4.6 Article

Next generation maleimides enable the controlled assembly of antibody-drug conjugates via native disulfide bond bridging

期刊

ORGANIC & BIOMOLECULAR CHEMISTRY
卷 12, 期 37, 页码 7261-7269

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c4ob01550a

关键词

-

资金

  1. BBSRC
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. UCL Business
  4. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/J010448/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. Medical Research Council [MC_PC_12024] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. BBSRC [BB/J010448/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. MRC [MC_PC_12024] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The advent of Adcetris (TM) and Kadcyla (TM), two recently FDA-approved antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), in the clinic has had a major impact on the treatment of lymphoma and breast cancer patients, respectively, worldwide. Despite these successes many new ADCs fail at various stages of development, often due to shortcomings in the methods used for their assembly. To address this problem we have developed next generation maleimides (NGMs), which specifically re-bridge reduced interchain disulfide bonds and allow the efficient conjugation of small molecules to antibodies, without the need for engineering of the target antibody. The method is site-specific and generates near homogeneous products in good yields. Moreover, adjustment of the reaction conditions allows control of the conjugation in terms of stoichiometry (drug-loading) and site selectivity. Using this method we prepared a series of ADCs from trastuzumab and doxorubicin (DOX) with a controlled drug-to-antibody ratio (DAR) of 1, 2, 3 and 4. All of these constructs were fully active by ELISA and had more than 90% of re-bridged disulfide bonds by CE-SDS when compared to clinical grade antibody. Furthermore, digest experiments of the DAR 2 material revealed that almost all of the drug had been targeted to the Fab arms of the antibody. Thus, NGMs offer a flexible and simple platform for the controlled assembly of ADCs from an antibody.

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

4.6
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