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

Educational guide

Protein Sticks to Any Antibody, Gums Up Immune Response

Antibodies are precision weapons that attack specific targets. If any single target were capable of attracting any and all antibodies, other targets, in all their diversity, would enjoy a kind of shield. And every antibody occupied by the generic, all-purpose

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.

Antibodies are precision weapons that attack specific targets. If any single target were capable of attracting any and all antibodies, other targets, in all their diversity, would enjoy a kind of shield. And every antibody occupied by the generic, all-purpose target would fail to bind to its intended target. It would, in a sense, be wasted.

A generic antibody-binding target actually exists. It’s a protein called protein M. (The “M” stands for mycoplasma.) It was discovered almost by accident by scientists investigating possible connections between long-term infections and cancer. The scientists, based at The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI), were working to understand the origins of multiple myeloma, a B-cell carcinoma. Clonal B-cell proliferation, as well as lymphomas and myelomas, can result from chronic infections caused by a variety of pathogens.

To better understand this process, the team investigated mycoplasma, a parasite that infects people chronically and is largely confined to the surface of cells. In a search for factors associated with long-term mycoplasma infection, Rajesh Grover, Ph.D., a senior staff scientist in the Lerner laboratory, tested samples of antibodies from multiple myeloma patients’ blood against a variety of mycoplasma species. One of the proteins recognized by the antibodies was from Mycoplasma genitalium, which causes sexually transmitted infections in humans.

To the scientists’ surprise, protein M reacted with every antibody sample tested. Additional tests established that these reactions were not in response to mass infection with M. genitalium. Instead, the scientists found, protein M appeared to have evolved simply to bind to any antibody it encounters.

Their interest piqued, the scientists investigated protein M’s structural biology via X-ray crystallography, electron microscopy, and other techniques. They found that protein M is unlike any of the known structures in the Protein Data Bank, a worldwide structure database. Moreover, they determined that protein M binds to a small, conserved region at the outer tip of every antibody’s antigen-binding arm.

Once protein M binds to an antibody, said Xeyong Zhu, Ph.D., a member of the TSRI team, “it likely extends the other end of itself, like a tail, over the antibody’s main antigen-binding region.”

The TSRI team published its findings February 6 in Science, in an article entitled “A Structurally Distinct Human Mycoplasma Protein that Generically Blocks Antigen-Antibody Union.” In this article, the authors speculate that protein M evolved to help M. genitalium cope with the immune response despite having one of the smallest bacterial genomes in nature. They also detailed how protein M binds to antibodies “with either κ or λ light chains using conserved hydrogen bonds and salt bridges, from backbone atoms and conserved side chains, and some conserved van der Waals interactions as well as other nonconserved interactions.”

Looking ahead, the authors explained that protein M—which they emphasize is a broad-scope, high-affinity antibody-binding protein—is likely to find myriad applications in immunochemistry. “Protein M,” they wrote, “may be particularly important for large-scale purification of therapeutic antibodies.”

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 →