Computational design of an epitope-specific Keap1 binding antibody using hotspot residues grafting and CDR loop swapping

Therapeutic and diagnostic applications of monoclonal antibodies often require careful selection of binders that recognize specific epitopes on the target molecule to exert a desired modulation of biological function. Here we present a proof-of-concept application for the rational design of an epitope-specific antibody binding with the target protein Keap1, by grafting pre-defined structural interaction patterns from the native binding partner protein, Nrf2, onto geometrically matched positions of a set of antibody scaffolds. The designed antibodies bind to Keap1 and block the Keap1-Nrf2 interaction in an epitope-specific way. One resulting antibody is further optimised to achieve low-nanomolar binding affinity by in silico redesign of the CDRH3 sequences. An X-ray co-crystal structure of one resulting design reveals that the actual binding orientation and interface with Keap1 is very close to the design model, despite an unexpected CDRH3 tilt and VH/VL interface deviation, which indicates that the modelling precision may be improved by taking into account simultaneous CDR loops conformation and VH/VL orientation optimisation upon antibody sequence change. Our study confirms that, given a pre-existing crystal structure of the target protein-protein interaction, hotspots grafting with CDR loop swapping is an attractive route to the rational design of an antibody targeting a pre-selected epitope.

[1]  Timothy A. Whitehead,et al.  Optimization of affinity, specificity and function of designed influenza inhibitors using deep sequencing , 2012, Nature Biotechnology.

[2]  G. Murshudov,et al.  Refinement of macromolecular structures by the maximum-likelihood method. , 1997, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[3]  L. A. Clark,et al.  An antibody loop replacement design feasibility study and a loop-swapped dimer structure. , 2008, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[4]  John McCafferty,et al.  Beyond natural antibodies: the power of in vitro display technologies , 2011, Nature Biotechnology.

[5]  J. Harper,et al.  The Keap1-BTB Protein Is an Adaptor That Bridges Nrf2 to a Cul3-Based E3 Ligase: Oxidative Stress Sensing by a Cul3-Keap1 Ligase , 2004, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[6]  M. Vendruscolo,et al.  Rational design of antibodies targeting specific epitopes within intrinsically disordered proteins , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Andrew C. R. Martin,et al.  Analysis and improvements to Kabat and structurally correct numbering of antibody variable domains. , 2008, Molecular immunology.

[8]  Colin A. Smith,et al.  Backrub-like backbone simulation recapitulates natural protein conformational variability and improves mutant side-chain prediction. , 2008, Journal of molecular biology.

[9]  L. Mei,et al.  Structural basis of agrin-LRP4-MuSK signaling. , 2012, Genes & development.

[10]  Timothy A. Whitehead,et al.  Computational Design of Proteins Targeting the Conserved Stem Region of Influenza Hemagglutinin , 2011, Science.

[11]  E. Bourhis,et al.  Wnt antagonists bind through a short peptide to the first β-propeller domain of LRP5/6. , 2011, Structure.

[12]  A Tramontano,et al.  Conformations of the third hypervariable region in the VH domain of immunoglobulins. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[13]  Gideon Schreiber,et al.  Computational design of protein-protein interactions. , 2013, Current opinion in structural biology.

[14]  R. Nussinov,et al.  Conservation of polar residues as hot spots at protein interfaces , 2000, Proteins.

[15]  D. Baker,et al.  Design of a Novel Globular Protein Fold with Atomic-Level Accuracy , 2003, Science.

[16]  David Baker,et al.  Macromolecular modeling with rosetta. , 2008, Annual review of biochemistry.

[17]  David Baker,et al.  Role of the Biomolecular Energy Gap in Protein Design, Structure, and Evolution , 2012, Cell.

[18]  A. Lawson,et al.  Antibody-enabled small-molecule drug discovery , 2012, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[19]  K. Itoh,et al.  Keap1 Recruits Neh2 through Binding to ETGE and DLG Motifs: Characterization of the Two-Site Molecular Recognition Model , 2006, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[20]  Jiye Shi,et al.  SAbDab: the structural antibody database , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[21]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  SnugDock: Paratope Structural Optimization during Antibody-Antigen Docking Compensates for Errors in Antibody Homology Models , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[22]  Hamid Tissire,et al.  Structure-Guided Design of an Anti-dengue Antibody Directed to a Non-immunodominant Epitope , 2015, Cell.

[23]  M. Lawrence,et al.  Shape complementarity at protein/protein interfaces. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[24]  P. Wilson,et al.  Tools to therapeutically harness the human antibody response , 2012, Nature Reviews Immunology.

[25]  S. Tonegawa Somatic generation of antibody diversity , 1983, Nature.

[26]  Louis M. Weiner,et al.  Monoclonal antibodies: versatile platforms for cancer immunotherapy , 2010, Nature Reviews Immunology.

[27]  C. Deane,et al.  ABangle: characterising the VH-VL orientation in antibodies. , 2013, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[28]  David Baker,et al.  A de novo protein binding pair by computational design and directed evolution. , 2011, Molecular cell.

[29]  P. Carter Potent antibody therapeutics by design , 2006, Nature Reviews Immunology.

[30]  M. Hannink,et al.  Structure of the Keap1:Nrf2 interface provides mechanistic insight into Nrf2 signaling , 2006, The EMBO journal.

[31]  D. Bartel,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S14 Tables S1 to S8 References Crystal Structure of the Catalytic Core of an Rna-polymerase Ribozyme , 2022 .

[32]  Peter Briggs,et al.  A graphical user interface to the CCP4 program suite. , 2003, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[33]  Randy J. Read,et al.  Overview of the CCP4 suite and current developments , 2011, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[34]  Luke N Robinson,et al.  Redesign of a cross-reactive antibody to dengue virus with broad-spectrum activity and increased in vivo potency , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Haim J. Wolfson,et al.  Geometric hashing: an overview , 1997 .

[36]  L. Griffin,et al.  Antibody fragments as tools in crystallography , 2011, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[37]  M. Karplus,et al.  Effective energy function for proteins in solution , 1999, Proteins.

[38]  H. Hoogenboom,et al.  Selecting and screening recombinant antibody libraries , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[39]  Jens Meiler,et al.  RosettaScripts: A Scripting Language Interface to the Rosetta Macromolecular Modeling Suite , 2011, PloS one.

[40]  Julia M. Shifman,et al.  Protein Engineering by Combined Computational and In Vitro Evolution Approaches. , 2016, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[41]  A. Dickson,et al.  A CHO cell line engineered to express XBP1 and ERO1‐Lα has increased levels of transient protein expression , 2013, Biotechnology progress.

[42]  Randy J. Read,et al.  Phaser crystallographic software , 2007, Journal of applied crystallography.

[43]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Computer-aided antibody design , 2012, Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS.

[44]  E. Söderlind,et al.  Recombining germline-derived CDR sequences for creating diverse single-framework antibody libraries , 2000, Nature Biotechnology.

[45]  W. Saltzman,et al.  Shining light on a new class of hydrogels , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.

[46]  Luhua Lai,et al.  Nonnatural protein–protein interaction-pair design by key residues grafting , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[47]  Ian W. Davis,et al.  Structure validation by Cα geometry: ϕ,ψ and Cβ deviation , 2003, Proteins.

[48]  Roland L. Dunbrack,et al.  A new clustering of antibody CDR loop conformations. , 2011, Journal of molecular biology.

[49]  Sarel J. Fleishman,et al.  AbDesign: An algorithm for combinatorial backbone design guided by natural conformations and sequences , 2015, Proteins.

[50]  X. Qiu,et al.  Structures of protective antibodies reveal sites of vulnerability on Ebola virus , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[51]  Guohui Li,et al.  Structural understanding of stabilization patterns in engineered bispecific Ig‐like antibody molecules , 2009, Proteins.

[52]  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.

[53]  J. Thornton,et al.  PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures , 1993 .

[54]  Costas D. Maranas,et al.  OptMAVEn – A New Framework for the de novo Design of Antibody Variable Region Models Targeting Specific Antigen Epitopes , 2014, PloS one.

[55]  Y. Li,et al.  Structure of a single-chain antibody variable domain (Fv) fragment complexed with a carbohydrate antigen at 1.7-A resolution. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[56]  O. Zelphati,et al.  Transcriptionally Active Polymerase Chain Reaction (TAP) , 2002, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[57]  S Suhai,et al.  Prediction of hypervariable CDR-H3 loop structures in antibodies. , 1995, Protein engineering.

[58]  Tsutomu Ohta,et al.  Structural basis for defects of Keap1 activity provoked by its point mutations in lung cancer. , 2006, Molecular cell.

[59]  S J Wodak,et al.  SFCHECK: a unified set of procedures for evaluating the quality of macromolecular structure-factor data and their agreement with the atomic model. , 1999, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[60]  Bruce Tidor,et al.  Computational design of antibody-affinity improvement beyond in vivo maturation , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[61]  Burkhard Rost,et al.  Protein–Protein Interaction Hotspots Carved into Sequences , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[62]  David Baker,et al.  Hotspot-centric de novo design of protein binders. , 2011, Journal of molecular biology.

[63]  Andrew C. Chan,et al.  Therapeutic antibodies for autoimmunity and inflammation , 2010, Nature Reviews Immunology.

[64]  B. Kuhlman,et al.  A comparison of successful and failed protein interface designs highlights the challenges of designing buried hydrogen bonds , 2013, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[65]  A. Shukla,et al.  Methodological advances: the unsung heroes of the GPCR structural revolution , 2015, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[66]  Dima Kozakov,et al.  The FTMap family of web servers for determining and characterizing ligand-binding hot spots of proteins , 2015, Nature Protocols.

[67]  Haruki Nakamura,et al.  Structural classification of CDR‐H3 in antibodies , 1996, FEBS letters.

[68]  A. Lesk,et al.  Standard conformations for the canonical structures of immunoglobulins. , 1997, Journal of molecular biology.

[69]  D. Spring,et al.  The Application of Ligand-Mapping Molecular Dynamics Simulations to the Rational Design of Peptidic Modulators of Protein-Protein Interactions. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[70]  Kevin Cowtan,et al.  research papers Acta Crystallographica Section D Biological , 2005 .

[71]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  Toward high‐resolution homology modeling of antibody Fv regions and application to antibody–antigen docking , 2009, Proteins.