4.5 Article

Crystal structure of a novel asymmetrically engineered Fc variant with improved affinity for FcγRs

期刊

MOLECULAR IMMUNOLOGY
卷 58, 期 1, 页码 132-138

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.molimm.2013.11.017

关键词

ADCC; Effector function; X-ray structure; Fc gamma R interactions; Fc engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Enhancing the effector function by optimizing the interaction between Fc and Fc gamma receptor (Fc gamma R) is a promising approach to enhance the potency of anticancer monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). To date, a variety of Fc engineering approaches to modulate the interaction have been reported, such as afucosylation in the heavy chain Fc region or symmetrically introducing amino acid substitutions into the region, and there is still room to improve Fc gamma R binding and thermal stability of the C(H)2 domain with these approaches. Recently, we have reported that asymmetric Fc engineering, which introduces different substitutions into each Fc region of heavy chain, can further improve the Fc gamma R binding while maintaining the thermal stability of the C(H)2 domain by fine-tuning the asymmetric interface between the Fc domain and Fc gamma R. However, the structural mechanism by which the asymmetrically engineered Pc improved Fc gamma R binding remained unclear. In order to elucidate the mechanism, we solved the crystal structure of a novel asymmetrically engineered Fc, asym-mAb23, in complex with Fc gamma RIIIa. Asym-mAb23 has enhanced binding affinity for both Fc gamma RIIIa and Fc gamma RIIa at the highest level of previously reported Fc variants. The structural analysis reveals the features of the asymmetrically engineered Fc in comparison with symmetric Fc and how each asymmetrically introduced substitution contributes to the improved interaction between asym-mAb23 and Fc gamma RIIIa. This crystal structure could be utilized to enable us to design a more potent asymmetric Fc. (C) 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据