Advertisement

Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp 1348–1360 | Cite as

Phase Separation of an IgG1 Antibody Solution under a Low Ionic Strength Condition

  • Hirotaka Nishi
  • Makoto Miyajima
  • Hiroaki Nakagami
  • Masanori Noda
  • Susumu Uchiyama
  • Kiichi FukuiEmail author
Research Paper

ABSTRACT

Purpose

Phase separation of monoclonal antibody A (MAb A) solution and its relation to protein self-association are studied.

Methods

A phase diagram of MAb A and its dependence on ionic strength and pH were investigated. The protein self-associations were characterized by dynamic light scattering (DLS), analytical ultracentrifugation analysis (AUC) and viscosity measurement.

Results

MAb A solution with a clear appearance in an isotonic ionic strength condition turned opalescent in a low ionic strength condition, followed by liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) into light and heavy phases. The protein concentrations of the two phases were dependent on the ionic strength and pH. The two phases became reversibly miscible when the ionic strength or temperature was increased. DLS and AUC showed that MAb A under a low ionic strength condition self-associates at a protein concentration above the critical concentration of 16.5 mg/mL. The viscosity of the heavy phase was high and dependent on the shear rate. These results indicate that attractive protein-protein interaction in the heavy phase induces LLPS.

Conclusions

LLPS was induced in MAb A solution in a low ionic strength condition due to reversible protein self-association mediated mainly by attractive electrostatic interaction among the MAb A molecules in the heavy phase.

KEY WORDS

low ionic strength condition monoclonal antibody opalescence phase separation self-association 

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank Mr. Yuichi Shinozaki and Ms. Tazuko Watanabe (Anton Paar Japan K.K.) for the viscosity measurements.

Supplementary material

11095_2010_125_Fig10_ESM.gif (221 kb)
Fig. S1

Effect of polysorbate 80 concentation on the protein concentation in the light (●) and heavy (▲) phases at 25°C in low ionic strength buffer of 5 mM sodium phosphate, 10 mM sodium phosphate, 10 mM sodium chloride, 5% sucrose, pH 5.5 N = 3 (GIF 221 kb)

11095_2010_125_MOESM1_ESM.tif (121 kb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 120 kb)
11095_2010_125_Fig11_ESM.gif (373 kb)
Fig. S2

Visual appearance of MAb A solution a) at 53 mg/mL and b) at 107 mg/ml in low ionic strength buffer of 5 mM sodium phosphate, 10 mM sodium chloride, 5% sucrose, pH 5.5 at ambient temperature (GIF 372 kb)

11095_2010_125_MOESM2_ESM.tif (651 kb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 651 kb)
11095_2010_125_Fig12_ESM.gif (207 kb)
Fig. S3

Autocorrelation function obtained in DLS measurement of MAb A in isotonic ionic strength condition of 10 mM sodium phosphate, 140 mM sodium chrolide, pH 7.2 (GIF 207 kb)

11095_2010_125_MOESM3_ESM.tif (103 kb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 103 kb)
11095_2010_125_Fig13_ESM.gif (193 kb)
Fig. S4

SEC chromatogram of MAb A before (red line) and after (Blue line) LLPS (GIF 192 kb)

11095_2010_125_MOESM4_ESM.tif (89 kb)
High Resolution Image (TIFF 88 kb)

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Shire SJ, Shahrokh Z, Liu J. Challenges in the development of high protein concentration formulations. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:1390–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Minton AP. Molecular crowding: analysis of effects of high concentrations of inert consolutes on biochemical equilibria and rates in terms of volume exclusion. Methods Enzymol. 1998;295:127–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jiménez M, Rivas G, Minton AP. Quantitative characterization of weak self-association in concentrated solutions of immunoglobulin G via the measurement of sedimentation equilibrium and osmotic pressure. Biochemistry. 2007;46:8373–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Demeule B, Lawrence MJ, Drake AF, Gurny R, Arvinte T. Characterization of protein aggregation: the case of a therapeutic immnoglobulin. Biochem Biophys Acta. 2007;1774:146–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu J, Nguyen MDH, Andya JD, Shire SJ. Reversible self-association increases the viscosity of a concentrated monoclonal antibody in aqueous solution. J Pharm Sci. 2005;94:1928–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saluja A, Badkar AV, Zeng DL, Nema S, Kalonia DS. Application of high-frequency rheology measurements for analyzing protein-protein interactions in high concentration solutions using a model antibody (IgG2). J Pharm Sci. 2006;95:1967–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chari R, Jerath K, Badkar AV, Kalonia DS. Long- and short-range electrostatic interactions affect the rheology of highly concentrated antibody solutions. Pharm Res. 2010;26:2607–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saluja A, Kalonia DS. Nature and consequences of protein-protein interactions in high protein concentration solutions. Int J Pharm. 2008;358:1–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cromwell MEM, Felten C, Flores H, Liu J, Shire SJ. Self-association of therapeutic proteins: Implications for product development. In: Murphy RM, Tsai AM, editors. Misbehaving proteins: protein misfolding, aggregation, and stability, New York: Springer; 2006. pp 313–330.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cleland JL, Powell MF, Shire SJ. The development of stable protein formulations: a close look at protein aggregation, deamidation and oxidation. Crit Rev Ther Drug Carr Syst. 1993;10:307–77.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Braun A, Kwee L, Labow MA, Alsenz J. Protein aggregates seem to play a key role among the parameters influencing the antigenicity of interferon alpha (INF-alpha) in normal and transgenic mice. Pharm Res. 1997;14:1472–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hermeling S, Crommelin DJ, Schellekens H, Jiskoot W. Structure-immunogenicity relationships of therapeutic proteins. Pharm Res. 2004;21:897–903.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Robert D, Barelli S, Crettaz D, Bart PA, Schifferli JA, Betticher D et al. Clinical proteomics: study of a cryogel. Proteomics. 2006;6:3958–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yagi H, Takahashi N, Yamaguchi Y, Kato K. Temperature-dependent isologous Fab-Fab interaction that mediates cryocrystallization of a monoclonal immunoglobulin G. Mol Immunol. 2004;41:1211–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narayanan J, Liu XY. Protein interactions in undersaturated and supersaturated solutions: a study using light and X-ray scattering. Biophys J. 2003;84:523–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salinas BA, Sathish HA, Bishop SM, Harn N, Carpenter JF, Randolph TW. Understanding and modulating opalescence and viscosity in a monoclonal antibody formulation. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:82–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yadav S, Liu J, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Specific interactions in high concentration antibody solutions resulting in high viscosity. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:1151–68.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Saluja A, Badkar AV, Zeng DL, Nema S, Kalonia DS. Ultrasonic storage modulus as a novel parameter for analyzing protein-protein interactions in high protein concentration solutions: correlation with static and dynamic light scattering measurements. Biophys J. 2007;92:234–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saluja A, Kalonia DS. Application of ultrasonic shear rheometer to characterize rheological properties of high concentration solutions at microliter volume. J Pharm Sci. 2005;94:1161–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saluja A, Badkar AV, Zeng DL, Kalonia DS. Ultrasonic rheology of a monoclonal antibody (IgG2) solution: implications for physical stability of proteins in high concentration formulations. J Pharm Sci. 2007;96:3181–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Patel AR, Kerwin BA, Kanapuram SR. Viscoelastic characterization of high concentration antibody formulations using quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation monitoring. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98:3108–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kanai S, Liu J, Patapoff TW, Shire SJ. Reversible self-association of a concentrated monoclonal antibody solution mediated by Fab-Fab interaction that impacts solution viscosity. J Pharm Sci. 2008;97:4219–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sukumar M, Doyle BL, Combs JL, Pekar AH. Opalescent appearance of an IgG1 antibody at high concentrations and its relationship to noncovalent association. Pharm Res. 2004;21:1087–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Annunziata O, Asherie N, Lomakin A, Pande J, Ogun O, Benedek GB. Effect of polyethylene glycol on the liquid-liquid phase transition in aqueous protein solutions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99:14165–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Asakura S, Oosawa F. On interactions between two bodies immersed in a solution of macromolecules. J Chem Phys. 1954;22:1255–6.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jion AI, Goh LT, Oh SKW. Crystallization of IgG1 by mapping its liquid-liquid phase separation curve. Biotech Bioeng. 2006;95:911–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ahamed T, Esteban BNA, Ottens M, van Dedem GW, van der Wielen LA, Bisschops MAT et al. Phase behavior of an intact monoclonal antibody. Biophy J. 2007;93:610–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dumets AC, Chockla AM, Kaler EW, Lenhoff AM. Protein phase behavior in aqueous solutions: crystallization, liquid-liquid phase separation, gels, and aggregates. Biophys J. 2008;94:570–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haruyama H, Ito S, Miyadai K, Takahashi T, Kawaida R, Takayama T et al. Humanization of the mouse anti-Fas antibody HFE7A and crystal structure of the humanized HFE7A Fab fragment. Biol Pharm Bull. 2002;25:1537–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thomson JA, Schurtenberger P, Thurston GM, Benedek GB. Binary liquid phase separation and critical phenomena in a protein/water solution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1987;84:7079–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baek SG, Magda JJ. Monolithic rheometer plate fabricated using silicon micromachining technology and containing miniature pressure sensors for N 1 and N 2 measurements. J Rheology. 2003;47:1249–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pipe C, Kim NJ, McKinley G. Microfluidic Rheometery on a Chip. 2007 4th AERC, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schuck P. Size distribution analysis of macromolecules by sedimentation velocity ultracentrifugation and Lamm equation modeling. Biophys J. 2000;78:1606–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tanaka T, Ishimoto C. Phase separation of a protein-water mixture in cold cataract in the young rat lens. Science. 1977;197:1010–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ishimoto C, Tanaka T. Critical behavior of a binary mixture of protein and salt water. Phys Rev Lett. 1977;39:474–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kato K, Sautes-Fridman C, Yamada W, Kobayashi K, Uchiyama S, Kim H et al. Structural basis of the interaction between IgG and Fcγ receptors. J Mol Biol. 2000;295:213–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Oda M, Uchiyama S, Noda M, Nishi Y, Koga M, Mayanagi M et al. Effects of antibody affinity and antigen valence on molecular forms of immune complexes. Mol Immunol. 2009;47:352–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu J, Andya JD, Shire SJ. A critical review of analytical ultracentrifugation and field flow fractionation methods for measuring protein aggregation. AAPS J. 2006;8:E580–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pekar A, Sukumar M. Quantitation of aggregates in therapeutic proteins using sedimentation velocity analytical ultracentrifugation: practical considerations that affect precision and accuracy. Anal Biochem. 2007;367:225–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    George A, Wilson WW. Predicting protein crystallization from a dilute solution property. Acta Crystallogr A. 1994;D50:61–365.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    George A, Chiang Y, Guo B, Arabshahi A, Cai Z, Wilson WW. Second virial coefficient as predictor in protein crystal growth. Methods Enzymol. 1997;276:100–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Clark JI, Clark JM. Lens cytoplasmic phase separation. Int Rev Cytol. 2000;192:171–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cromwell MEM, Carpenter JF, Scherer T, Randolph TW. Opalescence in antibody formulations is a solution critical phenomenon. Abstracts of Papers. 2008 236th ACS National Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, United States.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cromwell MEM. Implications of phase separation on pharmaceutical development. 2009 AAPS National Biotechnology Conference, Seattle, WA, United States.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McDonald P, Victa C, Carter-Franklin JN, Fahrner R. Selective antibody precipitation using polyelectlyte: A novel approach to the purification of monoclonal antibodies. Biotech Bioeng. 2009;102:1141–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Matheus S, Friess W, Schwartz D, Mahler HC. Liquid high concentration IgG1 antibody formulations by precipitation. J Pharm Sci. 2009;98:3043–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Strandner A, Sedgwick H, Cardinaux F, Poon WCK, Egelhaaf SU, Schurtenberger P. Equilibrium cluster formation in concentrated protein solutions and colloids. Nature. 2004;432:492–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hirotaka Nishi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Makoto Miyajima
    • 1
  • Hiroaki Nakagami
    • 1
  • Masanori Noda
    • 2
  • Susumu Uchiyama
    • 2
  • Kiichi Fukui
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Formulation Technology Research LaboratoriesDaiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.HiratsukaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Biotechnology, Graduate School of EngineeringOsaka UniversitySuitaJapan

Personalised recommendations