Structure Based Descriptors for the Estimation of Colloidal Interactions and Protein Aggregation Propensities

The control of protein aggregation is an important requirement in the development of bio-pharmaceutical formulations. Here a simple protein model is proposed that was used in molecular dynamics simulations to obtain a quantitative assessment of the relative contributions of proteins’ net-charges, dipole-moments, and the size of hydrophobic or charged surface patches to their colloidal interactions. The results demonstrate that the strength of these interactions correlate with net-charge and dipole moment. Variation of both these descriptors within ranges typical for globular proteins have a comparable effect. By comparison no clear trends can be observed upon varying the size of hydrophobic or charged patches while keeping the other parameters constant. The results are discussed in the context of experimental literature data on protein aggregation. They provide a clear guide line for the development of improved algorithms for the prediction of aggregation propensities.

[1]  G J Williams,et al.  The Protein Data Bank: a computer-based archival file for macromolecular structures. , 1978, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

[2]  W. L. Jorgensen,et al.  Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water , 1983 .

[3]  H. Berendsen,et al.  Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath , 1984 .

[4]  Hoover,et al.  Canonical dynamics: Equilibrium phase-space distributions. , 1985, Physical review. A, General physics.

[5]  Hideki Tanaka.  Integral equation and Monte Carlo study on hydrophobic effects: Size dependence of apolar solutes on solute–solute interactions and structures of water , 1987 .

[6]  R. Swendsen,et al.  THE weighted histogram analysis method for free‐energy calculations on biomolecules. I. The method , 1992 .

[7]  S. Takashima,et al.  Calculation and measurement of the dipole moment of small proteins: Use of protein data base , 1993, Biopolymers.

[8]  T. Darden,et al.  A smooth particle mesh Ewald method , 1995 .

[9]  J. Antosiewicz,et al.  Computation of the dipole moments of proteins. , 1995, Biophysical journal.

[10]  Jaime Prilusky,et al.  A server and database for dipole moments of proteins , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[11]  M. Berkowitz,et al.  Ewald summation for systems with slab geometry , 1999 .

[12]  T. N. Bhat,et al.  The Protein Data Bank , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..

[13]  Junmei Wang,et al.  How well does a restrained electrostatic potential (RESP) model perform in calculating conformational energies of organic and biological molecules? , 2000, J. Comput. Chem..

[14]  J A McCammon,et al.  Calculation of weak protein-protein interactions: the pH dependence of the second virial coefficient. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[15]  Oleg V. Tsodikov,et al.  Novel computer program for fast exact calculation of accessible and molecular surface areas and average surface curvature , 2002, J. Comput. Chem..

[16]  C. Dobson,et al.  Rationalization of the effects of mutations on peptide andprotein aggregation rates , 2003, Nature.

[17]  Mikael Lund,et al.  A mesoscopic model for protein-protein interactions in solution. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[18]  A. Sali,et al.  Modeller: generation and refinement of homology-based protein structure models. , 2003, Methods in enzymology.

[19]  B. Ninham,et al.  Specific ion effects: why the properties of lysozyme in salt solutions follow a Hofmeister series. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[20]  Theodore W Randolph,et al.  Roles of conformational stability and colloidal stability in the aggregation of recombinant human granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor , 2003, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[21]  D. Winzor.  Determination of the net charge (valence) of a protein: a fundamental but elusive parameter. , 2004, Analytical biochemistry.

[22]  A. Cavalli,et al.  The role of aromaticity, exposed surface, and dipole moment in determining protein aggregation rates , 2004, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[23]  C. Stultz.  An Assessment of Potential of Mean Force Calculations with Implicit Solvent Models , 2004 .

[24]  L. Serrano,et al.  Prediction of sequence-dependent and mutational effects on the aggregation of peptides and proteins , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[25]  L. Serrano,et al.  Protein aggregation and amyloidosis: confusion of the kinds? , 2006, Current opinion in structural biology.

[26]  C. Pace,et al.  Amino acid contribution to protein solubility: Asp, Glu, and Ser contribute more favorably than the other hydrophilic amino acids in RNase Sa. , 2007, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  Silvio C. E. Tosatto,et al.  The PASTA server for protein aggregation prediction. , 2007, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[28]  Gerhard Klebe,et al.  PDB2PQR: expanding and upgrading automated preparation of biomolecular structures for molecular simulations , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[29]  Gerhard Hummer,et al.  Coarse-grained models for simulations of multiprotein complexes: application to ubiquitin binding. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[30]  Carsten Kutzner,et al.  GROMACS 4:  Algorithms for Highly Efficient, Load-Balanced, and Scalable Molecular Simulation. , 2008, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[31]  Keith W Kelley,et al.  NIH public access policy , 2008, Brain, Behavior, and Immunity.

[32]  Michele Vendruscolo,et al.  Prediction of aggregation-prone regions in structured proteins. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[33]  Bernhardt L. Trout,et al.  Design of therapeutic proteins with enhanced stability , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[34]  Shoji Takada,et al.  Bimodal protein solubility distribution revealed by an aggregation analysis of the entire ensemble of Escherichia coli proteins , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  M. Vihinen,et al.  Pathogenic or not? And if so, then how? Studying the effects of missense mutations using bioinformatics methods , 2009, Human mutation.

[36]  D. Kalonia,et al.  Long- and Short-Range Electrostatic Interactions Affect the Rheology of Highly Concentrated Antibody Solutions , 2009, Pharmaceutical Research.

[37]  B. Hess,et al.  Cation specific binding with protein surface charges , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  Mikael Lund,et al.  Association and electrostatic steering of alpha-lactalbumin-lysozyme heterodimers. , 2009, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[39]  Christopher J Roberts,et al.  Comparative effects of pH and ionic strength on protein-protein interactions, unfolding, and aggregation for IgG1 antibodies. , 2010, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[40]  Gary Walsh,et al.  Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2010 , 2010, Nature Biotechnology.

[41]  A. Liwo,et al.  Potential of mean force of association of large hydrophobic particles: toward the nanoscale limit. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[42]  Bert L. de Groot,et al.  g_wham—A Free Weighted Histogram Analysis Implementation Including Robust Error and Autocorrelation Estimates , 2010 .

[43]  Paul Labute,et al.  Calibrative approaches to protein solubility modeling of a mutant series using physicochemical descriptors , 2010, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[44]  Babatunde A. Ogunnaike,et al.  Multi-variate approach to global protein aggregation behavior and kinetics: effects of pH, NaCl, and temperature for alpha-chymotrypsinogen A. , 2010, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[45]  Christian Bailly,et al.  Strategies and challenges for the next generation of therapeutic antibodies , 2010, Nature Reviews Immunology.

[46]  Jan H. Jensen,et al.  Improved Treatment of Ligands and Coupling Effects in Empirical Calculation and Rationalization of pKa Values. , 2011, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[47]  Liqiang Lisa Zhou,et al.  Impact of short range hydrophobic interactions and long range electrostatic forces on the aggregation kinetics of a monoclonal antibody and a dual-variable domain immunoglobulin at low and high concentrations. , 2011, International journal of pharmaceutics.

[48]  Steven J. Shire,et al.  Viscosity Analysis of High Concentration Bovine Serum Albumin Aqueous Solutions , 2011, Pharmaceutical Research.

[49]  Karsten Mäder,et al.  Assessment of net charge and protein-protein interactions of different monoclonal antibodies. , 2011, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[50]  Gaetano T Montelione,et al.  Large-scale experimental studies show unexpected amino acid effects on protein expression and solubility in vivo in E. coli , 2011, Microbial Informatics and Experimentation.

[51]  Jan H. Jensen,et al.  PROPKA3: Consistent Treatment of Internal and Surface Residues in Empirical pKa Predictions. , 2011, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[52]  Bernhardt L Trout,et al.  Developability index: a rapid in silico tool for the screening of antibody aggregation propensity. , 2012, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[53]  Sandeep Yadav,et al.  The influence of charge distribution on self-association and viscosity behavior of monoclonal antibody solutions. , 2012, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[54]  Vladimir I Razinkov,et al.  Native-state solubility and transfer free energy as predictive tools for selecting excipients to include in protein formulation development studies. , 2012, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[55]  M. Davies,et al.  Multicomponent synthetic polymers with viral-mimetic chemistry for nucleic acid delivery. , 2012, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[56]  J. Silberg,et al.  A transposase strategy for creating libraries of circularly permuted proteins , 2012, Nucleic acids research.

[57]  Sandeep Yadav,et al.  Viscosity behavior of high-concentration monoclonal antibody solutions: correlation with interaction parameter and electroviscous effects. , 2012, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[58]  E. Topp,et al.  Protein G, protein A and protein A-derived peptides inhibit the agitation induced aggregation of IgG. , 2012, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[59]  T. Tyliszczak,et al.  Microscopic probing of the size dependence in hydrophobic solvation. , 2012, The Journal of chemical physics.

[60]  Massimo Morbidelli,et al.  On the role of salt type and concentration on the stability behavior of a monoclonal antibody solution. , 2012, Biophysical chemistry.

[61]  Michele Vendruscolo,et al.  Sequence-based prediction of protein solubility. , 2012, Journal of molecular biology.

[62]  The UniProt Consortium,et al.  Reorganizing the protein space at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt) , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[63]  Sandeep Yadav,et al.  Weak interactions govern the viscosity of concentrated antibody solutions: high-throughput analysis using the diffusion interaction parameter. , 2012, Biophysical journal.

[64]  Theodore W Randolph,et al.  Selective domain stabilization as a strategy to reduce fusion protein aggregation. , 2012, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[65]  Hardeep S Samra,et al.  Advancements in high throughput biophysical technologies: applications for characterization and screening during early formulation development of monoclonal antibodies. , 2012, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[66]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .