Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Antibodies that recognize amyloidogenic aggregates with high conformational and sequence specificity are important for detecting and potentially treating a wide range of neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. However, these types of antibodies are challenging to generate because of the large size, hydrophobicity, and heterogeneity of protein aggregates. To address this challenge, we developed a method for generating antibodies specific for amyloid aggregates. First, we grafted amyloidogenic peptide segments from the target polypeptide [Alzheimer's amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide] into the complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) of a stable antibody scaffold. Next, we diversified the grafted and neighboring CDR sites using focused mutagenesis to sample each WT or grafted residue, as well as one to five of the most commonly occurring amino acids at each site in human antibodies. Finally, we displayed these antibody libraries on the surface of yeast cells and selected antibodies that strongly recognize Aβ-amyloid fibrils and only weakly recognize soluble Aβ. We found that this approach enables the generation of monovalent and bivalent antibodies with nanomolar affinity for Aβ fibrils. These antibodies display high conformational and sequence specificity as well as low levels of nonspecific binding and recognize a conformational epitope at the extreme N terminus of human Aβ. We expect that this systematic approach will be useful for generating antibodies with conformational and sequence specificity against a wide range of peptide and protein aggregates associated with neurodegenerative disorders.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.