Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

In Vaccine Design, Artificial Proteins Start Mimicking Real Immunogens

Proteins designed from the ground up are usually too regular and continuous to be useful in vaccine design, which must grapple with irregular and discontinuous epitopes, that is, the complex antigenic features that are recognized by the immune system’s antibod

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Proteins designed from the ground up are usually too regular and continuous to be useful in vaccine design, which must grapple with irregular and discontinuous epitopes, that is, the complex antigenic features that are recognized by the immune system’s antibodies. And so, these proteins, which are called de novo proteins, have been limited to mimicking the simplest epitopes.

Impatient with the sorts of de novo proteins that have been designed with existing computational systems, scientists based at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) built a computational system of their own, one capable of designing artificial proteins that rival the complexity of real proteins. The system, called TopoBuilder, designs scaffolds for irregular and discontinuous neutralization epitopes.

The EPFL scientists, led by Bruno Correia, PhD, a professor at the Laboratory of Protein Design and Immunoengineering (LPDI), described TopoBuilder in an article that appeared May 15 in Science, in an article titled, “De novo protein design enables the precise induction of RSV-neutralizing antibodies.” The scientists decided to train TopoBuilder on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), which causes serious lung infections and is a leading cause of hospitalization in infants and the elderly, because it seemed a suitable test object.

“Despite several decades of research,” noted Correia, “there is still no vaccine or cure for respiratory syncytial virus.”

“When a vaccine doesn’t work well,” he continued, “we tend to think that it’s because the antibodies produced are not protective. It’s usually because our immune system is simply making the wrong type of antibodies.”

To demonstrate TopoBuilder’s abilities, Correia and colleagues generated three epitope-focused immunogens designed to induce a targeted neutralizing antibody response to RSV.

“In both mice and nonhuman primates, cocktails of three de novo–designed immunogens induced robust neutralizing responses against the respiratory syncytial virus,” the article’s authors wrote. “Furthermore, the immunogens refocused preexisting antibody responses toward defined neutralization epitopes.”

The artificial proteins created with TopoBuilder “don’t exist in nature,” stressed Che Yang, a PhD student and a co-leading author of the study. “TopoBuilder lets you construct proteins virtually as if you were putting Lego bricks together, added Fabian Sesterhenn, a PhD student and co-leading author. “Assembling artificial proteins that have novel functions is absolutely fascinating.”

The artificial proteins designed by TopoBuilder were realized in the laboratory and then tested in animal models, and they triggered the immune system to produce specific antibodies against weak spots in RSV. “Our findings are encouraging because they indicate that one day, we will be able to design vaccines that target specific viruses more effectively, by prompting the immune system to generate those particular antibodies,” asserted Correia. “We still have a lot of work ahead to make the vaccine we developed more effective—this study is a first step in that direction.”

Methods for creating de novo proteins have applications well beyond immunology—they can also be used in various branches of biotechnology to expand the structural and functional range of natural proteins. “We can now use the protein design tools to create proteins for other biomedical applications such as protein-based drugs or functionalized biomaterials,” concluded Sesterhenn.

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →