2010
DOI: 10.1093/protein/gzq061
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

OptCDR: a general computational method for the design of antibody complementarity determining regions for targeted epitope binding

Abstract: Antibodies are an important class of proteins with many biomedical and biotechnical applications. Although there are a plethora of experimental techniques geared toward their efficient production, there is a paucity of computational methods for their de novo design. OptCDR is a general computational method to design the binding portions of antibodies to have high specificity and affinity against any targeted epitope of an antigen. First, combinations of canonical structures for the antibody complementarity det… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
73
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(73 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
73
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such computational methods allow for the consideration of large numbers of amino acid-amino acid interactions simultaneously. Computational design has been used to design inhibitors against H1N1 influenza hemagglutinin [56], to switch cofactor specificity of an enzyme [57], for generalized antibody design for recognition of a target epitope [58], for the design of entry inhibitors of HIV-1 gp41 [59], for the design of C3a receptor agonists for medicinal use [54], and for the design of inhibitors of the histone methyltransferase EZH2 [55]. See Fung et al [51], Pantazes et al [60], Samish et al [61], and Khoury et al [62] for reviews of the recent advances and successes in the area.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such computational methods allow for the consideration of large numbers of amino acid-amino acid interactions simultaneously. Computational design has been used to design inhibitors against H1N1 influenza hemagglutinin [56], to switch cofactor specificity of an enzyme [57], for generalized antibody design for recognition of a target epitope [58], for the design of entry inhibitors of HIV-1 gp41 [59], for the design of C3a receptor agonists for medicinal use [54], and for the design of inhibitors of the histone methyltransferase EZH2 [55]. See Fung et al [51], Pantazes et al [60], Samish et al [61], and Khoury et al [62] for reviews of the recent advances and successes in the area.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This procedure is based on the identification of a peptide complementary to a target region and on its grafting on to the CDR of an antibody scaffold. Related methods of altering rationally antibodies have been discussed in the literature, which include the exploration of specificity-enhancing mutations (27,28), the design of CDRs to bind structured epitopes (28,29), and the grafting of peptides extracted from aggregation prone proteins (30-32) or from other antibodies (33) in the CDR of an antibody scaffold. Here we show that designed antibodies can be obtained by the method that we present for essentially any disordered epitope.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This differs from previous attempts where iterations of insertion and crosslinking conditions had to be considered in order to identify functional crosslinks. Further studies will be needed to test the utility of these approaches with antibody homology models (e.g., (Marcatili et al, 2008; Pantazes and Maranas, 2010; Sivasubramanian et al, 2009)) or docked structures (e.g., (Sircar and Gray, 2010)).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the development of computational techniques and a number of successful experiences in protein modeling and design (Lippow and Tidor, 2007; Mandell and Kortemme, 2009), computational antibody design has begun to play an important role in predicting improvements to antibody function. Computational design of antibodies has been used to enhance binding affinity (Barderas et al, 2008; Clark et al, 2006; Lippow et al, 2007), to improve stability by improvement of thermal/aggregation resistance (Chennamsetty et al, 2009; Miklos et al, 2012), and to alter binding specificity (Farady et al, 2009), and others (Caravella et al, 2010; Kuroda et al, 2012; Midelfort et al, 2004; Pantazes and Maranas, 2010). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%