| Literature DB >> 29866909 |
Serena Giuntini1, Matteo Stoppato1, Maja Sedic1, Monir Ejemel1, Jessica R Pondish1, Danielle Wisheart1, Zachary A Schiller1, William D Thomas1, Eileen M Barry2, Lisa A Cavacini1, Mark S Klempner3, Yang Wang3.
Abstract
Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) causes diarrheal illness in infants in the developing world and travelers to countries where the disease is endemic, including military personnel. ETEC infection of the host involves colonization of the small intestinal epithelium and toxin secretion, leading to watery diarrhea. There is currently no vaccine licensed to prevent ETEC infection. CFA/I is one of the most common colonization factor antigens (CFAs). The CFA/I adhesin subunit, CfaE, is required for ETEC adhesion to host intestinal cells. Human antibodies against CfaE have the potential to block colonization of ETEC and serve as an immunoprophylactic against ETEC-related diarrhea. Mice transgenic for human immunoglobulin genes were immunized with CfaE to generate a panel of human monoclonal IgG1 antibodies (HuMAbs). The most potent IgG1 antibodies identified in the in vitro functional assays were selected and isotype switched to secretory IgA (sIgA) and tested in animal colonization assays via oral administration. Over 300 unique anti-CfaE IgG1 HuMAbs were identified. The lead IgG1 anti-CfaE HuMAbs completely inhibited hemagglutination and blocked adhesion of ETEC to Caco-2 cells. Epitope mapping studies revealed that HuMAbs recognized epitopes in the N-terminal domain of CfaE near the putative receptor binding site. Oral administration of anti-CfaE antibodies in either IgG or sIgA isotypes inhibited intestinal colonization in mice challenged with ETEC. A 2- to 4-log decrease in CFU was observed in comparison to mice challenged with irrelevant isotype controls. We identified fully human monoclonal antibodies against the CfaE adhesion domain that can be potentially employed as an immunoprophylactic to prevent ETEC-related diarrhea.Entities:
Keywords: CfaE; ETEC; HuMAb; adhesins; fimbriae
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29866909 PMCID: PMC6056861 DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00355-18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Immun ISSN: 0019-9567 Impact factor: 3.441
Anti-CfaE HuMAb heavy and light chain variable gene families
| Clone | Gene family for: | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heavy chain | Light chain | ||||
| VH | D | JH | VL | JK | |
| 68-51 | 4-34 | 2-08 | 3 | 1-12 | 2 |
| 68-61 | 1-69 | 2-21 | 3 | 1-16 | 2 |
| 68-97 | 4-34 | 7-27 | 3 | 1-12 | 2 |
| 68-90 | 4-34 | 7-27 | 3 | 1-12 | 2 |
| 68-75 | 4-34 | 2-02 | 6 | 1-13 | 1 |
| 67-102 | 4-34 | 2-15 | 3 | 1-12 | 4 |
| 840-53 | 30-30 | 7-27 | 4b | 1-06 | 1 |
| 68-48 | 4-34 | 7-27 | 6 | 1-13 | 1 |
| 837-6 | 3-23 | 6-06 | 2 | 1-27 | 5 |
| 68-06 | 1-69 | 4-17 | 3 | 1-16 | 2 |
FIG 1Binding of anti-CfaE MAbs. (A) ELISA. IgG bound to immobilized recombinant CfaE-N was detected with an anti-human IgG Fc chain-specific alkaline phosphatase-conjugated antibody. Error bars represent the range in OD values observed in two independent experiments. The binding curves of the 10 anti-CfaE MAbs are superimposed. (B) Surface plasmon resonance was used to measure the equilibrium dissociation constant (K). Error bars represent the standard deviation of results of two independent experiments. Results for all of the anti-CfaE antibodies were significantly different from those for the 68-6 HuMAb (P < 0.0001). Symbols represent significant differences (P < 0.01) between the anti-CfaE HuMAbs using one-way ANOVA. (C) Direct binding to live bacterial cells measured by flow cytometry. The gray filled area represents bacteria incubated with an irrelevant antibody.
FIG 2In vitro functional activity of anti-CfaE HuMAbs. (A) Hemagglutination assay. The ability of the MAbs to prevent hemagglutination is reported as the minimal inhibitory concentration (IC100). Error bars represent the standard deviation of results observed in three independent experiments using different blood donors. (B) Caco-2 adhesion assay. Example of inhibition curve obtained with HuMAb 68-51 and an irrelevant control. (C) The minimal effective IgG dose to prevent 50% (IC50) of bacterial adhesion to intestinal Caco-2 cells was used to determine antibody potency ranking. Error bars represent the standard deviation of results of three or four independent experiments. Results for all the anti-CfaE HuMAbs were significantly different from those for the irrelevant MAb (P<0.0001). Symbols represent significant differences (P < 0.01) within the anti-CfaE HuMAbs based on one-way ANOVA.
FIG 3Epitope mapping studies. Binding of anti-CfaE MAbs to mutants of recombinant CfaE as measured by ELISA. (A) Wild-type CfaE; (B) Arg67Ala mutant; (C) Thr91Ala mutant; (D) Arg145Ala mutant; (E) Tyr183Ala mutant; (F) Asn127Ala mutant. (G) Summary of the amino acid residues discovered to affect binding of anti-CfaE MAbs. (H) Crystal structure of N-terminal CfaE molecule with the five residues involved in the anti-CfaE MAb binding shown as green spheres. Highlighted in red are the three arginines forming the putative receptor binding domain.
FIG 4Ig class switching of anti-CfaE MAbs, tested using the Caco-2 adhesion assay. The minimal effective IgG dose to prevent 50% (IC50) of bacterial adhesion to intestinal Caco-2 cells was used to determine antibody potency ranking. Error bars represent the standard deviation of results of three or four independent experiments. *, P < 0.01; **, P < 0.001; ***, P < 0.0001.
FIG 5In vivo studies. DBA/2 mice were challenged intragastrically with 107 CFU preincubated with 10 mg/kg of HuMAbs. Animals were euthanized 24 h after challenge, and bacterial colonies in the small intestine were counted. Five animals were tested for each condition. Results for all the anti-CfaE HuMAbs were significantly different from those for the irrelevant MAb (P < 0.001).