| Literature DB >> 30973679 |
Anna Basile1,2, Margot De Marco1,2, Michelina Festa1,3, Antonia Falco1,3, Vittoria Iorio2, Luana Guerriero1, Daniela Eletto2, Domenica Rea4, Claudio Arra4, Alessia Lamolinara5, Patrizia Ballerini6, Verena Damiani5, Alessandra Rosati1,2, Gianluca Sala5, Maria Caterina Turco1,2, Liberato Marzullo1,2, Vincenzo De Laurenzi1,5.
Abstract
We have previously shown that secreted BAG3 is a potential target for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and that pancreatic tumor growth and metastatic dissemination can be reduced by treatment with an anti-BAG3 murine antibody. Here, we used complementarity-determining region (CDR) grafting to generate a humanized version of the anti-BAG3 antibody that may be further developed for possible clinical use. We show that the humanized anti-BAG3 antibody, named BAG3-H2L4, abrogates BAG3 binding to macrophages and subsequent release of IL-6. Furthermore, it specifically localizes into tumor tissues and significantly inhibits the growth of Mia PaCa-2 pancreatic cancer cell xenografts. We propose BAG3-H2L4 antibody as a potential clinical candidate for BAG3-targeted therapy in pancreatic cancer.Entities:
Keywords: BAG3; humanized antibody; pancreatic cancer; pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; tumor therapy
Year: 2019 PMID: 30973679 PMCID: PMC6547619 DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.12492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Oncol ISSN: 1574-7891 Impact factor: 6.603
Figure 1Generation and selection of monoclonal anti‐BAG3 antibodies blocking extracellular BAG3 activity on monocytes/macrophages. (A) Schematic representation of BAG3 with sequences of the peptides used for mouse immunization. (B) ELISA test evaluating binding to BAG3 peptides specified in panel A of antibodies contained in the supernatants from hybridoma clones AC‐1 and AC‐2. (C) IL‐6 production by isolated human monocytes (>98% CD14+) from 5 different healthy donors treated with rBAG3 at indicated concentrations for 16 h. Data represent means ± SD of triplicate samples. (D) IL‐6 production by isolated human monocytes (>98% CD14+) stimulated with rBAG3 in the presence of increasing concentrations of control IgG1, and anti‐BAG3 clone AC‐1 and AC‐2. Data represent means ± SD of triplicate samples. (E) The graph depicts intensity of signals obtained along the array and shows high binding of the anti‐BAG3 clone AC‐2 in the region surrounding motif PKSVATE for linear (LIN) and looped (LOOP) peptides (black and red traces, respectively). (F) Surface plasmon resonance analysis of mAb AC‐2‐rBAG3 interaction. SPR responses for biosensor chip bound to mAb AC‐2 were recorded for antigen (rBAG3) concentrations ranging from 0.39 to 200 nm. The association (k a) and dissociation (k d) constants and affinity (K D) were calculated using a 2‐state reaction model.
Figure 2Anti‐BAG3 humanized antibody lead selection. (A) Schematic representation of the steps of the humanization process. Sequences of CDRs in heavy and light chain of the antibody are reported as well as the KD values for rBAG3 binding for each variant. (B) Screening for rBAG3 binding ability of humanized antibody variants by direct ELISA test. Histograms represent EC50 values obtained using scalar dilutions of the antibodies (500 ng·mL−1 to 15.6 ng·mL−1). (C) Inhibition of FITC‐rBAG3 protein binding to J774 A.1 cells by the different humanized antibody variants. Histograms represent % of binding inhibition evaluated by flow cytometry as mean fluorescence intensity changes. Data represent means ± SD of triplicate samples. (D) IL‐6 production by isolated human monocytes (>98% CD14+) stimulated with rBAG3 in the presence of increasing concentrations of BAG3‐H2L4 antibody. As a control, an unrelated recombinant human IgG1 carrying the same heavy and light chains of BAG3‐H2L4 antibody was used (B12‐H2L4). Data represent means ± SD of triplicate samples. (E) Isolated human monocytes (>98% CD14+) were stimulated using conditioned medium of PANC‐1 subconfluent cultures for 16 h alone or in the presence of BAG3‐H2L4 or control B12‐H2L4 (200 μg·mL−1). P was calculated by Student's t‐test.
Figure 3BAG3‐H2L4 therapeutic activity. (A) Exponentially growing MIA PaCa‐2 cells were injected into the right flank of the recipient mice. Animals were treated twice a week with 20 mg·kg−1 BAG3‐H2L4 or gemcitabine (5 mg·kg−1) or with vehicle alone (PBS). Tumor growth was assessed, as described in the Materials and Methods section. Results are expressed as percentage fold change (±SEM). (B) Tumor specimens (PBS‐treated tumors N = 2; BAG3‐H2L4‐treated tumors N = 2) were analyzed by immunofluorescence using anti‐α‐SMA antibody. Nuclei were counterstained with DAPI (40× magnification‐scale bars 75 μm). Results were quantified as mean percentages of α‐SMA fluorescent area with respect to the total picture area using imagej software. Error bars indicate SD P was calculated by Student's t‐test. (C) BAG3‐H2L4 concentration in mouse sera was analyzed by ELISA. The graph depicts means sera concentrations from 3 different animals for each time point (±SD). (D) Representative images from tumor, heart, and liver sections collected from mice treated with BAG3‐H2L4 or the vehicle (as control). Slides were stained with anti‐CD31‐105 and anti‐human IgGs (scale bars 50 μm).