4.7 Review

In vitro-engineered non-antibody protein therapeutics

期刊

PROTEIN & CELL
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 3-14

出版社

HIGHER EDUCATION PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s13238-017-0386-6

关键词

scaffold; multivalent; phage; yeast; ribosome; antibody surrogate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antibodies have proved to be a valuable mode of therapy for numerous diseases, mainly owing to their high target binding affinity and specificity. Unfortunately, antibodies are also limited in several respects, chief amongst those being the extremely high cost of manufacture. Therefore, non-antibody binding proteins have long been sought after as alternative therapies. New binding protein scaffolds are constantly being designed or discovered with some already approved for human use by the FDA. This review focuses on protein scaffolds that are either already being used in humans or are currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Although not all are expected to be approved, the significant benefits ensure that these molecules will continue to be investigated and developed as therapeutic alternatives to antibodies. Based on the location of the amino acids that mediate ligand binding, we place all the protein scaffolds under clinical development into two general categories: scaffolds with ligand-binding residues located in exposed flexible loops, and those with the binding residues located in protein secondary structures, such as alpha-helices. Scaffolds that fall under the first category include adnectins, anticalins, avimers, Fynomers, Kunitz domains, and knottins, while those belonging to the second category include affibodies, beta-hairpin mimetics, and designed ankyrin repeat proteins (DARPins). Most of these scaffolds are thermostable and can be easily produced in microorganisms or completely synthesized chemically. In addition, many of these scaffolds derive from human proteins and thus possess very low immunogenic potential. Additional advantages and limitations of these protein scaffolds as therapeutics compared to antibodies will be discussed.

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

4.7
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