Discovery-stage identification of drug-like antibodies using emerging experimental and computational methods

References

• Buss NA, Henderson SJ, McFarlane M, Shenton JM, De Haan L. Monoclonal antibody therapeutics: history and future. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2012;12:615–20. doi:10.1016/j.coph.2012.08.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrebaeck CA, Carlsson R. Human therapeutic antibodies. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2001;1:404–08. doi:10.1016/S1471-4892(01)00070-4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brekke OH, Sandlie I. Therapeutic antibodies for human diseases at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2003;2:52–62. doi:10.1038/nrd984.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu ML, Gilliland GL. Engineering antibody therapeutics. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2016;38:163–73. doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2016.07.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner J, Barrington P, Brier T, Datta-Mannan A. Monoclonal antibodies: past, present and future. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2019;260:81–141.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Waldmann H. Human monoclonal antibodies: the benefits of humanization. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1904:1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Almagro JC, Fransson J. Humanization of antibodies. Front Biosci. 2008;13:1619–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu Y, Wang D, Mason B, Rossomando T, Li N, Liu D, Cheung JK, Xu W, Raghava S, Katiyar A, et al. Structure, heterogeneity and developability assessment of therapeutic antibodies. MAbs. 2019;11(2):239–64. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1553476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarasch A, Koll H, Regula JT, Bader M, Papadimitriou A, Kettenberger H. Developability assessment during the selection of novel therapeutic antibodies. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104:1885–98. doi:10.1002/jps.24430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministro J, Manuel AM, Goncalves J. Therapeutic antibody engineering and selection strategies. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol. 2020;171:55–86. doi:10.1007/10_2019_116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy PJ, Oliveira C, Granja PL, Sarmento B. Monoclonal antibodies: technologies for early discovery and engineering. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2018;38:394–408. doi:10.1080/07388551.2017.1357002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabia LA, Desai AA, Jhajj HS, Tessier PM. Understanding and overcoming trade-offs between antibody affinity, specificity, stability and solubility. Biochem Eng J. 2018;137:365–74. doi:10.1016/j.bej.2018.06.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stimple SD, Smith MD, Tessier PM. Directed evolution methods for overcoming trade-offs between protein activity and stability. AIChE J. 2020;66:e16814. doi:10.1002/aic.16814.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Basle Y, Chennell P, Tokhadze N, Astier A, Sautou V. Physicochemical stability of monoclonal antibodies: a review. J Pharm Sci. 2020;109:169–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe D, Dudgeon K, Rouet R, Schofield P, Jermutus L, Christ D. Aggregation, stability, and formulation of human antibody therapeutics. Adv Protein Chem Struct Biol. 2011;84:41–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perchiacca JM, Tessier PM. Engineering aggregation-resistant antibodies. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng. 2012;3:263–86. doi:10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-062011-081052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg AS. Effects of protein aggregates: an immunologic perspective. Aaps J. 2006;8:E501–7. doi:10.1208/aapsj080359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frokjaer S, Otzen DE. Protein drug stability: a formulation challenge. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2005;4:298–306. doi:10.1038/nrd1695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller BR, Demarest SJ, Lugovskoy A, Huang F, Wu X, Snyder WB, Croner LJ, Wang N, Amatucci A, Michaelson JS, et al. Stability engineering of scFvs for the development of bispecific and multivalent antibodies. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2010;23(7):549–57. doi:10.1093/protein/gzq028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg DS, Lewus RA, Esfandiary R, Farkas DC, Mody N, Day KJ, Mallik P, Tracka MB, Sealey SK, Samra HS, et al. Utility of high throughput screening techniques to predict stability of monoclonal antibody formulations during early stage development. J Pharm Sci. 2017;106(8):1971–77. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2017.04.039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lippow SM, Wittrup KD, Tidor B. Computational design of antibody-affinity improvement beyond in vivo maturation. Nat Biotechnol. 2007;25:1171–76. doi:10.1038/nbt1336.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bostrom J, Lee CV, Haber L, Fuh G. Improving antibody binding affinity and specificity for therapeutic development. Methods Mol Biol. 2009;525:353–76. xiii.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuroda D, Tsumoto K. Antibody affinity maturation by computational design. Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1827:15–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Warszawski S, Borenstein Katz A, Lipsh R, Khmelnitsky L, Ben Nissan G, Javitt G, Dym O, Unger T, Knop O, Albeck S, et al. Optimizing antibody affinity and stability by the automated design of the variable light-heavy chain interfaces. PLoS Comput Biol. 2019;15(8):e1007207. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark M. Antibody humanization: a case of the ‘Emperor’s new clothes’? Immunol Today. 2000;21:397–402. doi:10.1016/S0167-5699(00)01680-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Choi Y, Hua C, Sentman CL, Ackerman ME, Bailey-Kellogg C. Antibody humanization by structure-based computational protein design. MAbs. 2015;7:1045–57. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1076600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi Y, Ndong C, Griswold KE, Bailey-Kellogg C. Computationally driven antibody engineering enables simultaneous humanization and thermostabilization. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2016;29:419–26. doi:10.1093/protein/gzw024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentiluomo L, Roessner D, Augustijn D, Svilenov H, Kulakova A, Mahapatra S, Winter G, Streicher W, Rinnan Å, Peters GHJ, et al. Application of interpretable artificial neural networks to early monoclonal antibodies development. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2019;141:81–89. doi:10.1016/j.ejpb.2019.05.017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain T, Sun T, Durand S, Hall A, Houston NR, Nett JH, Sharkey B, Bobrowicz B, Caffry I, Yu Y, et al. Biophysical properties of the clinical-stage antibody landscape. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2017;114(5):944–49. doi:10.1073/pnas.1616408114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falconer RJ. Advances in liquid formulations of parenteral therapeutic proteins. Biotechnol Adv. 2019;37:107412. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2019.06.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shire SJ. Formulation and manufacturability of biologics. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2009;20:708–14. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2009.10.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lobo ED, Hansen RJ, Balthasar JP. Antibody pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93:2645–68. doi:10.1002/jps.20178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dostalek M, Gardner I, Gurbaxani BM, Rose RH, Chetty M. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modelling of monoclonal antibodies. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2013;52:83–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang W, Singh S, Zeng DL, King K, Nema S. Antibody structure, instability, and formulation. J Pharm Sci. 2007;96:1–26. doi:10.1002/jps.20727.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viola M, Sequeira J, Seiça R, Veiga F, Serra J, Santos AC, et al. Subcutaneous delivery of monoclonal antibodies: how do we get there? J Control Release. 2018;286:301–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmit JD, He F, Mishra S, Ketchem RR, Woods CE, Kerwin BA. Entanglement model of antibody viscosity. J Phys Chem B. 2014;118:5044–49. doi:10.1021/jp500434b.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomar DS, Kumar S, Singh SK, Goswami S, Li L. Molecular basis of high viscosity in concentrated antibody solutions: strategies for high concentration drug product development. MAbs. 2016;8:216–28. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1128606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu J, Nguyen MD, 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. doi:10.1002/jps.20347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1002/jps.21322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora J, Hu Y, Esfandiary R, Sathish HA, Bishop SM, Joshi SB, et al. Charge-mediated Fab-Fc interactions in an IgG1 antibody induce reversible self-association, cluster formation, and elevated viscosity. MAbs. 2016;8:1561–74. doi:10.1080/19420862.2016.1222342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav S, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Viscosity behavior of high-concentration monoclonal antibody solutions: correlation with interaction parameter and electroviscous effects. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:998–1011. doi:10.1002/jps.22831.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly Brian D, Petry C, Yadav S, Demeule B, Ciaccio N, Moore Jamie MR, Shire S, Gokarn Y. Weak interactions govern the viscosity of concentrated antibody solutions: high-throughput analysis using the diffusion interaction parameter. Biophys J. 2012;103:69–78. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2012.04.047.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingsbury JS, Saini A, Auclair SM, Fu L, Lantz MM, Halloran KT, Calero-Rubio C, Schwenger W, Airiau CY, Zhang J, et al. A single molecular descriptor to predict solution behavior of therapeutic antibodies. Sci Adv. 2020;6(32):eabb0372. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abb0372.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehermayr C, Mahler HC, Mäder K, Fischer S. Assessment of net charge and protein-protein interactions of different monoclonal antibodies. J Pharm Sci. 2011;100:2551–62. doi:10.1002/jps.22506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saluja A, Fesinmeyer RM, Hogan S, Brems DN, Gokarn YR. Diffusion and sedimentation interaction parameters for measuring the second virial coefficient and their utility as predictors of protein aggregation. Biophys J. 2010;99:2657–65. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2010.08.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sule SV, Dickinson CD, Lu J, Chow CK, Tessier PM. Rapid analysis of antibody self-association in complex mixtures using immunogold conjugates. Mol Pharm. 2013;10:1322–31. doi:10.1021/mp300524x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu J, Schultz JS, Weldon CL, Sule SV, Chai Q, Geng SB, Dickinson CD, Tessier PM. Discovery of highly soluble antibodies prior to purification using affinity-capture self-interaction nanoparticle spectroscopy. Protein Eng, Design Sel. 2015;28:403–14. doi:10.1093/protein/gzv045.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Caffry I, Wu J, Geng SB, Jain T, Sun T, Reid F, Cao Y, Estep P, Yu Y, et al. High-throughput screening for developability during early-stage antibody discovery using self-interaction nanoparticle spectroscopy. MAbs. 2014;6(2):483–92. doi:10.4161/mabs.27431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shan L, Mody N, Sormani P, Rosenthal KL, Damschroder MM, Esfandiary R. Developability assessment of engineered monoclonal antibody variants with a complex self-association behavior using complementary analytical and in silico tools. Mol Pharm. 2018;15:5697–710. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.8b00867.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geng SB, Wittekind M, Vigil A, Tessier PM. Measurements of monoclonal antibody self-association are correlated with complex biophysical properties. Mol Pharm. 2016;13:1636–45. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.6b00071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichols P, Li L, Kumar S, Buck PM, Singh SK, Goswami S, Balthazor B, Conley TR, Sek D, Allen MJ, et al. Rational design of viscosity reducing mutants of a monoclonal antibody: hydrophobic versus electrostatic inter-molecular interactions. MAbs. 2015;7:212–30. doi:10.4161/19420862.2014.985504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf Pérez AM, Sormanni P, Andersen JS, Sakhnini LI, Rodriguez-Leon I, Bjelke JR, Gajhede AJ, De Maria L, Otzen DE, Vendruscolo M, et al. In vitro and in silico assessment of the developability of a designed monoclonal antibody library. MAbs. 2019;11:388–400. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1556082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Wu L, Gupta P, Desai AA, Smith MD, Rabia LA, Ludwig SD, Tessier PM. Physicochemical rules for identifying monoclonal antibodies with drug-like specificity. Mol Pharm. 2020;17(7):2555–69. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.0c00257.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yadav S, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Factors affecting the viscosity in high concentration solutions of different monoclonal antibodies. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:4812–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esfandiary R, Parupudi A, Casas-Finet J, Gadre D, Sathish H. Mechanism of reversible self-association of a monoclonal antibody: role of electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. J Pharm Sci. 2015;104:577–86. doi:10.1002/jps.24237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav S, Laue TM, Kalonia DS, Singh SN, Shire SJ. The influence of charge distribution on self-association and viscosity behavior of monoclonal antibody solutions. Mol Pharm. 2012;9:791–802. doi:10.1021/mp200566k.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Cheng Y, Chen X, Zheng S. Impact of electroviscous effect on viscosity in developing highly concentrated protein formulations: lessons from non-protein charged colloids. Int J Pharm: X. 2019;1:100002.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yadav S, Liu J, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Specific interactions in high concentration antibody solutions resulting in high viscosity. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99:1152–68. doi:10.1002/jps.21898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav S, Sreedhara A, Kanai S, Liu J, Lien S, Lowman H, Kalonia DS, Shire SJ. Establishing a link between amino acid sequences and self-associating and viscoelastic behavior of two closely related monoclonal antibodies. Pharm Res. 2011;28:1750–64. doi:10.1007/s11095-011-0410-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadav S, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Viscosity analysis of high concentration bovine serum albumin aqueous solutions. Pharm Res. 2011;28:1973–83. doi:10.1007/s11095-011-0424-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sule SV, Cheung JK, Antochshuk V, Bhalla AS, Narasimhan C, Blaisdell S, et al. Solution pH that minimizes self-association of three monoclonal antibodies is strongly dependent on ionic strength. Mol Pharm. 2012;9:744–51. doi:10.1021/mp200448j.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Geoghegan JC, Fleming R, Damschroder M, Bishop SM, Sathish HA, Esfandiary R. Mitigation of reversible self-association and viscosity in a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody by rational, structure-guided Fv engineering. MAbs. 2016;8:941–50. doi:10.1080/19420862.2016.1171444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora J, Hickey JM, Majumdar R, Esfandiary R, Bishop SM, Samra HS, Middaugh CR, Weis DD, Volkin DB. Hydrogen exchange mass spectrometry reveals protein interfaces and distant dynamic coupling effects during the reversible self-association of an IgG1 monoclonal antibody. MAbs. 2015;7:525–39. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1029217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julian MC, Li L, Garde S, Wilen R, Tessier PM. Efficient affinity maturation of antibody variable domains requires co-selection of compensatory mutations to maintain thermodynamic stability. Sci Rep. 2017;7:45259. doi:10.1038/srep45259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li D, Wang L, Maziuk BF, Yao X, Wolozin B, Cho YK. Directed evolution of a picomolar-affinity, high-specificity antibody targeting phosphorylated tau. J Biol Chem. 2018;293:12081–94. doi:10.1074/jbc.RA118.003557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiller KE, Li L, Kumar S, Julian MC, Garde S, Tessier PM. Arginine mutations in antibody complementarity-determining regions display context-dependent affinity/specificity trade-offs. J Biol Chem. 2017;292:16638–52. doi:10.1074/jbc.M117.783837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu S-J, Luo J, O’Neil KT, Kang J, Lacy ER, Canziani G, Baker A, Huang M, Tang QM, Raju TS, et al. Structure-based engineering of a monoclonal antibody for improved solubility. Protein Engineering Design and Selection. 2010;23(8):643–51. doi:10.1093/protein/gzq037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houlihan G, Gatti-Lafranconi P, Lowe D, Hollfelder F. Directed evolution of anti-HER2 DARPins by SNAP display reveals stability/function trade-offs in the selection process. Protein Eng, Design Sel. 2015;28:269–79. doi:10.1093/protein/gzv029.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaleli NE, Karadag M, Kalyoncu S. Phage display derived therapeutic antibodies have enriched aliphatic content: insights for developability issues. Proteins: Struct, Funct, Bioinf. 2019;87:607–18. doi:10.1002/prot.25685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer S, Bethea D, Raju TS, Giles-Komar J, Feng Y. Solubility evaluation of murine hybridoma antibodies. MAbs. 2012;4:319–25. doi:10.4161/mabs.19869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradbury AR, Sidhu S, Dübel S, McCafferty J. Beyond natural antibodies: the power of in vitro display technologies. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29:245–54. doi:10.1038/nbt.1791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilvebrant J, Tessier PM, Sidhu SS. Engineered Autonomous Human Variable Domains. Curr Pharm Des. 2016;22:6527–37. doi:10.2174/1381612822666160921143011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baran D, Pszolla MG, Lapidoth GD, Norn C, Dym O, Unger T, et al. Principles for computational design of binding antibodies. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2017;201707171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma VK, Patapoff TW, Kabakoff B, Pai S, Hilario E, Zhang B, Li C, Borisov O, Kelley RF, Chorny I, et al. In silico selection of therapeutic antibodies for development: viscosity, clearance, and chemical stability. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2014;111(52):18601–06. doi:10.1073/pnas.1421779112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomar DS, Li L, Broulidakis MP, Luksha NG, Burns CT, Singh SK, Kumar S. In-silico prediction of concentration-dependent viscosity curves for monoclonal antibody solutions. mAbs. 2017;9:476–89. doi:10.1080/19420862.2017.1285479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agrawal NJ, Helk B, Kumar S, Mody N, Sathish HA, Samra HS, Buck PM, Li L, Trout BL. Computational tool for the early screening of monoclonal antibodies for their viscosities. mAbs. 2016;8(1):43–48. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1099773.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apgar JR, Tam ASP, Sorm R, Moesta S, King AC, Yang H, Kelleher K, Murphy D, D’Antona AM, Yan G, et al. Modeling and mitigation of high-concentration antibody viscosity through structure-based computer-aided protein design. PLOS ONE. 2020;15(5):e0232713. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu Y, Roach W, Sun T, Jain T, Prinz B, Yu T-Y, et al. Addressing polyspecificity of antibodies selected from an in vitro yeast presentation system: a FACS-based, high-throughput selection and analytical tool. Protein Eng, Design Sel. 2013;26:663–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avery LB, Wade J, Wang M, Tam A, King A, Piche-Nicholas N, et al. Establishing in vitro in vivo correlations to screen monoclonal antibodies for physicochemical properties related to favorable human pharmacokinetics. MAbs. 2018;10:244–55. doi:10.1080/19420862.2017.1417718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hötzel I, Theil FP, Bernstein LJ, Prabhu S, Deng R, Quintana L, et al. A strategy for risk mitigation of antibodies with fast clearance. MAbs. 2012;4:753–60. doi:10.4161/mabs.22189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Datta-Mannan A, Thangaraju A, Leung D, Tang Y, Witcher DR, Lu J, et al. Balancing charge in the complementarity-determining regions of humanized mAbs without affecting pI reduces non-specific binding and improves the pharmacokinetics. MAbs. 2015;7:483–93. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1016696.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li B, Tesar D, Boswell CA, Cahaya HS, Wong A, Zhang J, Meng YG, Eigenbrot C, Pantua H, Diao J, et al. Framework selection can influence pharmacokinetics of a humanized therapeutic antibody through differences in molecule charge. MAbs. 2014;6(5):1255–64. doi:10.4161/mabs.29809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Igawa T, Tsunoda H, Tachibana T, Maeda A, Mimoto F, Moriyama C, Nanami M, Sekimori Y, Nabuchi Y, Aso Y, et al. Reduced elimination of IgG antibodies by engineering the variable region. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2010;23(5):385–92. doi:10.1093/protein/gzq009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabia LA, Zhang Y, Ludwig SD, Julian MC, Tessier PM. Net charge of antibody complementarity-determining regions is a key predictor of specificity. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2018;31:409–18. doi:10.1093/protein/gzz002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raybould MIJ, Marks C, Krawczyk K, Taddese B, Nowak J, Lewis AP, Bujotzek A, Shi J, Deane CM. Five computational developability guidelines for therapeutic antibody profiling. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2019;116(10):4025–30. doi:10.1073/pnas.1810576116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obrezanova O, Arnell A, de la Cuesta RG, Berthelot ME, Gallagher TR, Zurdo J, Stallwood Y. Aggregation risk prediction for antibodies and its application to biotherapeutic development. MAbs. 2015;7(2):352–63. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1007828.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauer TM, Agrawal NJ, Chennamsetty N, Egodage K, Helk B, Trout BL. Developability index: a rapid in silico tool for the screening of antibody aggregation propensity. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101:102–15. doi:10.1002/jps.22758.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsuchiya Y, Mizuguchi K. The diversity of H3 loops determines the antigen-binding tendencies of antibody CDR loops. Protein Sci. 2016;25:815–25. doi:10.1002/pro.2874.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kizhedath A, Karlberg M. Cross-interaction chromatography-based QSAR model for early-stage screening to facilitate enhanced developability of monoclonal antibody therapeutics. Biotechnol J. 2019;14:e1800696. doi:10.1002/biot.201800696.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs SA, Wu SJ, Feng Y, Bethea D, O’Neil KT. Cross-interaction chromatography: a rapid method to identify highly soluble monoclonal antibody candidates. Pharm Res. 2010;27:65–71. doi:10.1007/s11095-009-0007-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tessier PM, Sandler SI, Lenhoff AM. Direct measurement of protein osmotic second virial cross coefficients by cross-interaction chromatography. Protein Sci. 2004;13:1379–90. doi:10.1110/ps.03419204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teske CA, Blanch HW, Prausnitz JM. Chromatographic measurement of interactions between unlike proteins. Fluid Phase Equilib. 2004;219:139–48. doi:10.1016/j.fluid.2004.01.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly RL, Sun T, Jain T, Caffry I, Yu Y, Cao Y, et al. High throughput cross-interaction measures for human IgG1 antibodies correlate with clearance rates in mice. MAbs. 2015;7:770–77. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1043503.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perchiacca JM, Bhattacharya M, Tessier PM. Mutational analysis of domain antibodies reveals aggregation hotspots within and near the complementarity determining regions. Proteins. 2011;79:2637–47. doi:10.1002/prot.23085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perchiacca JM, Ladiwala AR, Bhattacharya M, Tessier PM. Aggregation-resistant domain antibodies engineered with charged mutations near the edges of the complementarity-determining regions. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2012;25:591–601. doi:10.1093/protein/gzs042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vázquez-Rey M, Lang DA. Aggregates in monoclonal antibody manufacturing processes. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2011;108:1494–508. doi:10.1002/bit.23155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratanji KD, Derrick JP, Dearman RJ, Kimber I. Immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: influence of aggregation. J Immunotoxicol. 2014;11:99–109. doi:10.3109/1547691X.2013.821564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moussa EM, Panchal JP, Moorthy BS, Blum JS, Joubert MK, Narhi LO, et al. Immunogenicity of therapeutic protein aggregates. J Pharm Sci. 2016;105:417–30. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2015.11.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song Y, Yu D, Mayani M, Mussa N, Li ZJ. Monoclonal antibody higher order structure analysis by high throughput protein conformational array. MAbs. 2018;10:397–405. doi:10.1080/19420862.2017.1421880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebo JS, Saunders JC, Devine PWA, Gordon AM, Warwick AS, Schiffrin B, Chin SE, England E, Button JD, Lloyd C, et al. An in vivo platform to select and evolve aggregation-resistant proteins. Nat Commun. 2020;11:1816. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15667-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zidar M, Šušterič A, Ravnik M, Kuzman D. High throughput prediction approach for monoclonal antibody aggregation at high concentration. Pharm Res. 2017;34:1831–39. doi:10.1007/s11095-017-2191-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li X, Geng SB, Chiu ML, Saro D, Tessier PM. High-throughput assay for measuring monoclonal antibody self-association and aggregation in serum. Bioconjug Chem. 2015;26:520–28. doi:10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.5b00010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Escamilla A-M, Rousseau F, Schymkowitz J, Serrano L. Prediction of sequence-dependent and mutational effects on the aggregation of peptides and proteins. Nat Biotechnol. 2004;22:1302–06. doi:10.1038/nbt1012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Durme J, De Baets G, Van Der Kant R, Ramakers M, Ganesan A, Wilkinson H, Gallardo R, Rousseau F, Schymkowitz J. Solubis: a webserver to reduce protein aggregation through mutation. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2016;29:285–89. doi:10.1093/protein/gzw019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Baets G, Van Durme J, van der Kant R, Schymkowitz J, Rousseau F. Solubis: optimize your protein. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:2580–82. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btv162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chennamsetty N, Voynov V, Kayser V, Helk B, Trout BL. Design of therapeutic proteins with enhanced stability. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2009;106:11937–42. doi:10.1073/pnas.0904191106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Kant R, Karow-Zwick AR, Van Durme J, Blech M, Gallardo R, Seeliger D, Aßfalg K, Baatsen P, Compernolle G, Gils A, et al. Prediction and reduction of the aggregation of monoclonal antibodies. J Mol Biol. 2017;429(8):1244–61. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2017.03.014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerois R, Serrano L. The SH3-fold family: experimental evidence and prediction of variations in the folding pathways. J Mol Biol. 2000;304:967–82. doi:10.1006/jmbi.2000.4234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courtois F, Agrawal NJ, Lauer TM, Trout BL. Rational design of therapeutic mAbs against aggregation through protein engineering and incorporation of glycosylation motifs applied to bevacizumab. MAbs. 2016;8:99–112. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1112477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sormanni P, Aprile FA, Vendruscolo M. The CamSol method of rational design of protein mutants with enhanced solubility. J Mol Biol. 2015;427:478–90. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2014.09.026.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sormanni P, Amery L, Ekizoglou S, Vendruscolo M, Popovic B. Rapid and accurate in silico solubility screening of a monoclonal antibody library. Sci Rep. 2017;7:8200. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-07800-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smialowski P, Doose G, Torkler P, Kaufmann S, Frishman D. PROSO II – a new method for protein solubility prediction. FEBS J. 2012;279:2192–200. doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2012.08603.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khurana S, Rawi R, Kunji K, Chuang G-Y, Bensmail H, Mall R. DeepSol: a deep learning framework for sequence-based protein solubility prediction. Bioinformatics. 2018;34:2605–13. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawi R, Mall R, Kunji K, Shen C-H, Kwong PD, Chuang G-Y. PaRSnIP: sequence-based protein solubility prediction using gradient boosting machine. Bioinformatics. 2017;34:1092–98. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raimondi D, Orlando G, Fariselli P, Moreau Y. Insight into the protein solubility driving forces with neural attention. PLoS Comput Biol. 2020;16:e1007722. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007722.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paladin L, Piovesan D, Tosatto SCE. SODA: prediction of protein solubility from disorder and aggregation propensity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:W236–w40. doi:10.1093/nar/gkx412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang Y, Niroula A, Shen B, Vihinen M. PON-Sol: prediction of effects of amino acid substitutions on protein solubility. Bioinformatics. 2016;32:2032–34. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobson CL, Devine PWA, Phillips JJ, Higazi DR, Lloyd C, Popovic B, Arnold J, Buchanan A, Lewis A, Goodman J, et al. Engineering the surface properties of a human monoclonal antibody prevents self-association and rapid clearance in vivo. Sci Rep. 2016;6:38644. doi:10.1038/srep38644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ovacik M, Lin K. Tutorial on monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics and its considerations in early development. Clin Transl Sci. 2018;11:540–52. doi:10.1111/cts.12567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraft TE, Richter WF, Emrich T, Knaupp A, Schuster M, Wolfert A, et al. Heparin chromatography as an in vitro predictor for antibody clearance rate through pinocytosis. MAbs. 2020;12:1683432. doi:10.1080/19420862.2019.1683432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung S, Nguyen V, Lin YL, Lafrance-Vanasse J, Scales SJ, Lin K, Deng R, Williams K, Sperinde G, Li JJ, et al. An in vitro FcRn- dependent transcytosis assay as a screening tool for predictive assessment of nonspecific clearance of antibody therapeutics in humans. MAbs. 2019;11:942–55. doi:10.1080/19420862.2019.1605270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noguchi Y, Ozeki K, Akita H. Pharmacokinetic prediction of an antibody in mice based on an in vitro cell-based approach using target receptor-expressing cells. Sci Rep. 2020;10:16268. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-73255-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roopenian DC, Akilesh S. FcRn: the neonatal Fc receptor comes of age. Nat Rev Immunol. 2007;7:715–25. doi:10.1038/nri2155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyzik M, Sand KMK, Hubbard JJ, Andersen JT, Sandlie I, Blumberg RS. The neonatal Fc Receptor (FcRn): a misnomer? Front Immunol. 2019;10:10. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.01540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoch A, Kettenberger H, Mundigl O, Winter G, Engert J, Heinrich J, et al. Charge-mediated influence of the antibody variable domain on FcRn-dependent pharmacokinetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:5997–6002. doi:10.1073/pnas.1408766112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung S, Lin YL, Nguyen V, Kamen L, Zheng K, Vora B, et al. Development of a label-free FcRn-mediated transcytosis assay for in vitro characterization of FcRn interactions with therapeutic antibodies and Fc-fusion proteins. J Immunol Methods. 2018;462:101–05. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2018.07.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyzik M, Rath T, Lencer WI, Baker K, Blumberg RS. FcRn: the architect behind the immune and nonimmune functions of IgG and albumin. J Immunol. 2015;194:4595–603. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1403014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glassman PM, Balthasar JP. Physiologically-based modeling of monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics in drug discovery and development. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2019;34:3–13. doi:10.1016/j.dmpk.2018.11.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones HM, Zhang Z, Jasper P, Luo H, Avery LB, King LE, et al. A physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model for the prediction of monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics from in vitro data. CPT: Pharm Syst Pharmacol. 2019;8:738–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Datta-Mannan A, Estwick S, Zhou C, Choi H, Douglass NE, Witcher DR, Lu J, Beidler C, Millican R. Influence of physiochemical properties on the subcutaneous absorption and bioavailability of monoclonal antibodies. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1770028. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1770028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bumbaca Yadav D, Sharma VK, Boswell CA, Hotzel I, Tesar D, Shang Y, Ying Y, Fischer SK, Grogan JL, Chiang EY, et al. Evaluating the use of antibody variable region (Fv) charge as a risk assessment tool for predicting typical cynomolgus monkey pharmacokinetics. J Biol Chem. 2015;290:29732–41. doi:10.1074/jbc.M115.692434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khawli LA, Goswami S, Hutchinson R, Kwong ZW, Yang J, Wang X, Yao Z, Sreedhara A, Cano T, Tesar DB, et al. Charge variants in IgG1: isolation, characterization, in vitro binding properties and pharmacokinetics in rats. MAbs. 2010;2(6):613–24. doi:10.4161/mabs.2.6.13333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng Y, Tesar DB, Benincosa L, Birnböck H, Boswell CA, Bumbaca D, Cowan KJ, Danilenko DM, Daugherty AL, Fielder PJ, et al. Minipig as a potential translatable model for monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics after intravenous and subcutaneous administration. MAbs. 2012;4(2):243–55. doi:10.4161/mabs.4.2.19387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Datta-Mannan A, Lu J, Witcher DR, Leung D, Tang Y, Wroblewski VJ. The interplay of non-specific binding, target-mediated clearance and FcRn interactions on the pharmacokinetics of humanized antibodies. MAbs. 2015;7:1084–93. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1075109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendley C, Schantz A, Wagner C. Immunogenicity of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. Curr Opin Mol Ther. 2003;5:172–79.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lonberg N. Human antibodies from transgenic animals. Nat Biotechnol. 2005;23:1117–25. doi:10.1038/nbt1135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clavero-Álvarez A, Di Mambro T, Perez-Gaviro S, Magnani M, Bruscolini P. Humanization of antibodies using a statistical inference approach. Sci Rep. 2018;8:14820. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-32986-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkataramani S, Ernst R, Derebe MG, Wright R, Kopenhaver J, Jacobs SA, Singh S, Ganesan R. In pursuit of stability enhancement of a prostate cancer targeting antibody derived from a transgenic animal platform. Sci Rep. 2020;10:9722. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-66636-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith GP. Filamentous fusion phage: novel expression vectors that display cloned antigens on the virion surface. Science. 1985;228:1315–17. doi:10.1126/science.4001944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilvebrant J, Sidhu SS. Construction of synthetic antibody phage-display libraries. Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1701:45–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Setliff I, Shiakolas AR, Pilewski KA, Murji AA, Mapengo RE, Janowska K, Richardson S, Oosthuysen C, Raju N, Ronsard L, et al. High-throughput mapping of B cell receptor sequences to antigen specificity. Cell. 2019;179(7):1636–46.e15. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein LD, Chen Y-J-J, Wu J, Chaudhuri S, Hsiao Y-C, Schneider K, Hoi KH, Lin Z, Guerrero S, Jaiswal BS, et al. Massively parallel single-cell B-cell receptor sequencing enables rapid discovery of diverse antigen-reactive antibodies. Commun Biol. 2019;2:304. doi:10.1038/s42003-019-0551-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouisse L-H, Gautreau-Rolland L, Devilder M-C, Osborn M, Moyon M, Visentin J, et al. Antigen-specific single B cell sorting and expression-cloning from immunoglobulin humanized rats: a rapid and versatile method for the generation of high affinity and discriminative human monoclonal antibodies. BMC Biotechnol. 2017;17:3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sethu S, Govindappa K, Alhaidari M, Pirmohamed M, Park K, Sathish J. Immunogenicity to biologics: mechanisms, prediction and reduction. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2012;60:331–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boehncke WH, Brembilla NC. Immunogenicity of biologic therapies: causes and consequences. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2018;14:513–23. doi:10.1080/1744666X.2018.1468753.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Groot AS, Scott DW. Immunogenicity of protein therapeutics. Trends Immunol. 2007;28:482–90. doi:10.1016/j.it.2007.07.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraoui B, Cameron L, Ouellet M, White B. Anti-infliximab antibodies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who require higher doses of infliximab to achieve or maintain a clinical response. J Rheumatol. 2006;33:31–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karle A, Spindeldreher S, Kolbinger F. Secukinumab, a novel anti-IL-17A antibody, shows low immunogenicity potential in human in vitro assays comparable to other marketed biotherapeutics with low clinical immunogenicity. MAbs. 2016;8:536–50. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1136761.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sekiguchi N, Kubo C, Takahashi A, Muraoka K, Takeiri A, Ito S, Yano M, Mimoto F, Maeda A, Iwayanagi Y, et al. MHC-associated peptide proteomics enabling highly sensitive detection of immunogenic sequences for the development of therapeutic antibodies with low immunogenicity. MAbs. 2018;10(8):1168–81. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1518888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joubert MK, Deshpande M, Yang J, Reynolds H, Bryson C, Fogg M, Baker MP, Herskovitz J, Goletz TJ, Zhou L, et al. Use of in vitro assays to assess immunogenicity risk of antibody-based biotherapeutics. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0159328. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spindeldreher S, Karle A, Correia E, Tenon M, Gottlieb S, Huber T, Maillere B, Kolbinger F. T cell epitope mapping of secukinumab and ixekizumab in healthy donors. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1707418. doi:10.1080/19420862.2019.1707418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh H, Raghava GP. ProPred: prediction of HLA-DR binding sites. Bioinformatics. 2001;17:1236–37. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/17.12.1236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yogurtcu ON, Sauna ZE, McGill JR, Tegenge MA, Yang H. TCPro: an in silico risk assessment tool for biotherapeutic protein immunogenicity. AAPS J. 2019;21:96. doi:10.1208/s12248-019-0368-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi Y, Verma D, Griswold KE, Bailey-Kellogg C. EpiSweep: computationally driven reengineering of therapeutic proteins to reduce immunogenicity while maintaining function. Methods Mol Biol. 2017;1529:375–98.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salvat RS, Choi Y, Bishop A, Bailey-Kellogg C, Griswold KE. Protein deimmunization via structure-based design enables efficient epitope deletion at high mutational loads. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2015;112:1306–18. doi:10.1002/bit.25554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvat RS, Parker AS, Guilliams A, Choi Y, Bailey-Kellogg C, Griswold KE. Computationally driven deletion of broadly distributed T cell epitopes in a biotherapeutic candidate. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2014;71:4869–80. doi:10.1007/s00018-014-1652-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvat RS, Verma D, Parker AS, Kirsch JR, Brooks SA, Bailey-Kellogg C, et al. Computationally optimized deimmunization libraries yield highly mutated enzymes with low immunogenicity and enhanced activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:E5085–e93. doi:10.1073/pnas.1621233114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar