4.7 Article

Position-Specific Enrichment Ratio Matrix scores predict antibody variant properties from deep sequencing data

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The PSERM scoring method utilizes comprehensive deep sequencing data to score each observed protein variant, providing a more accurate determination of the optimal variants. PSERM scores are more reproducible and correlate stronger with experimentally measured properties compared to frequency or enrichment ratio methods, making it suitable for various protein engineering campaigns.
Motivation Deep sequencing of antibody and related protein libraries after phage or yeast-surface display sorting is widely used to identify variants with increased affinity, specificity, and/or improvements in key biophysical properties. Conventional approaches for identifying optimal variants typically use the frequencies of observation in enriched libraries or the corresponding enrichment ratios. However, these approaches disregard the vast majority of deep sequencing data and often fail to identify the best variants in the libraries.Results Here, we present a method, Position-Specific Enrichment Ratio Matrix (PSERM) scoring, that uses entire deep sequencing datasets from pre- and post-selections to score each observed protein variant. The PSERM scores are the sum of the site-specific enrichment ratios observed at each mutated position. We find that PSERM scores are much more reproducible and correlate more strongly with experimentally measured properties than frequencies or enrichment ratios, including for multiple antibody properties (affinity and non-specific binding) for a clinical-stage antibody (emibetuzumab). We expect that this method will be broadly applicable to diverse protein engineering campaigns.Availability and implementation All deep sequencing datasets and code to perform the analyses presented within are available via https://github.com/Tessier-Lab-UMich/PSERM_paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available