Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Unidirectional potentiation of binding between two anti‐FBP MAbs: Evaluation of involved mechanisms

View through CrossRef
AbstractThe monoclonal antibody MOv19 directed to a folate binding protein shows temperature‐dependent potentiation of binding of the noncompeting monoclonal antibody MOv18 to the relevant antigen, but the mechanism involved in this phinomenon had remained unclear. Use of chimeric versions of both monoclonal antibodies and the F(ab′)2 and fan fragments of MOv19 revealed an increment in MOv18 binding in all combinations irrespective of the orgin of the Fc portin of the monoclonal antibody. The potentiating effect of bivalent MOv19 fragments on 125l‐MOv18 binding was similar to that of the entire monoclonal antibody and occurred at saturating concentrations of both reagents at which monovalent binding prevails. Similarly, the monovalent fragment also induced a significant increase in MOv18 bunding. Howener, the potentiation sccurred only at very high concentrations of antibody fragment. Homologous inhibition was drastically reduced using MOv19 Fab fragment, suggesting a low binding stability of the monovalent reagent. Immunoblotting analysis and binding in the presence of exogenous purified folate binding protein indicated a cross‐linking between soluble and cell surface molecules mediated by the bivalent monoclonal antibodies. The extentof the increase in MOv18 binging at O°C with high amounts of exogenous folate binding protein was lower than that obtained at 370C in the absence of added molecule. Release of 125l‐MOv18 from the cell surface was significantly higher in the absence of MOv19 than in its presence. Affinity constant values of 125l‐MOv18 binding evaluated in the presence of MOv19 or control monoclonal antibody MINT5 were comparable, whereas the number of binding sites per cell detected by 125l‐MOv18 was significantly higher in the presence of MOv19 than MINT5. Together, the data suggest that monoclonal antibody MOv19 induces a conformational change of the molecule it binds that increases the number of antigenic sites anvailable for MOv18 binding and, in turn, the binding stability of the latter, MOv19 bivalency also contributes to the MOv18 binding increment by cross‐linking released and cell surface–anchored folate binding protein molecules. © Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Title: Unidirectional potentiation of binding between two anti‐FBP MAbs: Evaluation of involved mechanisms
Description:
AbstractThe monoclonal antibody MOv19 directed to a folate binding protein shows temperature‐dependent potentiation of binding of the noncompeting monoclonal antibody MOv18 to the relevant antigen, but the mechanism involved in this phinomenon had remained unclear.
Use of chimeric versions of both monoclonal antibodies and the F(ab′)2 and fan fragments of MOv19 revealed an increment in MOv18 binding in all combinations irrespective of the orgin of the Fc portin of the monoclonal antibody.
The potentiating effect of bivalent MOv19 fragments on 125l‐MOv18 binding was similar to that of the entire monoclonal antibody and occurred at saturating concentrations of both reagents at which monovalent binding prevails.
Similarly, the monovalent fragment also induced a significant increase in MOv18 bunding.
Howener, the potentiation sccurred only at very high concentrations of antibody fragment.
Homologous inhibition was drastically reduced using MOv19 Fab fragment, suggesting a low binding stability of the monovalent reagent.
Immunoblotting analysis and binding in the presence of exogenous purified folate binding protein indicated a cross‐linking between soluble and cell surface molecules mediated by the bivalent monoclonal antibodies.
The extentof the increase in MOv18 binging at O°C with high amounts of exogenous folate binding protein was lower than that obtained at 370C in the absence of added molecule.
Release of 125l‐MOv18 from the cell surface was significantly higher in the absence of MOv19 than in its presence.
Affinity constant values of 125l‐MOv18 binding evaluated in the presence of MOv19 or control monoclonal antibody MINT5 were comparable, whereas the number of binding sites per cell detected by 125l‐MOv18 was significantly higher in the presence of MOv19 than MINT5.
Together, the data suggest that monoclonal antibody MOv19 induces a conformational change of the molecule it binds that increases the number of antigenic sites anvailable for MOv18 binding and, in turn, the binding stability of the latter, MOv19 bivalency also contributes to the MOv18 binding increment by cross‐linking released and cell surface–anchored folate binding protein molecules.
© Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Related Results

A human ex vivo dengue virus neutralization assay identifies priority antibodies and epitopes for vaccines and therapeutics
A human ex vivo dengue virus neutralization assay identifies priority antibodies and epitopes for vaccines and therapeutics
AbstractBackgroundDengue is the most prevalent arboviral disease, for which neither effective vaccines nor antivirals are available. Clinical trials with Dengvaxia, the first licen...
Abstract 5421: Prediction of intratumoral TIGIT receptor occupancy after the treatment with anti-TIGIT antibodies
Abstract 5421: Prediction of intratumoral TIGIT receptor occupancy after the treatment with anti-TIGIT antibodies
Abstract Background: T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and tyrosine based inhibitory motif domain (TIGIT) is a co-inhibitory immune checkpoint receptor expre...
MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING (MPI)
MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING (MPI)
Objective: Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with superior quality of imagesin least acquisition time is imperative for diagnostic purpose. The objective of this study wasto compa...
Autoantibody Profile in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients
Autoantibody Profile in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Patients
AbstractSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease, in which the etiology is not well-understood; however, interactions between environmental and genetic factors i...

Back to Top