Zora Nováková1, Catherine A Foss2, Benjamin T Copeland2, Volker Morath3, Petra Baranová1, Barbora Havlínová1, Arne Skerra3, Martin G Pomper2, Cyril Barinka1. 1. Laboratory of Structural Biology, Institute of Biotechnology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Vestec, Czech Republic. 2. The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Munich Center for Integrated Protein Science (CIPS-M) and Lehrstuhl für Biologische Chemie, Technische Universität München, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a validated target for the imaging and therapy of prostate cancer. Here, we report the detailed characterization of four novel murine monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) recognizing human PSMA as well as PSMA orthologs from different species. METHODS: Performance of purified mAbs was assayed using a comprehensive panel of in vitro experimental setups including Western blotting, immunofluorescence, immunohistochemistry, ELISA, flow cytometry, and surface-plasmon resonance. Furthermore, a mouse xenograft model of prostate cancer was used to compare the suitability of the mAbs for in vivo applications. RESULTS: All mAbs demonstrate high specificity for PSMA as documented by the lack of cross-reactivity to unrelated human proteins. The 3F11 and 1A11 mAbs bind linear epitopes spanning residues 226-243 and 271-288 of human PSMA, respectively. 3F11 is also suitable for the detection of PSMA orthologs from mouse, pig, dog, and rat in experimental setups where the denatured form of PSMA is used. 5D3 and 5B1 mAbs recognize distinct surface-exposed conformational epitopes and are useful for targeting PSMA in its native conformation. Most importantly, using a mouse xenograft model of prostate cancer we show that both the intact 5D3 and its Fab fragment are suitable for in vivo imaging. CONCLUSIONS: With apparent affinities of 0.14 and 1.2 nM as determined by ELISA and flow cytometry, respectively, 5D3 has approximately 10-fold higher affinity for PSMA than the clinically validated mAb J591 and, therefore, is a prime candidate for the development of next-generation theranostics to target PSMA. Prostate 77:749-764, 2017.
BACKGROUND:Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a validated target for the imaging and therapy of prostate cancer. Here, we report the detailed characterization of four novel murine monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) recognizing humanPSMA as well as PSMA orthologs from different species. METHODS: Performance of purified mAbs was assayed using a comprehensive panel of in vitro experimental setups including Western blotting, immunofluorescence, immunohistochemistry, ELISA, flow cytometry, and surface-plasmon resonance. Furthermore, a mouse xenograft model of prostate cancer was used to compare the suitability of the mAbs for in vivo applications. RESULTS: All mAbs demonstrate high specificity for PSMA as documented by the lack of cross-reactivity to unrelated human proteins. The 3F11 and 1A11 mAbs bind linear epitopes spanning residues 226-243 and 271-288 of humanPSMA, respectively. 3F11 is also suitable for the detection of PSMA orthologs from mouse, pig, dog, and rat in experimental setups where the denatured form of PSMA is used. 5D3 and 5B1 mAbs recognize distinct surface-exposed conformational epitopes and are useful for targeting PSMA in its native conformation. Most importantly, using a mouse xenograft model of prostate cancer we show that both the intact 5D3 and its Fab fragment are suitable for in vivo imaging. CONCLUSIONS: With apparent affinities of 0.14 and 1.2 nM as determined by ELISA and flow cytometry, respectively, 5D3 has approximately 10-fold higher affinity for PSMA than the clinically validated mAb J591 and, therefore, is a prime candidate for the development of next-generation theranostics to target PSMA. Prostate 77:749-764, 2017.
Authors: Sangeeta Ray Banerjee; Vivek Kumar; Ala Lisok; Donika Plyku; Zora Nováková; Mary Brummet; Bryan Wharram; Cyril Barinka; Robert Hobbs; Martin G Pomper Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Colin T Huang; Xin Guo; Cyril Bařinka; Shawn E Lupold; Martin G Pomper; Kathleen Gabrielson; Venu Raman; Dmitri Artemov; Sudath Hapuarachchige Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2020-08-17 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Paolo Dell'Oglio; Danny M van Willigen; Matthias N van Oosterom; Kevin Bauwens; Fabian Hensbergen; Mick M Welling; Huijbert van der Stadt; Elise Bekers; Martin Pool; Pim van Leeuwen; Tobias Maurer; Fijs W B van Leeuwen; Tessa Buckle Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Zora Novakova; Nikola Belousova; Catherine A Foss; Barbora Havlinova; Marketa Gresova; Gargi Das; Ala Lisok; Adam Prada; Marketa Barinkova; Martin Hubalek; Martin G Pomper; Cyril Barinka Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 5.923