Structure-Guided Deimmunization of Therapeutic Proteins
Therapeutic proteins continue to yield revolutionary new treatments for a growing spectrum of human disease, but the development of these powerful drugs requires solving a unique set of challenges. For instance, it is increasingly apparent that mitigating potential anti-therapeutic immune responses, driven by molecular recognition of a therapeutic protein’s peptide fragments, may be best accomplished early in the drug development process. One may eliminate immunogenic peptide fragments by mutating the cognate amino acid sequences, but deimmunizing mutations are constrained by the need for a folded, stable, and functional protein structure. We develop a novel approach, called EpiSweep, that simultaneously optimizes both concerns. Our algorithm identifies sets of mutations making Pareto optimal trade-offs between structure and immunogenicity, embodied by a molecular mechanics energy function and a T-cell epitope predictor, respectively. EpiSweep integrates structure-based protein design, sequence-based protein deimmunization, and algorithms for finding the Pareto frontier of a design space. While structure-based protein design is NP-hard, we employ integer programming techniques that are efficient in practice. Furthermore, EpiSweep only invokes the optimizer once per identified Pareto optimal design. We show that EpiSweep designs of regions of the therapeutics erythropoietin and staphylokinase are predicted to outperform previous experimental efforts. We also demonstrate EpiSweep’s capacity for global protein deimmunization, a case analysis involving 50 predicted epitopes and over 30,000 unique side-chain interactions. Ultimately, EpiSweep is a powerful protein design tool that guides the protein engineer towards the most promising immunotolerant biotherapeutic candidates.
Keywordsstructure-based protein design sequence-based protein design multi-objective optimization therapeutic proteints deimmunization experiment planning
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.De Groot, A.S., Knopp, P.M., Martin, W.: De-immunization of therapeutic proteins by T-cell epitope modification. Dev. Biol (Basel) 122, 171–194 (2005)Google Scholar
- 5.De Groot, A.S., Moise, L.: Prediction of immunogenicity for therapeutic proteins: State of the art. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Devel. 10, 332–340 (2007)Google Scholar
- 8.Georgiev, I., Lilien, R.H., Donald, B.R.: A Novel Minimized Dead-End Elimination Criterion and Its Application to Protein Redesign in a Hybrid Scoring and Search Algorithm for Computing Partition Functions over Molecular Ensembles. In: Apostolico, A., Guerra, C., Istrail, S., Pevzner, P.A., Waterman, M. (eds.) RECOMB 2006. LNCS (LNBI), vol. 3909, pp. 530–545. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.He, L., Friedman, A.M., Bailey-Kellogg, C.: A divide and conquer approach to determine the pareto frontier for optimization of protein engineering experiments proteins. Proteins (2011)Google Scholar
- 13.Indiveri, F., Murdaca, G.: Immunogenicity of erythropoietin and other growth factors. Rev. Clin. Exp. Hematol. 1, 7–11 (2002)Google Scholar
- 20.Lilien, R., Stevens, B., Anderson, A., Donald, B.: A novel ensemble-based scoring and search algorithm for protein redesign, and its application to modify the substrate specificity of the gramicidin synthetase A phenylalanine adenlytaion enzyme. In: Proc. RECOMB, pp. 46–57 (2004)Google Scholar
- 23.Osipovitch, D.C., Parker, A.S., Makokha, C.D., Desrosiers, J., DeGroot, A.S., Baiely-Kellogg, C., Griswold, K.E.: Computational design of immune-evading enzymes for ADEPT therapy (in preperation)Google Scholar
- 30.Southwood, S., Sidney, J., Kondo, A., del Guercio, M.F., Appella, E., Hoffman, S., Kubo, R.T., Chesnut, R.W., Grey, H.M., Sette, A.: Several common HLA-DR types share largely overlapping peptide binding repertoires. J. Immunol. 160, 3363–3373 (1998)Google Scholar
- 31.Sturniolo, T., Bono, E., Ding, J., Raddrizzani, L., Tuereci, O., Sahin, U., Braxenthaler, M., Gallazzi, F., Protti, M.P., Sinigaglia, F., Hammer, J.: Generation of tissue-specific and promiscuous HLA ligand database using DNA microarrays and virtual HLA class II matrices. Nature Biotechnol. 17, 555–561 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Tangri, S., Mothe, B.R., Eisenbraun, J., Sidney, J., Southwood, S., Briggs, K., Zinckgraf, J., Bilsel, P., Newman, M., Chesnut, R., LiCalsi, C., Sette, A.: Rationally engineered therapeutic proteins with reduced immunogenicity. J. Immunol. 174, 3187–3196 (2005)Google Scholar
- 34.Warmerdam, P.A.M., Plaisance, S., Vanderlick, K., Vandervoort, P., Brepoels, K., Collen, D., Maeyer, M.D.: Elimination of a human T-cell region in staphylokinase by T-cell screening and computer modeling. J. Thromb. Haemost. 87, 666–673 (2002)Google Scholar
- 35.Zheng, W., Friedman, A.M., Bailey-Kellogg, C.: Algorithms for joint optimization of stability and diversity in planning combinatorial libraries of chimeric proteins. J. Comput. Biol. 16, 1151–1168 (2009); In: Vingron, M., Wong, L. (eds.) RECOMB 2008. LNCS (LNBI), vol. 4955, pp. 300–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar