4.7 Article

Production, characterization, and antigen specificity of recombinant 62-71-3, a candidate monoclonal antibody for rabies prophylaxis in humans

Journal

FASEB JOURNAL
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 2055-2065

Publisher

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1096/fj.12-219964

Keywords

plant biotechnology; molecular pharming; PEP; tobacco

Funding

  1. EU
  2. Dr. Hadwen Trust for Humane Research
  3. Hotung Foundation
  4. St. George's, University of London (London, UK)
  5. AHVLA
  6. COST projects [FAO94]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rabies kills many people throughout the developing world every year. The murine monoclonal antibody (mAb) 62-71-3 was recently identified for its potential application in rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP). The purpose here was to establish a plant-based production system for a chimeric mouse-human version of mAb 62-71-3, to characterize the recombinant antibody and investigate at a molecular level its interaction with rabies virus glycoprotein. Chimeric 62-71-3 was successfully expressed in Nicotiana benthamiana. Glycosylation was analyzed by mass spectroscopy; functionality was confirmed by antigen ELISA, as well as rabies and pseudotype virus neutralization. Epitope characterization was performed using pseudotype virus expressing mutagenized rabies glycoproteins. Purified mAb demonstrated potent viral neutralization at 500 IU/mg. A critical role for antigenic site I of the glycoprotein, as well as for two specific amino acid residues (K226 and G229) within site I, was identified with regard to mAb 62-71-3 neutralization. Pseudotype viruses expressing glycoprotein from lyssaviruses known not to be neutralized by this antibody were the controls. The results provide the molecular rationale for developing 62-71-3 mAb for rabies PEP; they also establish the basis for developing an inexpensive plant-based antibody product to benefit low-income families in developing countries.

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