Advanced search
Publication Cover
mAbs Volume 14, 2022 - Issue 1
Submit an article Journal homepage
15,731
Views
31
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Current advances in biopharmaceutical informatics: guidelines, impact and challenges in the computational developability assessment of antibody therapeutics

Rahul Khetana Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKCorrespondence[email protected]
ORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1890-0886View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Robin Curtisa Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7745-6362View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Charlotte M. Deaneb Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1388-2252View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Johannes Thorling Hadsundc Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DenmarkView further author information
,
Uddipan Kard Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA, USAView further author information
,
Konrad Krawczyke NaturalAntibody, Hamburg, GermanyORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0697-5522View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Daisuke Kurodaf Department of Bioengineering, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;g Medical Device Development and Regulation Research Center, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;h Department of Chemistry and Biotechnology, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2390-4785View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Sarah A. Robinsonb Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2500-0173View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Pietro Sormannii Chemistry of Health, Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of CambridgeORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6228-2221View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Kouhei Tsumotof Department of Bioengineering, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;g Medical Device Development and Regulation Research Center, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;h Department of Chemistry and Biotechnology, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan;j The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanView further author information
,
Jim Warwickera Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1302-0815View further author information
ORCID Icon &
Andrew C.R. Martink Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology, Division of Biosciences, University College London, London, UKORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2835-2572View further author information
ORCID Icon show all
Article: 2020082 | Received 16 Aug 2021, Accepted 15 Dec 2021, Published online: 01 Feb 2022

References

  • Kaplon H, Reichert JM. Antibodies to watch in 2021. MAbs. 2021;13(1):1860476. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1860476.
  • Kaplon H, Muralidharan M, Schneider Z, Reichert JM. Antibodies to watch in 2020. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1703531. doi:10.1080/19420862.2019.1703531.
  • Kumar S, Plotnikov NV, Rouse JC, Singh SK. Biopharmaceutical informatics: supporting biologic drug development via molecular modelling and informatics. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2018;70(5):595–22. doi:10.1111/jphp.12700.
  • Jameson B, Wolf H. The antigenic index: a novel algorithm for predicting antigenic determinants. Bioinformatics. 1988;4(1):181–86. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/4.1.181.
  • Raybould MI, 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 Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2019;116(10):4025–30. doi:10.1073/pnas.1810576116.
  • Jain T, Sun T, Durand S, Hall A, Houston NR, Nett JH, Sharkey B, Bobrowicz B, Caffry I, Yu Y. Biophysical properties of the clinical-stage antibody landscape. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2017;114(5):944–49. doi:10.1073/pnas.1616408114.
  • 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.
  • Krawczyk K, Buchanan A, Marcatili P. Data mining patented antibody sequences. MAbs. 2021;13(1):1892366. doi:10.1080/19420862.2021.1892366.
  • Krawczyk K, Kelm S, Kovaltsuk A, Galson JD, Kelly D, Trück J, Regep C, Leem J, Wong WK, Nowak J. Structurally mapping antibody repertoires. Front Immunol. 2018;9:1698. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.01698.
  • Krawczyk K, Raybould MI, Kovaltsuk A, Deane CM. Looking for therapeutic antibodies in next-generation sequencing repositories. MAbs. 2019;11(7):1197–205. doi:10.1080/19420862.2019.1633884.
  • Deszynski P, Mlokosiewicz J, Volanakis A, Jaszczyszyn I, Castellana N, Bonissone S, Ganesan R, Krawczyk K. INDI-Integrated Nanobody Database for Immunoinformatics. medRxiv. 2021. doi:10.1101/2021.08.04.21261581.
  • Kovaltsuk A, Leem J, Kelm S, Snowden J, Deane CM, Krawczyk K. Observed antibody space: a resource for data mining next-generation sequencing of antibody repertoires. J Immunol. 2018;201(8):2502–09. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1800708.
  • Norman RA, Ambrosetti F, Bonvin AM, Colwell LJ, Kelm S, Kumar S, Krawczyk K. Computational approaches to therapeutic antibody design: established methods and emerging trends. Brief Bioinform. 2020;21(5):1549–67. doi:10.1093/bib/bbz095.
  • Raybould MI, Marks C, Lewis AP, Shi J, Bujotzek A, Taddese B, Deane CM. Thera-SAbDab: the therapeutic structural antibody database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(D1):D383–D8. doi:10.1093/nar/gkz827.
  • Sirin S, Apgar JR, Bennett EM, Keating AE. AB‐bind: antibody binding mutational database for computational affinity predictions. Protein Sci. 2016;25(2):393–409. doi:10.1002/pro.2829.
  • 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(4):791–802. doi:10.1021/mp200566k.
  • Li L, Kumar S, Buck PM, Burns C, Lavoie J, Singh SK, Warne NW, Nichols P, Luksha N, Boardman D. Concentration dependent viscosity of monoclonal antibody solutions: explaining experimental behavior in terms of molecular properties. Pharm Res. 2014;31(11):3161–78. doi:10.1007/s11095-014-1409-0.
  • Schoch A, Kettenberger H, Mundigl O, Winter G, Engert J, Heinrich J, Emrich T. Charge-mediated influence of the antibody variable domain on FcRn-dependent pharmacokinetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2015;112(19):5997–6002. doi:10.1073/pnas.1408766112.
  • Marcatili P, Olimpieri PP, Chailyan A, Tramontano A. Antibody modeling using the Prediction of ImmunoGlobulin Structure (PIGS) web server. Nat Protoc. 2014;9(12):2771. doi:10.1038/nprot.2014.189.
  • Leem J, Dunbar J, Georges G, Shi J, Deane CM. ABodyBuilder: automated antibody structure prediction with data–driven accuracy estimation. MAbs. 2016;8(7):1259–68. doi:10.1080/19420862.2016.1205773.
  • Weitzner BD, Jeliazkov JR, Lyskov S, Marze N, Kuroda D, Frick R, Adolf-Bryfogle J, Biswas N, Dunbrack JRL, Gray JJ. Modeling and docking of antibody structures with Rosetta. Nat Protoc. 2017;12(2):401. doi:10.1038/nprot.2016.180.
  • North B, Lehmann A, Dunbrack JRL. A new clustering of antibody CDR loop conformations. J Mol Biol. 2011;406(2):228–56. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2010.10.030.
  • Al-Lazikani B, Lesk AM, Chothia C. Standard conformations for the canonical structures of immunoglobulins. J Mol Biol. 1997;273(4):927–48. doi:10.1006/jmbi.1997.1354.
  • Martin AC, Thornton JM. Structural families in loops of homologous proteins: automatic classification, modelling and application to antibodies. J Mol Biol. 1996;263(5):800–15. doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0617.
  • Weitzner BD, Dunbrack JRL, Gray JJ. The origin of CDR H3 structural diversity. Structure. 2015;23(2):302–11. doi:10.1016/j.str.2014.11.010.
  • Kuroda D, Shirai H, Kobori M, Nakamura H. Structural classification of CDR‐H3 revisited: a lesson in antibody modeling. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2008;73(3):608–20. doi:10.1002/prot.22087.
  • Weitzner BD, Kuroda D, Marze N, Xu J, Gray JJ. Blind prediction performance of RosettaAntibody 3.0: grafting, relaxation, kinematic loop modeling, and full CDR optimization. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2014;82(8):1611–23. doi:10.1002/prot.24534.
  • Swindells MB, Porter CT, Couch M, Hurst J, Abhinandan K, Nielsen JH, Macindoe G, Hetherington J, Martin AC. abYsis: integrated antibody sequence and structure—management, analysis, and prediction. J Mol Biol. 2017;429(3):356–64. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2016.08.019.
  • Cheng J, Randall AZ, Sweredoski MJ, Baldi P. SCRATCH: a protein structure and structural feature prediction server. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(suppl_2):W72–W6. doi:10.1093/nar/gki396.
  • Chennamsetty N, Voynov V, Kayser V, Helk B, Trout BL. Design of therapeutic proteins with enhanced stability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2009;106(29):11937–42. doi:10.1073/pnas.0904191106.
  • 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(8):285–89. doi:10.1093/protein/gzw019.
  • Gil-Garcia M, Bano-Polo M, Varejao N, Jamroz M, Kuriata A, Díaz-Caballero M, Lascorz J, Morel B, Navarro S, Reverter D. Combining structural aggregation propensity and stability predictions to redesign protein solubility. Mol Pharm. 2018;15(9):3846–59. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.8b00341.
  • Jain T, Boland T, Lilov A, Burnina I, Brown M, Xu Y, Vásquez M. Prediction of delayed retention of antibodies in hydrophobic interaction chromatography from sequence using machine learning. Bioinformatics. 2017;33(23):3758–66. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx519.
  • 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(1):102–15. doi:10.1002/jps.22758.
  • 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(6):1885–98. doi:10.1002/jps.24430.
  • Kohli N, Jain N, Geddie ML, Razlog M, Xu L, Lugovskoy AA. A novel screening method to assess developability of antibody-like molecules. MAbs. 2015;7(4):752–58. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1048410.
  • Sormanni P, Aprile FA, Vendruscolo M. Third generation antibody discovery methods: in silico rational design. Chem Soc Rev. 2018;47(24):9137–57. doi:10.1039/C8CS00523K.
  • Kumar S, Singh SK. Developability of biotherapeutics: computational approaches. Boca Raton (FL), CRC Press; 2015.
  • Xu Y, Wang D, Mason B, Rossomando T, Li N, Liu D, Cheung JK, Xu W, Raghava S, Katiyar A. Structure, heterogeneity and developability assessment of therapeutic antibodies. MAbs. 2019;11(2):239–64. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1553476.
  • Hebditch M, Warwicker J. Charge and hydrophobicity are key features in sequence-trained machine learning models for predicting the biophysical properties of clinical-stage antibodies. PeerJ. 2019;7:e8199. doi:10.7717/peerj.8199.
  • King AC, Woods M, Liu W, Lu Z, Gill D, Krebs MR. High‐throughput measurement, correlation analysis, and machine‐learning predictions for pH and thermal stabilities of Pfizer‐generated antibodies. Protein Sci. 2011;20(9):1546–57. doi:10.1002/pro.680.
  • Avery LB, Wade J, Wang M, Tam A, King A, Piche-Nicholas N, Kavosi MS, Penn S, Cirelli D, Kurz JC. Establishing in vitro in vivo correlations to screen monoclonal antibodies for physicochemical properties related to favorable human pharmacokinetics. MAbs. 2018;10(2):244–55. doi:10.1080/19420862.2017.1417718.
  • Bailly M, Mieczkowski C, Juan V, Metwally E, Tomazela D, Baker J, Uchida M, Kofman E, Raoufi F, Motlagh S. Predicting antibody developability profiles through early stage discovery screening. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1743053. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1743053.
  • Erasmus MF, D’Angelo S, Ferrara F, Naranjo L, Teixeira AA, Buonpane R, Stewart SM, Nastri HG, Bradbury AR. A single donor is sufficient to produce a highly functional in vitro antibody library. Commun biol. 2021;4(1):1–16. doi:10.1038/s42003-021-01881-0.
  • Tiller T, Schuster I, Deppe D, Siegers K, Strohner R, Herrmann T, Berenguer M, Poujol D, Stehle J, Stark Y. A fully synthetic human Fab antibody library based on fixed VH/VL framework pairings with favorable biophysical properties. MAbs. 2013;5(3):445–70. doi:10.4161/mabs.24218.
  • Adler AS, Bedinger D, Adams MS, Asensio MA, Edgar RC, Leong R, Leong J, Mizrahi RA, Spindler MJ, Bandi SR. A natively paired antibody library yields drug leads with higher sensitivity and specificity than a randomly paired antibody library. MAbs. 2018;10(3):431–43. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1426422.
  • Raybould MI, Marks C, Kovaltsuk A, Lewis AP, Shi J, Deane CM. Public baseline and shared response structures support the theory of antibody repertoire functional commonality. PLoS Comput Biol. 2021;17(3):e1008781. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008781.
  • Adams JJ, Sidhu SS. Synthetic antibody technologies. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2014;24:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2013.11.003.
  • Prassler J, Thiel S, Pracht C, Polzer A, Peters S, Bauer M, Nörenberg S, Stark Y, Kölln J, Popp A. HuCAL PLATINUM, a synthetic Fab library optimized for sequence diversity and superior performance in mammalian expression systems. J Mol Biol. 2011;413(1):261–78. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2011.08.012.
  • Zhai W, Glanville J, Fuhrmann M, Mei L, Ni I, Sundar PD, Van Blarcom T, Abdiche Y, Lindquist K, Strohner R. Synthetic antibodies designed on natural sequence landscapes. J Mol Biol. 2011;412(1):55–71. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2011.07.018.
  • Zhao Q, Buhr D, Gunter C, Frenette J, Ferguson M, Sanford E, Holland E, Rajagopal C, Batonick M, Kiss MM. Rational library design by functional CDR resampling. N Biotechnol. 2018;45:89–97. doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2017.12.005.
  • Friedensohn S, Neumeier D, Khan TA, Csepregi L, Parola C, de Vries ARG, Erlach L, Mason DM, Reddy ST. Convergent selection in antibody repertoires is revealed by deep learning. bioRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.02.25.965673.
  • Amimeur T, Shaver JM, Ketchem RR, Taylor JA, Clark RH, Smith J, Van Citters D, Siska CC, Smidt P, Sprague M. Designing feature-controlled humanoid antibody discovery libraries using generative adversarial networks. bioRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.04.12.024844.
  • Repecka D, Jauniskis V, Karpus L, Rembeza E, Rokaitis I, Zrimec J, Poviloniene S, Laurynenas A, Viknander S, Abuajwa W. Expanding functional protein sequence spaces using generative adversarial networks. Nat Mach Intell. 2021;3(4):324–33. doi:10.1038/s42256-021-00310-5.
  • Shin J-E, Riesselman AJ, Kollasch AW, McMahon C, Simon E, Sander C, Manglik A, Kruse AC, Marks DS. Protein design and variant prediction using autoregressive generative models. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):1–11. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22732-w.
  • Dyson MR, Masters E, Pazeraitis D, Perera RL, Syrjanen JL, Surade S, Thorsteinson N, Parthiban K, Jones PC, Sattar M. Beyond affinity: selection of antibody variants with optimal biophysical properties and reduced immunogenicity from mammalian display libraries. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1829335. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1829335.
  • Wu Z, Kan SJ, Lewis RD, Wittmann BJ, Arnold FH. Machine learning-assisted directed protein evolution with combinatorial libraries. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2019;116(18):8852–58. doi:10.1073/pnas.1901979116.
  • Chen X, Dougherty T, Hong C, Schibler R, Zhao YC, Sadeghi R, Matasci N, Wu Y-C, Kerman I. Predicting antibody developability from sequence using machine learning. bioRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.06.18.159798.
  • Starr CG, Tessier PM. Selecting and engineering monoclonal antibodies with drug-like specificity. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2019;60:119–27. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2019.01.008.
  • Vázquez‐Rey M, Lang DA. Aggregates in monoclonal antibody manufacturing processes. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2011;108(7):1494–508. doi:10.1002/bit.23155.
  • Ratanji KD, Derrick JP, Dearman RJ, Kimber I. Immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: influence of aggregation. J Immunotoxicol. 2014;11(2):99–109. doi:10.3109/1547691X.2013.821564.
  • Seeliger D, Schulz P, Litzenburger T, Spitz J, Hoerer S, Blech M, Enenkel B, Studts JM, Garidel P, Karow AR. Boosting antibody developability through rational sequence optimization. MAbs. 2015;7(3):505–15. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1017695.
  • van der Kant R, Karow-Zwick AR, Van Durme J, Blech M, Gallardo R, Seeliger D, Aßfalg K, Baatsen P, Compernolle G, Gils A. 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.
  • Kuhn AB, Kube S, Karow-Zwick AR, Seeliger D, Garidel P, Blech M, Schäfer LV. Improved solution-state properties of monoclonal antibodies by targeted mutations. J Phys Chem B. 2017;121(48):10818–27. doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b09126.
  • Casaz P, Boucher E, Wollacott R, Pierce BG, Rivera R, Sedic M, Ozturk S, Thomas JWD, Wang Y. Resolving self-association of a therapeutic antibody by formulation optimization and molecular approaches. MAbs. 2014;6(6):1533–39. doi:10.4161/19420862.2014.975658.
  • Wu S-J, Luo J, O’Neil KT, Kang J, Lacy ER, Canziani G, Baker A, Huang M, Tang QM, Raju TS. Structure-based engineering of a monoclonal antibody for improved solubility. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2010;23(8):643–51. doi:10.1093/protein/gzq037.
  • Nichols P, Li L, Kumar S, Buck PM, Singh SK, Goswami S, Balthazor B, Conley TR, Sek D, Allen MJ. Rational design of viscosity reducing mutants of a monoclonal antibody: hydrophobic versus electrostatic inter-molecular interactions. MAbs. 2015;7(1):212–30. doi:10.4161/19420862.2014.985504.
  • Pindrus M, Shire SJ, Kelley RF, Demeule B, Wong R, Xu Y, Yadav S. Solubility challenges in high concentration monoclonal antibody formulations: relationship with amino acid sequence and intermolecular interactions. Mol Pharm. 2015;12(11):3896–907. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.5b00336.
  • 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(7):1750–64. doi:10.1007/s11095-011-0410-0.
  • Sankar K, Krystek JSR, Carl SM, Day T, Maier JK. AggScore: prediction of aggregation‐prone regions in proteins based on the distribution of surface patches. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2018;86(11):1147–56. doi:10.1002/prot.25594.
  • Liu YD, Goetze AM, Bass RB, Flynn GC. N-terminal glutamate to pyroglutamate conversion in vivo for human IgG2 antibodies. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(13):11211–17. doi:10.1074/jbc.M110.185041.
  • Chelius D, Jing K, Lueras A, Rehder DS, Dillon TM, Vizel A, Rajan RS, Li T, Treuheit MJ, Bondarenko PV. Formation of pyroglutamic acid from N-terminal glutamic acid in immunoglobulin gamma antibodies. Anal Chem. 2006;78(7):2370–76. doi:10.1021/ac051827k.
  • Yu L, Vizel A, Huff MB, Young M, Remmele JRL, He B. Investigation of N-terminal glutamate cyclization of recombinant monoclonal antibody in formulation development. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2006;42(4):455–63. doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2006.05.008.
  • Tang L, Sundaram S, Zhang J, Carlson P, Matathia A, Parekh B, Zhou Q, Hsieh M-C. Conformational characterization of the charge variants of a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody using H/D exchange mass spectrometry. MAbs. 2013;5(1):114–25. doi:10.4161/mabs.22695.
  • van Den Bremer ET, Beurskens FJ, Voorhorst M, Engelberts PJ, de Jong RN, van der Boom BG, Cook EM, Lindorfer MA, Taylor RP, van Berkel PH. Human IgG is produced in a pro-form that requires clipping of C-terminal lysines for maximal complement activation. MAbs. 2015;7(4):672–80. doi:10.1080/19420862.2015.1046665.
  • Liu H, Nowak C, Shao M, Ponniah G, Neill A. Impact of cell culture on recombinant monoclonal antibody product heterogeneity. Biotechnol Prog. 2016;32(5):1103–12. doi:10.1002/btpr.2327.
  • Füssl F, Trappe A, Cook K, Scheffler K, Fitzgerald O, Bones J. Comprehensive characterisation of the heterogeneity of Adalimumab via charge variant analysis hyphenated on-line to native high resolution Orbitrap mass spectrometry. MAbs. 2019;11(1):116–28. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1531664.
  • Sydow JF, Lipsmeier F, Larraillet V, Hilger M, Mautz B, Mølhøj M, Kuentzer J, Klostermann S, Schoch J, Voelger HR. Structure-based prediction of asparagine and aspartate degradation sites in antibody variable regions. PloS One. 2014;9(6):e100736. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100736.
  • Verma A, Ngundi MM, Burns DL. Mechanistic analysis of the effect of deamidation on the immunogenicity of anthrax protective antigen. Clin vaccine immunol. 2016;23(5):396. doi:10.1128/CVI.00701-15.
  • Mo J, Yan Q, So CK, Soden T, Lewis MJ, Hu P. Understanding the impact of methionine oxidation on the biological functions of IgG1 antibodies using hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2016;88(19):9495–502. doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.6b01958.
  • Dashivets T, Stracke J, Dengl S, Knaupp A, Pollmann J, Buchner J, Schlothauer T. Oxidation in the complementarity-determining regions differentially influences the properties of therapeutic antibodies. MAbs. 2016;8(8):1525–35. doi:10.1080/19420862.2016.1231277.
  • Liu-Shin LP-Y, Fung A, Malhotra A, Ratnaswamy G. Evidence of disulfide bond scrambling during production of an antibody-drug conjugate. MAbs. 2018;10(8):1190–99. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1521128.
  • Moritz B, Stracke JO. Assessment of disulfide and hinge modifications in monoclonal antibodies. Electrophoresis. 2017;38(6):769–85. doi:10.1002/elps.201600425.
  • Wright A, Tao M, Kabat E, Morrison S. Antibody variable region glycosylation: position effects on antigen binding and carbohydrate structure. EMBO J. 1991;10(10):2717–23. doi:10.1002/j.1460-2075.1991.tb07819.x.
  • Leibiger H, Wüstner D, Stigler R-D, Marx U. Variable domain-linked oligosaccharides of a human monoclonal IgG: structure and influence on antigen binding. Biochem J. 1999;338(2):529–38. doi:10.1042/bj3380529.
  • van Bueren JJL, Rispens T, Verploegen S, van der Palen-merkus T, Stapel S, Workman LJ, James H, van Berkel PH, van de Winkel JG, Platts-Mills TA. Anti-galactose-α-1, 3-galactose IgE from allergic patients does not bind α-galactosylated glycans on intact therapeutic antibody Fc domains. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29(7):574–76. doi:10.1038/nbt.1912.
  • Jefferis R. Posttranslational modifications and the immunogenicity of biotherapeutics. J Immunol Res. 2016;2016:1–15. doi:10.1155/2016/5358272.
  • Muster W, Breidenbach A, Fischer H, Kirchner S, Müller L, Pähler A. Computational toxicology in drug development. Drug Discov Today. 2008;13(7–8):303–10. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2007.12.007.
  • Kuang Q, Wang M, Li R, Dong Y, Li Y, Li M. A systematic investigation of computation models for predicting Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs). PloS One. 2014;9(9):e105889. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105889.
  • Bryson CJ, Jones TD, Baker MP. Prediction of immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins. BioDrugs. 2010;24(1):1–8. doi:10.2165/11318560-000000000-00000.
  • Baker M, Reynolds HM, Lumicisi B, Bryson CJ. Immunogenicity of protein therapeutics: the key causes, consequences and challenges. Self/nonself. 2010;1(4):314–22. doi:10.4161/self.1.4.13904.
  • Diao L, Meibohm B. Tools for predicting the PK/PD of therapeutic proteins. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2015;11(7):1115–25. doi:10.1517/17425255.2015.1041917.
  • Wang J, Iyer S, Fielder PJ, Davis JD, Deng R. Projecting human pharmacokinetics of monoclonal antibodies from nonclinical data: comparative evaluation of prediction approaches in early drug development. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2016;37(2):51–65. doi:10.1002/bdd.1952.
  • Grinshpun B, Thorsteinson N, Pereira JN, Rippmann F, Nannemann D, Sood VD, Fomekong Nanfack Y. Identifying biophysical assays and in silico properties that enrich for slow clearance in clinical-stage therapeutic antibodies. MAbs. 2021;13(1):1932230. doi:10.1080/19420862.2021.1932230.
  • Desai DV, Kulkarni-Kale U. T-cell epitope prediction methods: an overview. Immunoinformatics. 2014:333–64. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1115-8_19.
  • Peters B, Nielsen M, Sette A. T cell epitope predictions. Annu Rev Immunol. 2020;38:123–45. doi:10.1146/annurev-immunol-082119-124838.
  • Reche PA, Glutting J-P, Zhang H, Reinherz EL. Enhancement to the RANKPEP resource for the prediction of peptide binding to MHC molecules using profiles. Immunogenetics. 2004;56(6):405–19. doi:10.1007/s00251-004-0709-7.
  • Singh H, Raghava G. ProPred: prediction of HLA-DR binding sites. Bioinformatics. 2001;17(12):1236–37. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/17.12.1236.
  • Sturniolo T, Bono E, Ding J, Raddrizzani L, Tuereci O, Sahin U, Braxenthaler M, Gallazzi F, Protti MP, Sinigaglia F. Generation of tissue-specific and promiscuous HLA ligand databases using DNA microarrays and virtual HLA class II matrices. Nat Biotechnol. 1999;17(6):555–61. doi:10.1038/9858.
  • Nielsen M, Lundegaard C, Lund O. Prediction of MHC class II binding affinity using SMM-align, a novel stabilization matrix alignment method. BMC Bioinform. 2007;8(1):1–12. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-238.
  • Wang P, Sidney J, Dow C, Mothé B, Sette A, Peters B. A systematic assessment of MHC class II peptide binding predictions and evaluation of a consensus approach. PLoS Comput Biol. 2008;4(4):e1000048. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000048.
  • Zhang GL, Khan AM, Srinivasan KN, August JT, Brusic V. MULTIPRED: a computational system for prediction of promiscuous HLA binding peptides. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(suppl_2):W172–W9. doi:10.1093/nar/gki452.
  • Andreatta M, Trolle T, Yan Z, Greenbaum JA, Peters B, Nielsen M. An automated benchmarking platform for MHC class II binding prediction methods. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(9):1522–28. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx820.
  • Reynisson B, Alvarez B, Paul S, Peters B, Nielsen M. NetMHCpan-4.1 and NetMHCIIpan-4.0: improved predictions of MHC antigen presentation by concurrent motif deconvolution and integration of MS MHC eluted ligand data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(W1):W449–W54. doi:10.1093/nar/gkaa379.
  • Nielsen M, Lundegaard C, Blicher T, Peters B, Sette A, Justesen S, Buus S, Lund O. Quantitative predictions of peptide binding to any HLA-DR molecule of known sequence: NetMHCIIpan. PLoS Comput Biol. 2008;4(7):e1000107. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000107.
  • Jacob L, Vert J-P. Efficient peptide–MHC-I binding prediction for alleles with few known binders. Bioinformatics. 2008;24(3):358–66. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm611.
  • Zhang H, Lundegaard C, Nielsen M. Pan-specific MHC class I predictors: a benchmark of HLA class I pan-specific prediction methods. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(1):83–89. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btn579.
  • Yachnin BJ, Mulligan VK, Khare SD, Bailey-Kellogg C. MHCEpitopeEnergy, a flexible Rosetta-based biotherapeutic deimmunization platform. J Chem Inf Model. 2021;61(5):2368–82. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00056.
  • Peng H-P, Lee KH, Jian J-W, Yang A-S. Origins of specificity and affinity in antibody–protein interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2014;111(26):E2656–E65. doi:10.1073/pnas.1401131111.
  • Hopp TP, Woods KR. Prediction of protein antigenic determinants from amino acid sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 1981;78(6):3824–28. doi:10.1073/pnas.78.6.3824.
  • Welling GW, Weijer WJ, van der Zee R, Welling-Wester S. Prediction of sequential antigenic regions in proteins. FEBS Lett. 1985;188(2):215–18. doi:10.1016/0014-5793(85)80374-4.
  • Van Regenmortel M, De Marcillac GD. An assessment of prediction methods for locating continuous epitopes in proteins. Immunol Lett. 1988;17(2):95–107. doi:10.1016/0165-2478(88)90076-4.
  • Pellequer J, Westhof E. PREDITOP: a program for antigenicity prediction. J Mol Graph. 1993;11(3):204–10. doi:10.1016/0263-7855(93)80074-2.
  • Saha S, Raghava GPS. Prediction of continuous B‐cell epitopes in an antigen using recurrent neural network. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2006;65(1):40–48. doi:10.1002/prot.21078.
  • Gao J, Faraggi E, Zhou Y, Ruan J, Kurgan L. BEST: improved prediction of B-cell epitopes from antigen sequences. PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e40104. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040104.
  • Singh H, Ansari HR, Raghava GP. Improved method for linear B-cell epitope prediction using antigen’s primary sequence. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e62216. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062216.
  • Yao B, Zhang L, Liang S, Zhang C. SVMTriP: a method to predict antigenic epitopes using support vector machine to integrate tri-peptide similarity and propensity. PloS One. 2012;7(9):e45152. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045152.
  • Kulkarni-Kale U, Bhosle S, Kolaskar AS. CEP: a conformational epitope prediction server. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33(suppl_2):W168–W71. doi:10.1093/nar/gki460.
  • Zinsli LV, Stierlin N, Loessner MJ, Schmelcher M. Deimmunization of protein therapeutics–Recent advances in experimental and computational epitope prediction and deletion. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2020;19:315–29. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2020.12.024.
  • Lipinski CA, Lombardo F, Dominy BW, Feeney PJ. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 1997;23(1–3):3–25. doi:10.1016/S0169-409X(96)00423-1.
  • Lecerf M, Kanyavuz A, Lacroix-Desmazes S, Dimitrov JD. Sequence features of variable region determining physicochemical properties and polyreactivity of therapeutic antibodies. Mol Immunol. 2019;112:338–46. doi:10.1016/j.molimm.2019.06.012.
  • Hebditch M, Carballo-Amador MA, Charonis S, Curtis R, Warwicker J. Protein–Sol: a web tool for predicting protein solubility from sequence. Bioinformatics. 2017;33(19):3098–100. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx345.
  • Hou Q, Kwasigroch JM, Rooman M, Pucci F. SOLart: a structure-based method to predict protein solubility and aggregation. Bioinformatics. 2020;36(5):1445–52. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz773.
  • Sormanni P, Aprile FA, Vendruscolo M. The CamSol method of rational design of protein mutants with enhanced solubility. J Mol Biol. 2015;427(2):478–90. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2014.09.026.
  • 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(1):1–9. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-07800-w.
  • 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(12):5697–710. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.8b00867.
  • Wolf Pérez A-M, Sormanni P, Andersen JS, Sakhnini LI, Rodriguez-Leon I, Bjelke JR, Gajhede AJ, De Maria L, Otzen DE, Vendruscolo M. In vitro and in silico assessment of the developability of a designed monoclonal antibody library. MAbs. 2019;11(2):388–400. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1556082.
  • Kingsbury JS, Saini A, Auclair SM, Fu L, Lantz MM, Halloran KT, Calero-Rubio C, Schwenger W, Airiau CY, Zhang J. A single molecular descriptor to predict solution behavior of therapeutic antibodies. Sci Adv. 2020;6(32):eabb0372. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abb0372.
  • Hanke AT, Klijn ME, Verhaert PD, van der Wielen LA, Ottens M, Eppink MH, van de Sandt EJ. Prediction of protein retention times in hydrophobic interaction chromatography by robust statistical characterization of their atomic‐level surface properties. Biotechnol Prog. 2016;32(2):372–81. doi:10.1002/btpr.2219.
  • Goyon A, D’Atri V, Colas O, Fekete S, Beck A, Guillarme D. Characterization of 30 therapeutic antibodies and related products by size exclusion chromatography: feasibility assessment for future mass spectrometry hyphenation. J Chromatogr B. 2017;1065:35–43. doi:10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.09.027.
  • Hebditch M, Roche A, Curtis RA, Warwicker J. Models for antibody behavior in hydrophobic interaction chromatography and in self-association. J Pharm Sci. 2019;108(4):1434–41. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2018.11.035.
  • Sundberg EJ, Urrutia M, Braden BC, Isern J, Tsuchiya D, Fields BA, Malchiodi EL, Tormo J, Schwarz FP, Mariuzza RA. Estimation of the hydrophobic effect in an antigen− antibody protein− protein interface. Biochemistry. 2000;39(50):15375–87. doi:10.1021/bi000704l.
  • Almagro JC, Fransson J. Humanization of antibodies. Front Biosci. 2008;13(1):1619–33. doi:10.2741/2786.
  • Roguska MA, Pedersen JT, Keddy CA, Henry AH, Searle SJ, Lambert JM, Goldmacher VS, Blättler W, Rees AR, Guild BC. Humanization of murine monoclonal antibodies through variable domain resurfacing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 1994;91(3):969–73. doi:10.1073/pnas.91.3.969.
  • Bartelds GM, Krieckaert CL, Nurmohamed MT, van Schouwenburg PA, Lems WF, Twisk JW, Dijkmans BA, Aarden L, Wolbink GJ. Development of antidrug antibodies against Adalimumab and association with disease activity and treatment failure during long-term follow-up. JAMA. 2011;305(14):1460–68. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.406.
  • Sekiguchi N, Kubo C, Takahashi A, Muraoka K, Takeiri A, Ito S, Yano M, Mimoto F, Maeda A, Iwayanagi Y. 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.
  • Karle AC. Applying MAPPs assays to assess drug immunogenicity. Front Immunol. 2020;11:698. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.00698.
  • Abhinandan K, Martin AC. Analyzing the “degree of humanness” of antibody sequences. J Mol Biol. 2007;369(3):852–62. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2007.02.100.
  • Gao SH, Huang K, Tu H, Adler AS. Monoclonal antibody humanness score and its applications. BMC Biotechnol. 2013;13(1):1–12. doi:10.1186/1472-6750-13-55.
  • Thullier P, Huish O, Pelat T, Martin AC. The humanness of macaque antibody sequences. J Mol Biol. 2010;396(5):1439–50. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2009.12.041.
  • Schmitz S, Soto C, Crowe JJE, Meiler J. Human-likeness of antibody biologics determined by back-translation and comparison with large antibody variable gene repertoires. MAbs. 2020;12(1):1758291. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1758291.
  • Chin M, Marks C, Deane CM. Humanization of antibodies using a machine learning approach on large-scale repertoire data. bioRxiv. 2021. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btab434.
  • Chailyan A, Tramontano A, Marcatili P. A database of immunoglobulins with integrated tools: DIGIT. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(D1):D1230–D4. doi:10.1093/nar/gkr806.
  • Christley S, Scarborough W, Salinas E, Rounds WH, Toby IT, Fonner JM, Levin MK, Kim M, Mock SA, Jordan C. VDJServer: a cloud-based analysis portal and data commons for immune repertoire sequences and rearrangements. Front Immunol. 2018;9:976. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.00976.
  • Corrie BD, Marthandan N, Zimonja B, Jaglale J, Zhou Y, Barr E, Knoetze N, Breden FM, Christley S, Scott JK. iReceptor: a platform for querying and analyzing antibody/B‐cell and T‐cell receptor repertoire data across federated repositories. Immunol Rev. 2018;284(1):24–41. doi:10.1111/imr.12666.
  • DeWitt WS, Lindau P, Snyder TM, Sherwood AM, Vignali M, Carlson CS, Greenberg PD, Duerkopp N, Emerson RO, Robins HS. A public database of memory and naive B-cell receptor sequences. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0160853. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0160853.
  • Rosenfeld AM, Meng W, Luning Prak ET, Hershberg U. Immunedb, a novel tool for the analysis, storage, and dissemination of immune repertoire sequencing data. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2107. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.02107.
  • Zhang W, Wang L, Liu K, Wei X, Yang K, Du W, Wang S, Guo N, Ma C, Luo L. PIRD: pan immune repertoire database. Bioinformatics. 2020;36(3):897–903. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz614.
  • Marks C, Deane CM. How repertoire data are changing antibody science. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(29):9823–37. doi:10.1074/jbc.REV120.010181.
  • Galson JD, Clutterbuck EA, Trück J, Ramasamy MN, Münz M, Fowler A, Cerundolo V, Pollard AJ, Lunter G, Kelly DF. BCR repertoire sequencing: different patterns of B‐cell activation after two Meningococcal vaccines. Immunol Cell Biol. 2015;93(10):885–95. doi:10.1038/icb.2015.57.
  • Miho E, Yermanos A, Weber CR, Berger CT, Reddy ST, Greiff V. Computational strategies for dissecting the high-dimensional complexity of adaptive immune repertoires. Front Immunol. 2018;9:224. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.00224.
  • Briney B, Inderbitzin A, Joyce C, Burton DR. Commonality despite exceptional diversity in the baseline human antibody repertoire. Nature. 2019;566(7744):393–97. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-0879-y.
  • Slabodkin A, Chernigovskaya M, Mikocziova I, Akbar R, Scheffer L, Pavlović M, Bashour H, Snapkov I, Mehta BB, Weber CR. Individualized VDJ recombination predisposes the available Ig sequence space. bioRxiv. 2021. doi:10.1101/2021.04.19.440409.
  • Bashford‐Rogers RJ, Smith KG, Thomas DC. Antibody repertoire analysis in polygenic autoimmune diseases. Immunology. 2018;155(1):3–17. doi:10.1111/imm.12927.
  • Liu J, Yang X, Lu X, Zhang L, Luo W, Cheng Y, Zhang L, Yang Y, Dai N, Xu Y. Impact of T-cell receptor and B-cell receptor repertoire on the recurrence of early stage lung adenocarcinoma. Exp Cell Res. 2020;394(2):112134. doi:10.1016/j.yexcr.2020.112134.
  • Galson JD, Pollard AJ, Trück J, Kelly DF. Studying the antibody repertoire after vaccination: practical applications. Trends Immunol. 2014;35(7):319–31. doi:10.1016/j.it.2014.04.005.
  • Galson JD, Schaetzle S, Bashford-Rogers RJ, Raybould MI, Kovaltsuk A, Kilpatrick GJ, Minter R, Finch DK, Dias J, James LK. Deep sequencing of B cell receptor repertoires from COVID-19 patients reveals strong convergent immune signatures. Front Immunol. 2020;11:3283. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.605170.
  • Richardson E, Galson JD, Kellam P, Kelly DF, Smith SE, Palser A, Watson S, Deane CM. A computational method for immune repertoire mining that identifies novel binders from different clonotypes, demonstrated by identifying anti-Pertussis toxoid antibodies. MAbs. 2021;13(1):1869406. doi:10.1080/19420862.2020.1869406.
  • Wong WK, Robinson SA, Bujotzek A, Georges G, Lewis AP, Shi J, Snowden J, Taddese B, Deane CM. Ab-Ligity: identifying sequence-dissimilar antibodies that bind to the same epitope. MAbs. 2021;13(1):1873478. doi:10.1080/19420862.2021.1873478.
  • Schritt D, Li S, Rozewicki J, Katoh K, Yamashita K, Volkmuth W, Cavet G, Standley DM. Repertoire builder: high-throughput structural modeling of B and T cell receptors. Mol Syst Des Eng. 2019;4(4):761–68. doi:10.1039/C9ME00020H.
  • DeKosky BJ, Lungu OI, Park D, Johnson EL, Charab W, Chrysostomou C, Kuroda D, Ellington AD, Ippolito GC, Gray JJ. Large-scale sequence and structural comparisons of human naive and antigen-experienced antibody repertoires. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 2016;113(19):E2636–E45. doi:10.1073/pnas.1525510113.
  • Raybould MI, Marks C, Kovaltsuk A, Lewis AP, Shi J, Deane C. Evidence of antibody repertoire functional convergence through public baseline and shared response structures. bioRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.03.17.993444.
  • Robinson SA, Raybould MI, Marks C, Schneider C, Wong WK, Deane CM. Epitope profiling of coronavirus-binding antibodies using computational structural modelling. bioRxiv. 2021. doi:10.1101/2021.04.12.439478.
  • Kovaltsuk A, Raybould MI, Wong WK, Marks C, Kelm S, Snowden J, Trück J, Deane CM. Structural diversity of B-cell receptor repertoires along the B-cell differentiation axis in humans and mice. PLoS Comput Biol. 2020;16(2):e1007636. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007636.
  • Setliff I, Shiakolas AR, Pilewski KA, Murji AA, Mapengo RE, Janowska K, Richardson S, Oosthuysen C, Raju N, Ronsard L. 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.
  • Carter PJ, Lazar GA. Next generation antibody drugs: pursuit of the’high-hanging fruit’. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2018;17(3):197. doi:10.1038/nrd.2017.227.
  • Beck A, D’atri V, Ehkirch A, Fekete S, Hernandez-Alba O, Gahoual R, Leize-Wagner E, François Y, Guillarme D, Cianférani S. Cutting-edge multi-level analytical and structural characterization of antibody-drug conjugates: present and future. Expert Rev Proteomics. 2019;16(4):337–62. doi:10.1080/14789450.2019.1578215.
  • Khongorzul P, Ling CJ, Khan FU, Ihsan AU, Zhang J. Antibody–drug conjugates: a comprehensive review. Mol Cancer Res. 2020;18(1):3–19. doi:10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-19-0582.
  • Leung D, Wurst JM, Liu T, Martinez RM, Datta-Mannan A, Feng Y. Antibody conjugates-recent advances and future innovations. Antibodies. 2020;9(1):2. doi:10.3390/antib9010002.
  • Wilton EE, Opyr MP, Kailasam S, Kothe RF, Wieden H-J. sdAb-DB: the single domain antibody database. ACS Synth Biol. 2018;7(11):2480–84. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.8b00407.
  • Zavrtanik U, Hadži S. A non-redundant data set of nanobody-antigen crystal structures. Data Brief. 2019;24:103754. doi:10.1016/j.dib.2019.103754.
  • Zuo J, Li J, Zhang R, Xu L, Chen H, Jia X, Su Z, Zhao L, Huang X, Xie W. Institute collection and analysis of Nanobodies (iCAN): a comprehensive database and analysis platform for nanobodies. BMC Genom. 2017;18(1):1–5. doi:10.1186/s12864-017-4204-6.
  • Gentiluomo L, Svilenov HL, Augustijn D, El Bialy I, Greco ML, Kulakova A, Indrakumar S, Mahapatra S, Morales MM, Pohl C. Advancing therapeutic protein discovery and development through comprehensive computational and biophysical characterization. Mol Pharm. 2019;17(2):426–40. doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b00852.
  • Pollastri G, Przybylski D, Rost B, Baldi P. Improving the prediction of protein secondary structure in three and eight classes using recurrent neural networks and profiles. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2002;47(2):228–35. doi:10.1002/prot.10082.
  • Magnan CN, Baldi P. SSpro/ACCpro 5: almost perfect prediction of protein secondary structure and relative solvent accessibility using profiles, machine learning and structural similarity. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(18):2592–97. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu352.
  • Adamczak R, Porollo A, Meller J. Accurate prediction of solvent accessibility using neural networks–based regression. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2004;56(4):753–67. doi:10.1002/prot.20176.
  • Yuan Z, Burrage K, Mattick JS. Prediction of protein solvent accessibility using support vector machines. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2002;48(3):566–70. doi:10.1002/prot.10176.
  • Nepal R, Spencer J, Bhogal G, Nedunuri A, Poelman T, Kamath T, Chung E, Kantardjieff K, Gottlieb A, Lustig B. Logistic regression models to predict solvent accessible residues using sequence-and homology-based qualitative and quantitative descriptors applied to a domain-complete X-ray structure learning set. J Appl Crystallogr. 2015;48(6):1976–84. doi:10.1107/S1600576715018531.
  • Joo K, Lee SJ, Lee J. Sann: solvent accessibility prediction of proteins by nearest neighbor method. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinf. 2012;80(7):1791–97. doi:10.1002/prot.24074.
  • Noé F, De Fabritiis G, Clementi C. Machine learning for protein folding and dynamics. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2020;60:77–84. doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2019.12.005.
  • Raimondi D, Orlando G, Pancsa R, Khan T, Vranken WF. Exploring the sequence-based prediction of folding initiation sites in proteins. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–11. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-08366-3.
  • Tan AC, Gilbert D, Deville Y. Multi-class protein fold classification using a new ensemble machine learning approach. Genome Inf. 2003;14:206–17. doi:10.11234/gi1990.14.206.
  • Senior AW, Evans R, Jumper J, Kirkpatrick J, Sifre L, Green T, Qin C, Žídek A, Nelson AW, Bridgland A. Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning. Nature. 2020;577(7792):706–10. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1923-7.
  • Liu S, Liu C, Deng L. Machine learning approaches for protein–protein interaction hot spot prediction: progress and comparative assessment. Molecules. 2018;23(10):2535. doi:10.3390/molecules23102535.
  • Zhang M, Su Q, Lu Y, Zhao M, Niu B. Application of machine learning approaches for protein-protein interactions prediction. Med Chem (Los Angeles). 2017;13(6):506–14. doi:10.2174/1573406413666170522150940.
  • Sarkar D, Saha S. Machine-learning techniques for the prediction of protein–protein interactions. J Biosci. 2019;44(4):1–12. doi:10.1007/s12038-019-9909-z.
  • Melo R, Fieldhouse R, Melo A, Correia JD, Cordeiro MND, Gümüş ZH, Costa J, Bonvin AM, Moreira IS. A machine learning approach for hot-spot detection at protein-protein interfaces. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(8):1215. doi:10.3390/ijms17081215.
  • Wang W, Yang Y, Yin J, Gong X, Wang Z, Tamada K, Takumi T, Hashimoto R, Otani H, Pazour GJ. Different protein-protein interface patterns predicted by different machine learning methods. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–13. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-16397-z.
  • Wang D, Liu D, Yuchi J, He F, Jiang Y, Cai S, Li J, Xu D. MusiteDeep: a deep-learning based webserver for protein post-translational modification site prediction and visualization. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(W1):W140–W6. doi:10.1093/nar/gkaa275.
  • Xu Y, Chou K-C. Recent progress in predicting posttranslational modification sites in proteins. Curr Top Med Chem. 2016;16(6):591–603. doi:10.2174/1568026615666150819110421.
  • Bao W, Yuan C-A, Zhang Y, Han K, Nandi AK, Honig B, Huang D-S. Mutli-features prediction of protein translational modification sites. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinf. 2017;15(5):1453–60. doi:10.1109/TCBB.2017.2752703.
  • Sankar K, Hoi KH, Yin Y, Ramachandran P, Andersen N, Hilderbrand A, McDonald P, Spiess C, Zhang Q. Prediction of methionine oxidation risk in monoclonal antibodies using a machine learning method. MAbs. 2018;10(8):1281–90. doi:10.1080/19420862.2018.1518887.
  • Lai P-K, Fernando A, Cloutier TK, Kingsbury JS, Gokarn Y, Halloran KT, Calero-Rubio C, Trout BL. Machine learning feature selection for predicting high concentration therapeutic antibody aggregation. J Pharm Sci. 2021;110(4):1583–91. doi:10.1016/j.xphs.2020.12.014.
  • Long X, Jeliazkov JR, Gray JJ. Non-H3 CDR template selection in antibody modeling through machine learning. PeerJ. 2019;7:e6179. doi:10.7717/peerj.6179.
  • Wong WK, Georges G, Ros F, Kelm S, Lewis AP, Taddese B, Leem J, Deane CM. SCALOP: sequence-based antibody canonical loop structure annotation. Bioinformatics. 2019;35(10):1774–76. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty877.
  • Raimondi D, Orlando G, Vranken WF, Moreau Y. Exploring the limitations of biophysical propensity scales coupled with machine learning for protein sequence analysis. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):1–11. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-53324-w.
  • Narayanan H, Dingfelder F, Butté A, Lorenzen N, Sokolov M, Arosio P. Machine learning for biologics: opportunities for protein engineering, developability, and formulation. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2021;42(3):151–65. doi:10.1016/j.tips.2020.12.004.
  • Graves J, Byerly J, Priego E, Makkapati N, Parish SV, Medellin B, Berrondo M. A review of deep learning methods for antibodies. Antibodies. 2020;9(2):12. doi:10.3390/antib9020012.
  • Liberis E, Veličković P, Sormanni P, Vendruscolo M, Liò P. Parapred: antibody paratope prediction using convolutional and recurrent neural networks. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(17):2944–50. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty305.
  • Deac A, Veličković P, Sormanni P. Attentive cross-modal paratope prediction. J Comput Biol. 2019;26(6):536–45. doi:10.1089/cmb.2018.0175.
  • Akbar R, Robert PA, Pavlović M, Jeliazkov JR, Snapkov I, Slabodkin A, Weber CR, Scheffer L, Miho E, Haff IH. A compact vocabulary of paratope-epitope interactions enables predictability of antibody-antigen binding. Cell Rep. 2021;34(11):108856. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2021.108856.
  • Liu G, Zeng H, Mueller J, Carter B, Wang Z, Schilz J, Horny G, Birnbaum ME, Ewert S, Gifford DK. Antibody complementarity determining region design using high-capacity machine learning. Bioinformatics. 2020;36(7):2126–33. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz895.
  • Mason DM, Friedensohn S, Weber CR, Jordi C, Wagner B, Meng S, Gainza P, Correia BE, Reddy ST. Deep learning enables therapeutic antibody optimization in mammalian cells by deciphering high-dimensional protein sequence space. bioRxiv. 2019:617860. doi:10.1101/617860.
  • Dunbar J, Krawczyk K, Leem J, Baker T, Fuchs A, Georges G, Shi J, Deane CM. SAbDab: the structural antibody database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42(D1):D1140–D6. doi:10.1093/nar/gkt1043.
  • Allcorn LC, Martin AC. SACS—self-maintaining database of antibody crystal structure information. Bioinformatics. 2002;18(1):175–81. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/18.1.175.
  • Ferdous S, Martin AC. AbDb: antibody structure database—a database of PDB-derived antibody structures. Database. 2018:2018. doi:10.1093/database/bay040.
  • Khetan R. Biopharma licensing and M&A trends in the 21st-century landscape. J Commer Biotechnol. 2020;25(3). doi:10.5912/jcb943.
  • Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A, Green T, Figurnov M, Ronneberger O, Tunyasuvunakool K, Bates R, Žídek A, Potapenko A. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021:1–11. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.