050-66; PMID:21935986; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1002/prot. 23130
18. Almagro JC, Teplyakov A, Luo J, Sweet RW, Kodangattil S, Hernandez-Guzman F, Gilliland GL. Second antibody modeling assessment (AMA-II). Proteins 2014; 82: 1553-62; PMID:24668560; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/prot. 24567
19. Teplyakov A, Luo J, Obmolova G, Malia TJ, Sweet R, Stanfield RL, Kodangattil S, Almagro JC, Gilliland GL. Antibody modeling assessment II. Structures and models. Proteins 2014; 82: 1563-82; PMID:24633955; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 24554
20. Tramontano A, Morea V. Assessment of homologybased predictions in CASP5. Proteins 2003; 53: 352-68; PMID:14579324; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 10543
21. Moult J. A decade of CASP: progress, bottlenecks and prognosis in protein structure prediction. Curr Opin Struc Biol 2005; 15: 285-9; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/ j. sbi. 2005. 05. 011
22. Arnold K, Bordoli L, Kopp J, Schwede T. The SWISSMODEL workspace: a web-based environment for protein structure homology modelling. Bioinformatics 2006; 22: 195-201; PMID:16301204; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/bioinformatics/bti770
23. Padlan EA. Anatomy of the antibody molecule. Mol Immunol 1994; 31: 169-217; PMID:8114766; http:// dx. doi. org/10. 1016/0161-5890(94)90001-9
24. Wu TT, Kabat EA. An analysis of the sequences of the variable regions of Bence Jones proteins and myeloma light chains and their implications for antibody complementarity. J Exp Med 1970; 132: 211-50; PMID:5508247; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1084/ jem. 132. 2. 211
25. Mariuzza RA, Phillips SEV, Poljak RJ. The structural basis of antigen-antibody recognition. Annu Rev Biophys Bio 1987; 16: 139-59; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1146/ annurev. bb. 16. 060187. 001035
26. Chothia C, Lesk AM, Tramontano A, Levitt M, Smith-Gill SJ, Air G, Sheriff S, Padlan EA, Davies D, Tulip WR, et al. Conformations of immunoglobulin hypervariable regions. Nature 1989; 342: 877-83; PMID:2687698; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1038/342877a0
27. Martin AC, Thornton JM. Structural families in loops of homologous proteins: automatic classification, modelling and application to antibodies. J Mol Biol 1996; 263: 800-15; PMID:8947577; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1006/jmbi. 1996. 0617
28. North B, Lehmann A, Dunbrack RL. A new clustering of antibody CDR loop conformations. J Mol Biol 2011; 406: 228-56; PMID:21035459; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. jmb. 2010. 10. 030
29. Weitzner BD, Dunbrack RL, Gray JJ. The Origin of CDR H3 Structural Diversity. Structure 2015; 23 (2):302-11; PMID:25579815
30. Abhinandan KR, Martin AC. Analysis and prediction of VH/VL packing in antibodies. Protein Eng Des Sel 2010; 23: 689-97; PMID:20591902; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1093/protein/gzq043
31. Chailyan A, Marcatili P, Tramontano A. The association of heavy and light chain variable domains in antibodies: implications for antigen specificity. FEBS J 2011; 278: 2858-66; PMID:21651726; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1111/j. 1742-4658. 2011. 08207. x
32. Dunbar J, Fuchs A, Shi J, Deane CM. ABangle: characterising the VH-VL orientation in antibodies. Protein Eng Des Sel 2013; 26: 611-20; PMID:23708320; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/protein/gzt020
33. Dunbar J, Knapp B, Fuchs A, Shi J, Deane CM. Examining Variable Domain Orientations in Antigen Receptors Gives Insight into TCR-Like Antibody Design. PLoS Comput Biol 2014; 10: e1003852; PMID:25233457; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1371/journal. pcbi. 1003852
34. Ramachandran GN. Conformation of polypeptides proteins. Adv Protein Chem 1968; 23: 283; PMID:4882249; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/S0065-3233(08)60402-7
35. Bujotzek A, Dunbar J, Lipsmeier F, Schäfer W, Antes I, Deane CM, Georges G. Prediction of VH-VL domain orientation for antibody variable domain modeling. Proteins 2015; 83(4):681-95; PMID:25641019
36. Weitzner BD, Kuroda D, Marze N, Xu J, Gray JJ. Blind prediction performance of RosettaAntibody 3. 0: grafting, relaxation, kinematic loop modeling, and full CDR optimization. Proteins 2014; 82: 1611-23; PMID:24519881; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 24534
37. Zhu K, Day T, Warshaviak D, Murrett C, Friesner R, Pearlman D. Antibody structure determination using a combination of homology modeling, energy-based refinement, and loop prediction. Proteins 2014; 82: 1646-55; PMID:24619874; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1002/prot. 24551
38. Maier JK, Labute P. Assessment of fully automated antibody homology modeling protocols in molecular operating environment. Proteins 2014; 82: 1599-610; PMID:24715627; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 24576
39. Berrondo M, Kaufmann S, Berrondo M. Automated Aufbau of antibody structures from given sequences using Macromoltek's SmrtMolAntibody. Proteins 2014; 82: 1636-45; PMID:24777752; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/prot. 24595
40. Fasnacht M, Butenhof K, Goupil-Lamy A, Hernandez-Guzman F, Huang H, Yan L. Automated antibody structure prediction using Accelrys tools: Results and best practices. Proteins 2014; 82: 1583-98; PMID:24833271; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 24604
41. Marcatili P, Olimpieri PP, Chailyan A, Tramontano A. Antibody modeling using the Prediction of Immuno-Globulin Structure (PIGS) web server. Nature Protoc 2014; 9: 2771-83; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1038/ nprot. 2014. 189
42. Canutescu AA, Dunbrack RL. Cyclic coordinate descent: a robotics algorithm for protein loop closure. Protein Sci 2003; 12: 963-72; PMID:12717019; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1110/ps. 0242703
43. Choi Y, Deane CM. FREAD revisited: accurate loop structure prediction using a database search algorithm. Proteins 2010; 78: 1431-40; PMID:20034110
44. Chothia C, Lesk AM. Canonical structures for the hypervariable regions of immunoglobulins. J Mol Biol 1987; 196: 901-17; PMID:3681981; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1016/0022-2836(87)90412-8
45. Robin G, Sato Y, Desplancq D, Rochel N, Weiss E, Martineau P. Restricted diversity of antigen binding residues of antibodies revealed by computational alanine scanning of 227 antibody-antigen complexes. J Mol Biol 2014; 426: 3729-43; PMID:25174334; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. jmb. 2014. 08. 013
46. Ramaraj T, Angel T, Dratz EA, Jesaitis AJ, Mumey B. Antigen-antibody interface properties: Composition, residue interactions, and features of 53 non-redundant structures. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteom 2012; 1824: 520-32; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. bbapap. 2011. 12. 007
47. Birtalan S, Zhang Y, Fellouse FA, Shao L, Schaefer G, Sidhu SS. The intrinsic contributions of tyrosine, serine, glycine and arginine to the affinity and specificity of antibodies. J Mol Biol 2008; 377: 1518-28; PMID:18336836; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. jmb. 2008. 01. 093
48. Dengl S, Hoffmann E, Grote M, Wagner C, Mundigl O, Georges G, Thorey I, Stubenrauch KG, Bujotzek A, Josel HP, et al. Hapten-directed spontaneous disulfide shuffling: a universal technology for site-directed covalent coupling of payloads to antibodies. FASEB J 2015; 83(4):681-95; fj-14; PMID:25670234
49. Kabat EA, Te Wu T, Perry HM, Gottesman KS, Foeller C. Sequences of proteins of immunological interest. Darby, PA: DIANE Publishing; 1992
50. Honegger A, Plückthun A. Yet another numbering scheme for immunoglobulin variable domains: an automatic modeling and analysis tool. J Mol Biol 2001; 309: 657-70; PMID:11397087; http://dx. doi. org/ 10. 1006/jmbi. 2001. 4662
51. Kaas Q, Ehrenmann F, Lefranc MP. IG, TR and IgSF, MHC and MhcSF: what do we learn from the IMGT Colliers de Perles? Brief Funct Genomics Proteom 2007; 6: 253-64; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/bfgp/ elm032
52. Accelrys Software Inc. Pipeline Pilot, Release 9. 1. 0. 13, San Diego: 2013
53. Accelrys Software Inc. Discovery Studio Modeling Environment, Release 4. 0. 0. 13259, San Diego: 2013
54. Henikoff S, Henikoff JG. Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. P Natl Acad Sci U S A 1992; 89: 10915-9; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1073/ pnas. 89. 22. 10915
55. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schäffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ. Gapped BLAST and PSIBLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 1997; 25: 3389-402; PMID:9254694; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/nar/ 25. 17. 3389
56. Oldfield T. Pattern-recognition methods to identify secondary structure within X-ray crystallographic electron-density maps. Acta Crystallogr D 2002; 58: 487-93; PMID:11856835; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1107/ S0907444902000525
57. Brooks BR, Brooks CL, MacKerell AD, Nilsson L, Petrella RJ, Roux B, Won Y, Archontis G, Bartels C, Boresch S, et al. CHARMM: the biomolecular simulation program. J Comput Chem 2009; 30: 1545-614; PMID:19444816; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ jcc. 21287
58. Im W, Lee MS, Brooks CL. Generalized born model with a simple smoothing function. J Comput Chem 2003; 24: 1691-702; PMID:12964188; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/jcc. 10321
59. Luenberger DG. Introduction to linear and nonlinear programming. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Reading; 1973
60. Mayo SL, Olafson BD, Goddard WA. DREIDING: a generic force field for molecular simulations. J Phys Chem 1990; 94: 8897-909; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1021/ j100389a010
61. Li W, Godzik A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 2006; 22: 1658-9; PMID:16731699; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/ bioinformatics/btl158
62. Fu L, Niu B, Zhu Z, Wu S, Li W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2012; 28: 3150-2; PMID:23060610; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1093/ bioinformatics/bts565
63. Chen VB, Arendall WB, Headd JJ, Keedy DA, Immormino RM, Kapral GJ, Murray LW, Richardson JS, Richardson DC. MolProbity: all-atom structure validation for macromolecular crystallography. Acta Crystallogr D 2009; 66: 12-21; PMID:20057044; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1107/S0907444909042073
64. Adams PD, Afonine PV, Bunkóczi G, Chen VB, Davis IW, Echols N, Headd JJ, Hung LW, Kapral GJ, Grosse-Kunstleve RW, et al. PHENIX: a comprehensive Python-based system for macromolecular structure solution. Acta Crystallogr D 2010; 66: 213-21; PMID:20124702; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1107/ S0907444909052925
65. Lovell SC, Davis IW, Arendall WB, de Bakker PI, Word JM, Prisant MG, Richardson JS, Richardson DC. Structure validation by Cα geometry: Φ, Ψ and Cβ deviation. Proteins 2003; 50: 437-50; PMID:12557186; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1002/ prot. 10286
66. Word JM, Lovell SC, LaBean TH, Taylor HC, Zalis ME, Presley BK, Richardson JS, Richardson DC. Visualizing and quantifying molecular goodness-of-fit: small-probe contact dots with explicit hydrogen atoms. J Mol Biol 1999; 285: 1711-33; PMID:9917407; http://dx. doi. org/10. 1006/jmbi. 1998. 2400