|
The Scientist: NewsBlog:
Double-duty antibodies
Posted by Tia Ghose [Entry posted at 19th March 2009 08:21 PM GMT]
Rate this article
dual-specific, another name for cross-reactive? by SHANNON BEATTY [Comment posted 2009-04-21 09:31:13] The illustration that accompanies this article depicts two molecular scenarios: one, of a "monospecific" IgG molecule with both antigen-binding sites occupied by apparently identical antigen moieties (either small and green or large and purple) and two, of a "bispecific" IgG molecule with its pair of antigen-binding sites occupied by two apparently different antigen moieties (one small and green, the other large and purple). A description of the precise nature(s) of the epitope(s) bound on the green moiety and on the purple moiety is not contained in the text, making a distinction between true bispecificity and cross-reactivity impossible. For two target molecules in the growth-hormone family, one might anticipate some degree of structural, and therefore antigenic, similarity. I simply do not see anything new presented here. Old ideas in a new bottle by Chandrika B-rao [Comment posted 2009-04-21 05:11:09] Way back in the early 1990s, we talked of [Jerne's] immune networks, multifunctional antibodies, those that work like "glues", binding to almost every antigen, and those that are essentially "stand-alones", binding to just one or a few antigens. So much of wet-lab work done at Institut Pasteur & elsewhere with real antibodies and antigens ... Ideas of "shape space", "mirror shape space", "affinity space" fuelled discussions on multifunctional antibodies and how to place them in such spaces... This is not to detract from the original work reported here, but just to point out that it only provides new proof of what immunologists (theoretical and wet-lab) have known for a long time. What's new? by Didier LECOMMANDEUR [Comment posted 2009-03-23 04:10:27] Engineered antibodies binding two different antigens, one "arm" each, wow, there was a Canadian company offering this, hmmm...15 years ago or so, if I remember well.
I don't see anything new in this "double-duty" that justifies a half-line of interest! Or did I miss something? this is a nice result, but hardly surprising by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-03-20 16:39:02] I find this result (one antibody, two antigens) hardly surprising. The comment quoted in the article about antibodies being known to sometimes bind two completely different haptens, but that proteins are a different story, is just plain dumb -- antibodies don't bind whole proteins, they bind specific (haptenic!) antigenic sites that represent rather small parts of the 3-D structure of the whole protein. What I would like to know is if the same binding site on the Ab is involved in binding to both of the protein antigens (suggesting some shared structural motif or feature in the two proteins, not at all unlikely), or if separate regions in the binding site of the Ab are involved (probably a less likely scenario, but certainly not impossible).
So, an interesting result, but not at all unexpected or surprising. dual-antibodies means? by Zhaohua Lu [Comment posted 2009-03-20 11:58:15] I am wondering how this dual-antibodies were made. From the imagine, the two binding sites of an antibody binds to two different antigens.One may bind to HER2, another may bind to VEGF. From the text, it was done by "tweaked" light chain. Unless the "tweak" is selective for one light chain, otherwise, how come another binding site wont be affected?
Another question remaining in my mind is the therapeutics. Is there any synergistic or combining effect of this dual antibody could be proposed to treat cancers? Comment on this blog |