4.5 Article

Protein-Protein Interactions, Clustering, and Rheology for Bovine IgG up to High Concentrations Characterized by Small Angle X-Ray Scattering and Molecular Dynamics Simulations

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
卷 109, 期 1, 页码 696-708

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2019.11.001

关键词

antibody(s); arginine; biopharmaceutical characterization; biophysical model(s); high concentration; light scattering (static); molecular dynamics; pH; protein formulation(s); viscosity

资金

  1. Welch Foundation [F-1319, F-1696]
  2. National Science Foundation [CBET 1624659]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A systematic understanding of intermolecular interactions is necessary for designing concentrated monoclonal and polyclonal antibody solutions with reduced viscosity and enhanced stability. Here, we determine the effects of pH and cosolute on the strength and geometry of short-range anisotropic protein-protein attractions for a polyclonal bovine IgG by comparing intensities [I(q)] obtained from small-angle X-ray scattering to those computed in molecular dynamics simulations with 12-bead models. As our model embodies key features of the protein shape, it can describe the experimental 1(q) for solutions of 10-200 mg/mL protein with only a small (<1 k(B)T) variation in the model's well depth. At high concentration, small changes in the interaction potential produce large increases in clustering given the close interprotein spacing. Reducing the pH below the pI or adding NaCl weakens short-range anisotropic attractions but not enough to remove large reversible oligomers that raise viscosity. In contrast, for arginine added at pH 5.5, a uniform attraction model is sufficient to describe the 1(q) that plateaus at low q. With primarily monomers and dimers, the viscosity is reduced relative to the other systems that have larger clusters as described with a model that includes the cluster size distribution. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Pharmacists Association.

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