Analysis of nanobody paratopes reveals greater diversity than classical antibodies

Abstract Nanobodies (Nbs) are a class of antigen-binding protein derived from camelid immune systems, which achieve equivalent binding affinities and specificities to classical antibodies (Abs) despite being comprised of only a single variable domain. Here, we use a data set of 156 unique Nb:antigen complex structures to characterize Nb–antigen binding and draw comparison to a set of 156 unique Ab:antigen structures. We analyse residue composition and interactions at the antigen interface, together with structural features of the paratopes of both data sets. Our analysis finds that the set of Nb structures displays much greater paratope diversity, in terms of the structural segments involved in the paratope, the residues used at these positions to contact the antigen and furthermore the type of contacts made with the antigen. Our findings suggest a different relationship between contact propensity and sequence variability from that observed for Ab VH domains. The distinction between sequence positions that control interaction specificity and those that form the domain scaffold is much less clear-cut for Nbs, and furthermore H3 loop positions play a much more dominant role in determining interaction specificity.

[1]  B. Lee,et al.  The interpretation of protein structures: estimation of static accessibility. , 1971, Journal of molecular biology.

[2]  A. Lesk,et al.  Conformations of immunoglobulin hypervariable regions , 1989, Nature.

[3]  E. Kabat,et al.  Identical V region amino acid sequences and segments of sequences in antibodies of different specificities. Relative contributions of VH and VL genes, minigenes, and complementarity-determining regions to binding of antibody-combining sites. , 1991, Journal of immunology.

[4]  S. Muyldermans,et al.  Naturally occurring antibodies devoid of light chains , 1993, Nature.

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

[6]  Chantal Abergel,et al.  Identification of specificity‐determining residues in antibodies , 1995, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[7]  L. Wyns,et al.  A single-domain antibody fragment in complex with RNase A: non-canonical loop structures and nanomolar affinity using two CDR loops. , 1999, Structure.

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

[9]  A. Plückthun,et al.  Yet another numbering scheme for immunoglobulin variable domains: an automatic modeling and analysis tool. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[10]  C. Woo,et al.  The generation of antibody diversity through somatic hypermutation and class switch recombination. , 2004, Genes & development.

[11]  Fred Dyda,et al.  Water molecules in the antibody-antigen interface of the structure of the Fab HyHEL-5-lysozyme complex at 1.7 A resolution: comparison with results from isothermal titration calorimetry. , 2005, Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography.

[12]  L. Wyns,et al.  Molecular basis for the preferential cleft recognition by dromedary heavy-chain antibodies. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[14]  Jeffrey J. Gray,et al.  Analysis and Modeling of the Variable Region of Camelid Single-Domain Antibodies , 2011, The Journal of Immunology.

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

[16]  S. Rasmussen,et al.  Structure of a nanobody-stabilized active state of the β2 adrenoceptor , 2010, Nature.

[17]  Yanay Ofran,et al.  Paratome: an online tool for systematic identification of antigen-binding regions in antibodies based on sequence or structure , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[18]  H. Ewers,et al.  A simple, versatile method for GFP-based super-resolution microscopy via nanobodies , 2012, Nature Methods.

[19]  Michael Y. Galperin,et al.  The 2012 Nucleic Acids Research Database Issue and the online Molecular Biology Database Collection , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

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

[21]  Yanay Ofran,et al.  Structural Consensus among Antibodies Defines the Antigen Binding Site , 2012, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[22]  Serge Muyldermans,et al.  Nanobodies: natural single-domain antibodies. , 2013, Annual review of biochemistry.

[23]  N. Palaniyar,et al.  NET balancing: a problem in inflammatory lung diseases , 2013, Front. Immun..

[24]  Inbal Sela-Culang,et al.  The Structural Basis of Antibody-Antigen Recognition , 2013, Front. Immunol..

[25]  Paolo Marcatili,et al.  Prediction of site-specific interactions in antibody-antigen complexes: the proABC method and server , 2013, Bioinform..

[26]  P. Martineau,et al.  Restricted diversity of antigen binding residues of antibodies revealed by computational alanine scanning of 227 antibody-antigen complexes. , 2014, Journal of molecular biology.

[27]  S. Muyldermans,et al.  Nanobody-based products as research and diagnostic tools. , 2014, Trends in biotechnology.

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

[29]  Rubel Chakravarty,et al.  Nanobody: The “Magic Bullet” for Molecular Imaging? , 2014, Theranostics.

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

[31]  Qifang Xu,et al.  PyIgClassify: a database of antibody CDR structural classifications , 2014, Nucleic Acids Res..

[32]  E. Pelletier,et al.  Abundant toxin-related genes in the genomes of beneficial symbionts from deep-sea hydrothermal vent mussels , 2015, eLife.

[33]  A. Desmyter,et al.  Camelid nanobodies: killing two birds with one stone. , 2015, Current opinion in structural biology.

[34]  Mark Bates,et al.  Nanobodies: site-specific labeling for super-resolution imaging, rapid epitope-mapping and native protein complex isolation , 2015, eLife.

[35]  S. Oliveira,et al.  Nanobody-based cancer therapy of solid tumors. , 2015, Nanomedicine.

[36]  Charlotte M. Deane,et al.  ANARCI: antigen receptor numbering and receptor classification , 2015, Bioinform..

[37]  Simon Mitternacht,et al.  FreeSASA: An open source C library for solvent accessible surface area calculations , 2016, F1000Research.

[38]  Daisuke Kuroda,et al.  Shape complementarity and hydrogen bond preferences in protein-protein interfaces: implications for antibody modeling and protein-protein docking , 2016, Bioinform..

[39]  Lucy J. Colwell,et al.  Comparative analysis of nanobody sequence and structure data , 2018, Proteins.