4.5 Article

Surface phosphophilicity of aluminum-containing adjuvants probed by their efficiency for catalyzing the P-O bond cleavage with chromogenic and fluorogenic substrates

期刊

ANALYTICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 295, 期 1, 页码 76-81

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1006/abio.2001.5175

关键词

phosphosphilicity; aluminum-containing adjuvant; catalysis; fluorogenic substrate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aluminum-containing adjuvants are widely used in a variety of vaccine products, such as recombinant proteins, virus-like particles, conjugated polysaccharides, and recently DNA vaccines. Aluminum-containing adjuvants are also known to have a high affinity to inorganic phosphate and its mono- or diesters. Since phosphate groups are present in many antigens as well as the natural physiological environment, a better understanding of the interactions between phosphate and phospho-containing species could help in the design of improved vaccines. This report describes a convenient and novel continuous procedure to measure the avidity denoted by the new term phosphophilicity of phosphate and phosphate esters to the surface of aluminum-containing adjuvants. The assay measures the rate of hydrolysis of a fluorogenic substrate 6,8-difluoro-4-methylumbelliferyl phosphate (DiFMUP)-with a microplate reader. This method was based on the fundamental bioorganic phenomenon that when a tight binding event occurs, the effective concentration of nucleophile(s) will be significantly increased in the proximity of the P atom for a nucleophilic reaction (i.e., the cleavage of the P-O bond) to take place. A very good leaving group (pK(a) of DiFMU similar to 4.7) in the phosphate monoester substrate makes the assay highly sensitive. Top reading of the nascent fluorescence makes the assay very convenient with no need to separate the particulate adjuvants from the reaction mixtures. The results from this assay are consistent with catalysis of the chromogenic phosphate mono- or diesters. (C) 2001 Academic Press.

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