Advertisement

In Silico Engineering Towards Enhancement of Bap–VHH Monoclonal Antibody Binding Affinity

  • Fateme Sefid
  • Zahra Payandeh
  • Ghasem Azamirad
  • Razieh Abdolhamidi
  • Iraj RasooliEmail author
Article
  • 169 Downloads

Abstract

Antibodies play major role in immunotherapy, basic researches, and industrial processes. Interactions between antibody–antigen complexes are important to know how they function that help improve their properties in designing new antibodies through rational engineering for therapeutic or biotechnological applications, including the production of biosensors. Nowadays, antibody engineering is widely used in many fields such as medicine, criminal sciences, military, defense industries, etc. Designing antibodies with desired properties is a challenging task. Computational docking is the method of predicting the conformation of a complex structure such as antibody–antigen from its separated elements. The validation of designed antibodies is carried out by docking tools. In the previous study we produced VHH against Bap antigen in Acinetobacter baumannii using phage display technique. In this study, the VHH selected using phage display technique was modeled and docked with its antigen. We made an attempt to find the important amino acids of this antibody, then replaced these amino acids with others to improve their binding affinity of antibody variants to antigens. In this regard, the VHH was mutated. Docking structural prediction of Bap–VHH complex was used for designing and validation of VHHs with higher affinity for binding to Bap receptor. By analysis of the model, several mutants of VHH were designed, and their properties improved in a predictable manner especially for their binding ability to Bap. In conclusion, the designed nanobodies, considering their binding site on Bap, were found to be potential candidates for the treatment of Acinetobacter baumannii infections.

Keywords

Acinetobacter baumannii Antibody engineering Antigen binding Bap VHH Bioinformatic tools 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Molecular Microbiology Research Center, Shahed University, Tehran- Iran for their support by an unrestricted free access to web site for data collection.

Author Contributions

Prof. IR laid out the main idea and participated in the design of the study, conducted coordination, and revised the manuscript. FS, ZP, GA and RA participated in the data collection, data analysis, software trouble shooting, and drafting the manuscript respectively. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

The authors appreciate National Institute for Medical Research Development, Grant Number 958302.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Ahern H (1995) Antibodies making their way from the clinic to the research lab. Scientist 9:18–19Google Scholar
  2. Ardekani LS, Gargari SLM, Rasooli I, Bazl MR, Mohammadi M, Ebrahimizadeh W, Bakherad H, Zare H (2013) A novel nanobody against urease activity of Helicobacter pylori. Int J Infect Dis 17:e723–e728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barderas R, Desmet J, Timmerman P, Meloen R, Casal JI (2008) Affinity maturation of antibodies assisted by in silico modeling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9029–9034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brock K, Talley K, Coley K, Kundrotas P, Alexov E (2007) Optimization of electrostatic interactions in protein-protein complexes. Biophys J 93:3340–3352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark KR, Walsh ST (2009) Crystal structure of a 3B3 variant—a broadly neutralizing HIV-1 scFv antibody. Protein Sci 18:2429–2441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dominguez C, Boelens R, Bonvin AM (2003) HADDOCK: a protein–protein docking approach based on biochemical or biophysical information. J Am Chem Soc 125:1731–1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dundas J, Ouyang Z, Tseng J, Binkowski A, Turpaz Y, Liang J (2006) CASTp: computed atlas of surface topography of proteins with structural and topographical mapping of functionally annotated residues. Nucleic Acids Res 34:W116–W118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ebrahimizadeh W, Gargari SM, Rajabibazl M, Ardekani LS, Zare H, Bakherad H (2013) Isolation and characterization of protective anti-LPS nanobody against V. cholerae O1 recognizing Inaba and Ogawa serotypes. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97:4457–4466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Espinal P, Marti S, Vila J (2012) Effect of biofilm formation on the survival of Acinetobacter baumannii on dry surfaces. J Hosp Infect 80:56–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fattahian Y, Rasooli I, Gargari SLM, Rahbar MR, Astaneh SDA, Amani J (2011) Protection against Acinetobacter baumannii infection via its functional deprivation of biofilm associated protein (Bap). Microb Pathog 51:402–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferreira LG, dos Santos RN, Oliva G, Andricopulo AD (2015) Molecular docking and structure-based drug design strategies. Molecules 20:13384–13421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hernandez M, Ghersi D, Sanchez R (2009) SITEHOUND-web: a server for ligand binding site identification in protein structures. Nucleic Acids Res 37:W413–W416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jahangiri A, Rasooli I, Gargari SLM, Owlia P, Rahbar MR, Amani J, Khalili S (2011) An in silico DNA vaccine against Listeria monocytogenes. Vaccine 29:6948–6958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jahangiri A, Rasooli I, Rahbar MR, Khalili S, Amani J, Zanoos KA (2012) Precise detection of L. monocytogenes hitting its highly conserved region possessing several specific antibody binding sites. J Theor Biol 305:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kawabata T (2010) Detection of multiscale pockets on protein surfaces using mathematical morphology. Proteins 78:1195–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim SJ, Park Y, Hong HJ (2005) Antibody engineering for the development of therapeutic antibodies. Mol Cells 20:17–29Google Scholar
  17. Kinoshita K, Murakami Y, Nakamura H (2007) eF-seek: prediction of the functional sites of proteins by searching for similar electrostatic potential and molecular surface shape. Nucleic Acids Res 35:W398–W402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krykbaev RA, Tsantili P, Jeffrey PD, Margolies MN (2002) Modifying specificity of antidigoxin antibodies using insertional mutagenesis. Protein Sci 11:2899–2908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kufareva I, Budagyan L, Raush E, Totrov M, Abagyan R (2007) PIER: protein interface recognition for structural proteomics. Proteins 67:400–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kunik V, Ashkenazi S, Ofran Y (2012) Paratome: an online tool for systematic identification of antigen-binding regions in antibodies based on sequence or structure. Nucleic Acids Res 40:W521–W524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lippow SM, Wittrup KD, Tidor B (2007) Computational design of antibody-affinity improvement beyond in vivo maturation. Nat Biotechnol 25:1171–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lo Y-T, Wang H-W, Pai T-W, Tzou W-S, Hsu H-H, Chang H-T (2013) Protein-ligand binding region prediction (PLB-SAVE) based on geometric features and CUDA acceleration. BMC Bioinform 14:S4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pantazes R, Maranas C (2010) OptCDR: a general computational method for the design of antibody complementarity determining regions for targeted epitope binding. Protein Eng Des Sel 23:849–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Payandeh Z, Rasooli I, Mousavi Gargari SL, Rajabi Bazl M, Ebrahimizadeh W (2014) Immunoreaction of a recombinant nanobody from camelid single domain antibody fragment with Acinetobacter baumannii. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hygiene 108:92–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Payandeh Z, Rajabibazl M, Mortazavi Y, Rahim-Pour A, Taromchi AH (2017) Ofatumumab monoclonal antibody affinity maturation through in silico modeling.Iran Biomed JGoogle Scholar
  26. Qin S, Zhou H.-X. (2007) meta-PPISP: a meta web server for protein-protein interaction site prediction. Bioinformatics 23:3386–3387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rahbar MR, Rasooli I, Gargari SLM, Sandstrom G, Amani J, Fattahian Y, Jahangiri A, Jalali M (2012) A potential in silico antibody–antigen based diagnostic test for precise identification of Acinetobacter baumannii. J Theor Biol 294:29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reichert JM (2013) Antibodies to watch in 2013: mid-year update. In: MAbs, vol 5. Taylor & Francis, pp 513–517Google Scholar
  29. Reichert JM, Rosensweig CJ, Faden LB, Dewitz MC (2005) Monoclonal antibody successes in the clinic. Nat Biotechnol 23:1073–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Renaut L, Monnet C, Dubreuil O, Zaki O, Crozet F, Bouayadi K, Kharrat H, Mondon P (2012) Affinity maturation of antibodies: optimized methods to generate high-quality ScFv libraries and isolate IgG candidates by high-throughput screening. Antibody engineering: methods and protocols, 2nd edn, pp 451–461Google Scholar
  31. Sefid F, Rasooli I, Jahangiri A (2013) In silico determination and validation of Baumannii acinetobactin utilization a structure and ligand binding site. BioMed Res Int.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/172784 Google Scholar
  32. Sefid F, Rasooli I, Jahangiri A, Bazmara H (2015) Functional exposed amino acids of BauA as potential immunogen against Acinetobacter baumannii. Acta Biotheor 63:129–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sefid F, Rasooli I, Payandeh Z (2016) Homology modeling of a Camelid antibody fragment against a conserved region of Acinetobacter baumannii biofilm associated protein (Bap). J Theor Biol 397:43–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sim N-L, Kumar P, Hu J, Henikoff S, Schneider G, Ng PC (2012) SIFT web server: predicting effects of amino acid substitutions on proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 40:W452–W457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Siontorou CG (2013) Nanobodies as novel agents for disease diagnosis and therapy. Int J Nanomed 8:4215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tan KP, Nguyen TB, Patel S, Varadarajan R, Madhusudhan MS (2013) Depth: a web server to compute depth, cavity sizes, detect potential small-molecule ligand-binding cavities and predict the pKa of ionizable residues in proteins. Nucleic Acids Res 41:W314–W321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Turanli-Yildiz B, Alkim C, Cakar ZP (2012) Protein engineering methods and applications. In: Protein engineering. InTechGoogle Scholar
  38. Weiner LM (2007) Building better magic bullets—improving unconjugated monoclonal antibody therapy for cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 7:701–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xu J, Song J, Yan F, Chu H, Luo J, Zhao Y, Cheng X, Luo G, Zheng Q, Wei J (2009) Improving GPX activity of selenium-containing human single-chain Fv antibody by site-directed mutation based on the structural analysis. J Mol Recognit 22:293–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yang W-P, Green K, Pinz-Sweeney S, Briones AT, Burton DR, Barbas CF III (1995) CDR walking mutagenesis for the affinity maturation of a potent human anti-HIV-1 antibody into the picomolar range. J Mol Biol 254:392–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang Z, Li Y, Lin B, Schroeder M, Huang B (2011a) Identification of cavities on protein surface using multiple computational approaches for drug binding site prediction. Bioinformatics 27:2083–2088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang QC, Deng L, Fisher M, Guan J, Honig B, Petrey D (2011b) PredUs: a web server for predicting protein interfaces using structural neighbors. Nucleic Acids Res 39:W283–W287CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fateme Sefid
    • 1
    • 2
  • Zahra Payandeh
    • 3
  • Ghasem Azamirad
    • 4
  • Razieh Abdolhamidi
    • 5
  • Iraj Rasooli
    • 5
    • 6
    Email author
  1. 1.Departeman of Medical GeneticsShahid Sadoughi University of Medical ScienceYazdIran
  2. 2.Departeman of BiologyScience and Art UniversityYazdIran
  3. 3.Department of Medical Biotechnology and Nanotechnology, Faculty of MedicineZanjan University of Medical ScienceZanjanIran
  4. 4.School of Mechanical EngineeringYazd UniversityYazdIran
  5. 5.Molecular Microbiology Research CenterShahed UniversityTehranIran
  6. 6.Department of BiologyShahed UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations