Local and global anatomy of antibody‐protein antigen recognition

Deciphering antibody‐protein antigen recognition is of fundamental and practical significance. We constructed an antibody structural dataset, partitioned it into human and murine subgroups, and compared it with nonantibody protein‐protein complexes. We investigated the physicochemical properties of regions on and away from the antibody‐antigen interfaces, including net charge, overall antibody charge distributions, and their potential role in antigen interaction. We observed that amino acid preference in antibody‐protein antigen recognition is entropy driven, with residues having low side‐chain entropy appearing to compensate for the high backbone entropy in interaction with protein antigens. Antibodies prefer charged and polar antigen residues and bridging water molecules. They also prefer positive net charge, presumably to promote interaction with negatively charged protein antigens, which are common in proteomes. Antibody‐antigen interfaces have large percentages of Tyr, Ser, and Asp, but little Lys. Electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions in the Ag binding sites might be coupled with Fab domains through organized charge and residue distributions away from the binding interfaces. Here we describe some features of antibody‐antigen interfaces and of Fab domains as compared with nonantibody protein‐protein interactions. The distributions of interface residues in human and murine antibodies do not differ significantly. Overall, our results provide not only a local but also a global anatomy of antibody structures.

[1]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Biased probability Monte Carlo conformational searches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  M. Buckle,et al.  Can immunoglobulin C(H)1 constant region domain modulate antigen binding affinity of antibodies? , 1996, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[3]  Andrew J. Martin,et al.  Antibody-antigen interactions: contact analysis and binding site topography. , 1996, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  R. Nussinov,et al.  A systematic study of the vibrational free energies of polypeptides in folded and random states. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[5]  J. Adelman,et al.  Structure of the gating domain of a Ca2+-activated K+ channel complexed with Ca2+/calmodulin , 2001, Nature.

[6]  R. Schwartz,et al.  Whole proteome pI values correlate with subcellular localizations of proteins for organisms within the three domains of life. , 2001, Genome research.

[7]  H. Wolfson,et al.  Access the most recent version at doi: 10.1110/ps.21302 References , 2001 .

[8]  Christian Cole,et al.  Side‐chain conformational entropy at protein–protein interfaces , 2002, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[9]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein–protein interactions: Structurally conserved residues distinguish between binding sites and exposed protein surfaces , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Paul B Rainey,et al.  Global analysis of predicted proteomes: functional adaptation of physical properties. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Is allostery an intrinsic property of all dynamic proteins? , 2004, Proteins.

[12]  G. Caraux,et al.  The modal distribution of protein isoelectric points reflects amino acid properties rather than sequence evolution , 2004, Proteomics.

[13]  Sara Linse,et al.  The role of electrostatic interactions in calmodulin-peptide complex formation. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[14]  R. Nussinov,et al.  How similar are protein folding and protein binding nuclei? Examination of vibrational motions of energy hot spots and conserved residues. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[15]  Marie-Paule Lefranc,et al.  IMGT , the international ImMunoGeneTics information system , 2003 .

[16]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein–protein interactions: organization, cooperativity and mapping in a bottom-up Systems Biology approach , 2005, Physical biology.

[17]  C. Pace,et al.  pK values of the ionizable groups of proteins , 2006, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[18]  Ping Wan,et al.  Multi‐modality of pI distribution in whole proteome , 2006, Proteomics.

[19]  Michael Nilges,et al.  Flexibility and conformational entropy in protein-protein binding. , 2006, Structure.

[20]  David S. Wishart,et al.  DrugBank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[21]  J. Onuchic,et al.  Water mediation in protein folding and molecular recognition. , 2006, Annual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure.

[22]  Przemysław Biecek,et al.  The relationships between the isoelectric point and: length of proteins, taxonomy and ecology of organisms , 2007, BMC Genomics.

[23]  Ozlem Keskin,et al.  Binding induced conformational changes of proteins correlate with their intrinsic fluctuations: a case study of antibodies , 2007, BMC Structural Biology.

[24]  P. Bourne,et al.  Antibody-protein interactions: benchmark datasets and prediction tools evaluation , 2007 .

[25]  Gideon Schreiber,et al.  On the contribution of water-mediated interactions to protein-complex stability. , 2008, Biochemistry.

[26]  Shigehiro Sato,et al.  Net Positive Charge of HIV-1 CRF01_AE V3 Sequence Regulates Viral Sensitivity to Humoral Immunity , 2008, PloS one.

[27]  M. Oda,et al.  Exploring the energy landscape of antibody-antigen complexes: protein dynamics, flexibility, and molecular recognition. , 2008, Biochemistry.

[28]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Principles of protein-protein interactions: what are the preferred ways for proteins to interact? , 2008, Chemical reviews.

[29]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein-protein interaction networks: how can a hub protein bind so many different partners? , 2009, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[30]  C. Pace,et al.  Protein Ionizable Groups: pK Values and Their Contribution to Protein Stability and Solubility* , 2009, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[31]  K. Wittrup,et al.  Stability and CDR composition biases enrich binder functionality landscapes. , 2010, Journal of molecular biology.

[32]  J. Reichert,et al.  Development trends for human monoclonal antibody therapeutics , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[33]  A. Casadevall,et al.  Circular Dichroism reveals evidence of coupling between immunoglobulin constant and variable region secondary structure. , 2010, Molecular immunology.

[34]  D. Dimitrov.  Therapeutic antibodies, vaccines and antibodyomes , 2010, mAbs.

[35]  H. Persson,et al.  Charges drive selection of specific antibodies by phage display. , 2010, Journal of immunological methods.

[36]  Pietro Cozzini,et al.  Bound Water at Protein-Protein Interfaces: Partners, Roles and Hydrophobic Bubbles as a Conserved Motif , 2011, PloS one.

[37]  Z. Weng,et al.  A structure‐based benchmark for protein–protein binding affinity , 2011, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[38]  M. Churchill,et al.  Increased Sensitivity to Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies of End-Stage Disease R5 HIV-1 Correlates with Evolution in Env Glycosylation and Charge , 2011, PloS one.

[39]  Mario Roederer,et al.  Focused Evolution of HIV-1 Neutralizing Antibodies Revealed by Structures and Deep Sequencing , 2011, Science.

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

[41]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Dynamic allostery: linkers are not merely flexible. , 2011, Structure.

[42]  Yanay Ofran,et al.  A Systematic Comparison of Free and Bound Antibodies Reveals Binding-Related Conformational Changes , 2012, The Journal of Immunology.

[43]  L. Lopalco,et al.  Isotype modulates epitope specificity, affinity, and antiviral activities of anti–HIV-1 human broadly neutralizing 2F5 antibody , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[44]  B. Mumey,et al.  Antigen-antibody interface properties: composition, residue interactions, and features of 53 non-redundant structures. , 2012, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[45]  J. Nielsen,et al.  Highly perturbed pKa values in the unfolded state of hen egg white lysozyme. , 2012, Biophysical journal.

[46]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein charge and mass contribute to the spatio‐temporal dynamics of protein–protein interactions in a minimal proteome , 2013, Proteomics.

[47]  Søren B. Padkjær,et al.  Structural analysis of B-cell epitopes in antibody:protein complexes. , 2013, Molecular immunology.

[48]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Multiple conformational selection and induced fit events take place in allosteric propagation. , 2014, Biophysical chemistry.

[49]  A. Yang,et al.  Origins of specificity and affinity in antibody–protein interactions , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  The Importance of Epitope Binning for Biological Drug Discovery , 2014, Current drug discovery technologies.

[51]  S. Sidhu,et al.  Synthetic antibody technologies. , 2014, Current opinion in structural biology.

[52]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Promiscuous and specific recognition among ephrins and Eph receptors. , 2014, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[53]  G. Logroscino,et al.  Is there still any hope for amyloid-based immunotherapy for Alzheimer's disease? , 2014, Current opinion in psychiatry.

[54]  Malgorzata B. Tracka,et al.  Redistribution of Flexibility in Stabilizing Antibody Fragment Mutants Follows Le Châtelier’s Principle , 2014, PloS one.

[55]  Young Do Kwon,et al.  Maturation and Diversity of the VRC01-Antibody Lineage over 15 Years of Chronic HIV-1 Infection , 2015, Cell.

[56]  Samantha Dale Strasser,et al.  Systems biology of neurodegenerative diseases. , 2015, Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro.

[57]  Antibody Engineering & Therapeutics 2015: The Antibody Society's annual meeting December 7–10, 2015, San Diego, CA , 2015, mAbs.

[58]  D. Jacobs,et al.  Mutations in Antibody Fragments Modulate Allosteric Response Via Hydrogen-Bond Network Fluctuations. , 2016, Biophysical journal.

[59]  James R. Apgar,et al.  Beyond CDR-grafting: Structure-guided humanization of framework and CDR regions of an anti-myostatin antibody , 2016, mAbs.

[60]  Seungpyo Hong,et al.  Interaction between bound water molecules and local protein structures: A statistical analysis of the hydrogen bond structures around bound water molecules , 2016, Proteins.

[61]  Richard H. Henchman,et al.  Water Determines the Structure and Dynamics of Proteins. , 2016, Chemical reviews.

[62]  S. Iwata,et al.  High-resolution crystal structure of the therapeutic antibody pembrolizumab bound to the human PD-1 , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[63]  S. Ryu,et al.  Structural basis of checkpoint blockade by monoclonal antibodies in cancer immunotherapy , 2016, Nature Communications.

[64]  A. Casadevall,et al.  Ig Constant Region Effects on Variable Region Structure and Function , 2016, Front. Microbiol..

[65]  S. Campion.  Conserved aromatic residues as determinants in the folding and assembly of immunoglobulin variable domains. , 2016, Molecular immunology.

[66]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Conformational selection in amyloid-based immunotherapy: Survey of crystal structures of antibody-amyloid complexes. , 2016, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[67]  Raja R Srinivas,et al.  Strong Enrichment of Aromatic Residues in Binding Sites from a Charge-neutralized Hyperthermostable Sso7d Scaffold Library , 2016, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[68]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Protein Ensembles: How Does Nature Harness Thermodynamic Fluctuations for Life? The Diverse Functional Roles of Conformational Ensembles in the Cell. , 2016, Chemical reviews.