Chapter 4: Production Strategies and Challenges with IgG-Based Bispecific Ab Formats

  • Chen Gu
  • Diego EllermanEmail author
Part of the AAPS Advances in the Pharmaceutical Sciences Series book series (AAPS, volume 35)


Bispecific antibodies are being developed against a range of diseases and are gaining presence in the pipeline of pharmaceutical companies. Rather than a single format, they consist of a variety of different forms reflecting different mindsets favoring a simplified production process or a more native-like molecule. In this chapter we review the most common bispecific Ab formats from a production point of view: we group them according to the simplicity of the process they require and discuss how the different engineering solutions may impact diverse aspects such as the specific yield, thermostability, analytical assays, or purification strategies.


Ab purification Thermostability Cell line development Light chain mispairing Ab homodimers In vitro annealing Single-cell expression Mab2 Xmab DuoBody Abs κλ body CrossMabs Knob into holes 


  1. 1.
    Kontermann RE, Brinkmann U. Bispecific antibodies. Drug Discov Today. 2015;20:838–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Husain B, Ellerman D. Expanding the boundaries of biotherapeutics with bispecific antibodies. BioDrugs. 2018;32:441–64. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nagorsen D, Kufer P, Baeuerle PA, Bargou R. Blinatumomab: a historical perspective. Pharmacol Ther. 2012;136:334–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu J, Fu J, Zhang M, Liu D. Blinatumomab: a bispecific T cell engager (BiTE) antibody against CD19/CD3 for refractory acute lymphoid leukemia. J Hematol Oncol. 2015;8:104. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kitazawa T, et al. A bispecific antibody to factors IXa and X restores factor VIII hemostatic activity in a hemophilia A model. Nat Med. 2012;18:1570–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uchida N, et al. A first-in-human phase 1 study of ACE910, a novel factor VIII-mimetic bispecific antibody, in healthy subjects. Blood. 2016;127:1633–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee KJ, et al. Clinical use of blinatumomab for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016;12:1301–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Knight T, Callaghan MU. The role of emicizumab, a bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody, for the prevention of bleeding episodes in patients with hemophilia A. Ther Adv Hematol. 2018;9:319–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kufer P, Lutterbuse R, Baeuerle PA. A revival of bispecific antibodies. Trends Biotechnol. 2004;22:238–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brinkmann U, Kontermann RE. The making of bispecific antibodies. MAbs. 2017;9:182–212. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spiess C, Zhai Q, Carter PJ. Alternative molecular formats and therapeutic applications for bispecific antibodies. Mol Immunol. 2015;67:95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Staerz UD, Bevan MJ. Hybrid hybridoma producing a bispecific monoclonal antibody that can focus effector T-cell activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986;83:1453–7. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Milstein C, Cuello AC. Hybrid hybridomas and their use in immunohistochemistry. Nature. 1983;305:537–40. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suresh MR, Cuello AC, Milstein C. Bispecific monoclonal antibodies from hybrid hybridomas. Methods Enzymol. 1986;121:210–28. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wozniak-Knopp G, et al. Introducing antigen-binding sites in structural loops of immunoglobulin constant domains: Fc fragments with engineered HER2/neu-binding sites and antibody properties. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2010;23:289–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Traxlmayr MW, et al. Integrin binding human antibody constant domains-probing the C-terminal structural loops for grafting the RGD motif. J Biotechnol. 2011;155:193–202. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lobner E, et al. Two-faced Fcab prevents polymerization with VEGF and reveals thermodynamics and the 2.15 Å crystal structure of the complex. MAbs. 2017;9:1088–104. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wozniak-Knopp G, Stadlmann J, Rüker F. Stabilisation of the Fc fragment of human IgG1 by engineered intradomain disulfide bonds. PLoS One. 2012;7:e30083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Traxlmayr MW, et al. Directed evolution of Her2/neu-binding IgG1-Fc for improved stability and resistance to aggregation by using yeast surface display. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2013;26:255–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fischer N, et al. Exploiting light chains for the scalable generation and platform purification of native human bispecific IgG. Nat Commun. 2015;6:6113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Merchant AM, et al. An efficient route to human bispecific IgG. Nat Biotechnol. 1998;16:677–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Magistrelli G, et al. Optimizing assembly and production of native bispecific antibodies by codon de-optimization. MAbs. 2017;9:231–9. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dheilly E, et al. Selective blockade of the ubiquitous checkpoint receptor CD47 is enabled by dual-targeting bispecific antibodies. Mol Ther. 2017;25:523–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buatois V, et al. Preclinical development of a bispecific antibody that safely and effectively targets CD19 and CD47 for the treatment of B-cell lymphoma and leukemia. Mol Cancer Ther. 2018;17:1739–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Skegro D, et al. Immunoglobulin domain interface exchange as a platform technology for the generation of Fc heterodimers and bispecific antibodies. J Biol Chem. 2017;292:9745–59. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yageta S, Lauer TM, Trout BL, Honda S. Conformational and colloidal stabilities of isolated constant domains of human immunoglobulin G and their impact on antibody aggregation under acidic conditions. Mol Pharm. 2015;12:1443–55. Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yageta S, Shibuya R, Imamura H, Honda S. Conformational and colloidal stabilities of human immunoglobulin G Fc and its cyclized variant: independent and compensatory participation of domains in aggregation of multidomain proteins. Mol Pharm. 2017;14:699–711. Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fennell BJ, et al. CDR-restricted engineering of native human scFvs creates highly stable and soluble bifunctional antibodies for subcutaneous delivery. MAbs. 2013;5:882–95. Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lehmann A, et al. Stability engineering of anti-EGFR scFv antibodies by rational design of a lambda-to-kappa swap of the VL framework using a structure-guided approach. MAbs. 2015;7:1058–71. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smith EJ, et al. A novel, native-format bispecific antibody triggering T-cell killing of B-cells is robustly active in mouse tumor models and cynomolgus monkeys. Sci Rep. 2015;5:17943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jendeberg L, et al. Engineering of Fc1 and Fc3 from human immunoglobulin G to analyse subclass specificity for staphylococcal protein A. J Immunol Methods. 1997;201:25–34. Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ljungberg UK, et al. The interaction between different domains of staphylococcal protein a and human polyclonal IgG, IgA, IgM and F(ab’)2: separation of affinity from specificity. Mol Immunol. 1993;30:1279–85. Scholar
  33. 33.
    Roben PW, Salem AN, Silverman GJ. VH3 family antibodies bind domain D of staphylococcal protein A. J Immunol. 1995;154(12):6437–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Starovasnik MA, O’Connell MP, Fairbrother WJ, Kelley RF. Antibody variable region binding by Staphylococcal protein A: thermodynamic analysis and location of the Fv binding site on E-domain. Protein Sci. 1999;8:1423–31. Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tustian AD, Endicott C, Adams B, Mattila J, Bak H. Development of purification processes for fully human bispecific antibodies based upon modification of protein A binding avidity. MAbs. 2016;8:828–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tustian AD, et al. Development of a novel affinity chromatography resin for platform purification of bispecific antibodies with modified protein a binding avidity. Biotechnol Prog. 2018;34:650–8. Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moore GL, et al. A robust heterodimeric Fc platform engineered for efficient development of bispecific antibodies of multiple formats. Methods. 2019;154:38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sampei Z, et al. Identification and multidimensional optimization of an asymmetric bispecific IgG antibody mimicking the function of factor VIII cofactor activity. PLoS One. 2013;8:e57479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ishiguro T, et al. An anti-glypican 3/CD3 bispecific T cell-redirecting antibody for treatment of solid tumors. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9:eaal4291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ridgway JB, Presta LG, Carter P. “Knobs-into-holes” engineering of antibody CH3 domains for heavy chain heterodimerization. Protein Eng. 1996;9:617–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Spiess C, et al. Bispecific antibodies with natural architecture produced by co-culture of bacteria expressing two distinct half-antibodies. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:753–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shatz W, et al. An efficient route to bispecific antibody production using single-reactor mammalian co-culture. MAbs. 2016;8:1487–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Williams AJ, Giese G, Persson J. Improved assembly of bispecific antibodies from knob and hole half-antibodies. Biotechnol Prog. 2015;31:1315–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Giese G, Williams A, Rodriguez M, Persson J. Bispecific antibody process development: assembly and purification of knob and hole bispecific antibodies. Biotechnol Prog. 2017;34:397–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gramer MJ, et al. Production of stable bispecific IgG1 by controlled Fab-arm exchange. MAbs. 2013;5:962–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Aalberse RC, Schuurman J, van Ree R. The apparent Monovalency of human IgG4 is due to bispecificity. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 1999;118:187–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Aalberse RC, Schuurman J. IgG4 breaking the rules. Immunology. 2002;105:9–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    van der Neut Kolfschoten M, et al. Anti-inflammatory activity of human IgG4 antibodies by dynamic Fab arm exchange. Science. 2007;317:1554–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Labrijn AF, et al. Efficient generation of stable bispecific IgG1 by controlled Fab-arm exchange. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110:5145–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Klein C, Schaefer W, Regula JT. The use of CrossMAb technology for the generation of bi- and multispecific antibodies. MAbs. 2016;8:1010–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mazor Y, et al. Improving target cell specificity using a novel monovalent bispecific IgG design. MAbs. 2015;7:377–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Vaks L, et al. Design principles for bispecific IgGs, opportunities and pitfalls of artificial disulfide bonds. Antibodies. 2018;7(3):27. Scholar
  53. 53.
    Liu Z, et al. A novel antibody engineering strategy for making monovalent bispecific heterodimeric IgG antibodies by electrostatic steering mechanism. J Biol Chem. 2015;290:7535–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lewis SM, et al. Generation of bispecific IgG antibodies by structure-based design of an orthogonal Fab interface. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:191–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dillon M, et al. Efficient production of bispecific IgG of different isotypes and species of origin in single mammalian cells. MAbs. 2017;9:213–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Schachner L, et al. Characterization of chain pairing variants of bispecific IgG expressed in a single host cell by high-resolution native and denaturing mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2016;88:12122–7. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yin Y, et al. Precise quantification of mixtures of bispecific IgG produced in single host cells by liquid chromatography-orbitrap high-resolution mass spectrometry. MAbs. 2016;8:1467–76. Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Protein ChemistryGenentechSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations