Marko Bunc1,2, San Hadži2, Christian Graf3, Matjaž Bončina1, Jurij Lah2. 1. Technical Research and Development, Global Drug Development, Novartis, Lek d.d., 1234 Mengeš, Slovenia. 2. Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Technology, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. 3. Technical Research and Development, Global Drug Development, Novartis, Hexal AG, 82041 Oberhaching, Germany.
Abstract
Monoclonal antibodies are the fastest growing class of therapeutics. However, aggregation limits their shelf life and can lead to adverse immune responses. Assessment and optimization of the long-term antibody stability are therefore key challenges in the biologic drug development. Here, we present a platform based on the analysis of temperature-dependent aggregation data that can dramatically shorten the assessment of the long-term aggregation stability and thus accelerate the optimization of antibody formulations. For a set of antibodies used in the therapeutic areas from oncology to rheumatology and osteoporosis, we obtain an accurate prediction of aggregate fractions for up to three years using the data obtained on a much shorter time scale. Significantly, the strategy combining kinetic and thermodynamic analysis not only contributes to a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms of antibody aggregation but has already proven to be very effective in the development and production of biological therapeutics.
Monoclonal antibodies are the fastest growing class of therapeutics. However, aggregation limits their shelf life and can lead to adverse immune responses. Assessment and optimization of the long-term antibody stability are therefore key challenges in the biologic drug development. Here, we present a platform based on the analysis of temperature-dependent aggregation data that can dramatically shorten the assessment of the long-term aggregation stability and thus accelerate the optimization of antibody formulations. For a set of antibodies used in the therapeutic areas from oncology to rheumatology and osteoporosis, we obtain an accurate prediction of aggregate fractions for up to three years using the data obtained on a much shorter time scale. Significantly, the strategy combining kinetic and thermodynamic analysis not only contributes to a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms of antibody aggregation but has already proven to be very effective in the development and production of biological therapeutics.
Biologics are increasingly
becoming the leading group of therapeutics
and dominate the list of best-selling drugs.[1] Since their introduction to the market 3 decades ago, monoclonal
antibodies (mAb) have become the leading class of biologic drugs,
proving to be highly effective and safe for treatment of numerous
diseases.[2−4] An important step in bringing mAb to the market is
the development of an antibody formulation that ensures quality, efficacy,
and safety of the product throughout its shelf life.[5,6] Ideally, therapeutic antibody solutions have a long shelf life and
can be stored at high concentrations allowing direct intravenous use.[7] However, at this stage, aggregation of antibodies
presents a significant challenge for the development of therapeutics.
Although modern mAbs are fully humanized,[8] aggregates resulting from various types of stress (manufacturing
and storage) are the main cause of potential adverse immune reactions
and are of major concern in the drug development process.[9−12] Therefore, the amount of aggregates in biologic drugs must be kept
at low levels.[13,14] More broadly, prediction of aggregation
progression is crucial not only in the therapeutic antibody development
but also in understanding of the underlying mechanisms of protein
aggregation in amyloid diseases.[15−19]Considerable efforts are being made to evaluate
and improve the
long-term stability of therapeutic antibodies by optimizing the solution
formulation. This includes the search for the appropriate buffer composition,
ionic strength, and various additives that increase the thermodynamic
and colloidal stability of antibody solutions.[20−23] Because mAb aggregation at the
storage temperature is a very slow process, it takes several months
to detect a measurable amount of aggregates.[24] mAb stability studies are therefore usually shortened by performing
experiments under stress conditions (40 °C) that accelerate the
aggregation process. Typically, different formulations are tested
in parallel for the differences in aggregation propensity, and the
final formulation is developed iteratively based on several stability
studies.[25] However, it is not clear how
accurately do such studies reflect the aggregation process at the
intended low temperature storage conditions.[14,24,26] Ultimately, the final formulation is confirmed
by analyzing the samples stored at 5 °C, which takes as long
as the declared shelf life of the therapeutic antibody. Thus, determining
the long-term stability and developing the optimal mAb formulation
represent a bottleneck in the final stages of drug development, and
finding a better strategy is a key challenge for the pharmaceutical
industry.Our aim is to overcome this paradigm and explore the
aggregation
phase space beyond the traditional stress condition at 40 °C.
Here, we studied the aggregation of six therapeutic antibodies covering
different therapeutic areas from oncology to immunology and rheumatology
over a wide range of temperatures and mAb concentrations. The obtained
set of aggregation profiles enabled us to develop a physically realistic
kinetic model that could accurately capture the observed aggregation
kinetics under different experimental conditions. Importantly, the
developed protocol allows for a rapid and reliable long-term prediction
(up to 3 years) of mAb aggregate fractions at low temperatures (i.e.,
intended storage conditions) based on the data obtained at high temperatures.
We further show that the developed protocol can be used to efficiently
identify mAb formulations that increase the long-term stability specifically
at the storage temperature. Finally, we explain how the antibody thermodynamic
stability, a common indicator in formulation development, is linked
to its kinetic parameters of aggregation, which provides the basis
for optimizing antibody stability. Collectively, we developed a novel
platform for the prediction and optimization of mAb long-term stability
based on the short-term kinetic analysis, thereby improving the quality
and time/cost benefit of these pharmaceutical products.
Results
Temperature-Dependent
Aggregation Kinetics of Therapeutic mAbs
We first focused
on the aggregation kinetics of two antibodies
from classes IgG1 and IgG2. mAb1 is humanized, while mAb3 is fully
human, and both are used in cancer treatment. To elucidate the appropriate
kinetic mechanism of mAb aggregation, we measured the time dependence
of antibody aggregate fractions over a wide range of temperatures
and antibody concentrations. Fresh antibody solutions elute as monomers
on a size exclusion column; however, with prolonged incubation times,
increasing fraction of dimers, trimers, or higher-order aggregates
can be detected (Figure S1). The aggregation
process of both mAb1 and mAb3 is strongly temperature-dependent (Figures A, S2, and S3). At low-temperature antibody solutions remain
stable for months, while higher temperatures significantly accelerate
the aggregation process. For example, at 75 °C, mAb1 aggregation
starts in a few minutes compared to several months at 40 °C (Figure A).
Figure 1
Branched kinetic model
describes antibody aggregation in a broad
range of temperatures. (A) Aggregation time course of mAb1 measured
at different temperatures and concentrations in 20 mM histidine buffer,
pH 6.0. Fractions of monomers and oligomers (dimers and trimers) were
determined from the size exclusion chromatography (SEC) chromatograms
(see Figure S1) at different time points.
Solid lines show the global fit to the data using a branched kinetic
mechanism. The corresponding kinetic parameters are reported in Table S1. (B) Arrhenius plot for mAb1 aggregation
shows a biphasic behavior. The observed curvature in the Arrhenius
plot can be explained by using two competitive kinetic pathways [low-temperature
(LT) and high-temperature (HT) aggregation pathway] with different
temperature dependencies (red and blue lines). The temperature determines
the aggregation flux through either pathway. (C) Branched aggregation
mechanism describes mAb aggregation in a broad range of temperatures.
In both LT and HT pathways, the first step involves the conversion
of a native monomer N to an intermediate (I or D), followed by a relatively
faster formation of oligomers NI or D2 and D.
Branched kinetic model
describes antibody aggregation in a broad
range of temperatures. (A) Aggregation time course of mAb1 measured
at different temperatures and concentrations in 20 mM histidine buffer,
pH 6.0. Fractions of monomers and oligomers (dimers and trimers) were
determined from the size exclusion chromatography (SEC) chromatograms
(see Figure S1) at different time points.
Solid lines show the global fit to the data using a branched kinetic
mechanism. The corresponding kinetic parameters are reported in Table S1. (B) Arrhenius plot for mAb1 aggregation
shows a biphasic behavior. The observed curvature in the Arrhenius
plot can be explained by using two competitive kinetic pathways [low-temperature
(LT) and high-temperature (HT) aggregation pathway] with different
temperature dependencies (red and blue lines). The temperature determines
the aggregation flux through either pathway. (C) Branched aggregation
mechanism describes mAb aggregation in a broad range of temperatures.
In both LT and HT pathways, the first step involves the conversion
of a native monomer N to an intermediate (I or D), followed by a relatively
faster formation of oligomers NI or D2 and D.
Antibodies Aggregate via
Low- and High-Temperature Kinetic Pathways
The availability
of a large dataset of a time-dependent mAb aggregation
over a range of concentrations and temperatures allowed us to define
a physically reasonable kinetic model of antibody aggregation. Based
on the SEC elution profiles, it appears that for all antibodies studied,
aggregation proceeds via dimer formation. We initially hypothesized
a simple mechanism in which dimers form through a kinetic intermediate,
followed by further oligomerization (Figure S4A). Such a mechanism can successfully describe either low- or high-temperature
data sets, but it fails in describing both low- and high-temperature
data simultaneously (Figure S4B,C). Interestingly,
the apparent rate constant obtained for each temperature separately
(Figure S4D) shows a strong curvature in
the Arrhenius plot, suggesting that the aggregation mechanism is more
complex (symbols, Figure B).[27] Therefore, we developed several
alternative kinetic mechanisms of varying complexity in order to describe
the data (Figure S5). The simplest physically
realistic model that successfully describes the entire range of experimental
data with a single parameter set is a branched-type mechanism (Figure C). In this mechanism,
the aggregation proceeds via distinct LT and HT aggregation pathways,
and the temperature determines the flux through either pathways. The
mechanism postulates the existence of a LT kinetic intermediate I
and a high-temperature intermediate D, which further aggregate to
form the NI and D2 dimers, respectively (Figure C). Using a branched kinetic
mechanism, we were able to describe the aggregation for both mAb1
and mAb3 in the measured temperature and concentration range (solid
lines, Figures A, S2, and S3, parameters are listed in Table S1). The branched mechanism also explains
that the observed curvature in the Arrhenius plot is simply a result
of different temperature dependencies of LT and HT pathways (solid
lines Figure B). Importantly,
several alternative kinetic mechanisms fail to describe our data (Figure S5). Thus, the presented mechanism is
the simplest one that can adequately describe the aggregation kinetics
of mAb1 and mAb3 over a wide range of experimental conditions.
Distinct
Molecular Mechanisms Drive Low- and High-Temperature
Aggregation
To verify the existence of two competing aggregation
pathways independently, we isolated different on-pathway antibody
species and characterized their molecular properties. Capillary isoelectric
focusing analysis reveals that the isolated mAb1 dimers formed via
the LT or HT pathway contain a pronounced increase in acidic variants
compared to fresh monomers (Figure A), suggesting that the post-translational modifications
such as asparagine deamidation may trigger aggregation.[28] The overall isoelectric points of the LT dimer
and HT dimer are 0.16 and 0.22 pH units lower compared to the fresh,
unstressed mAb1 monomer. To quantify post-translational modifications
in more detail, we analyzed the mAb1 aggregate fractions by trypsin
digestion followed by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry
(LC–MS). The main differences between the mAb1 dimers occurring
in the LT pathway and the dimers and trimers of the HT pathway are
related to the oxidation levels of methionines in the Fc region (Figure B). While a significant
oxidation of Met-254 to methionine sulfoxide is observed for the both
LT and HT dimers, oxidation of Met-430 is characteristic only for
the HT oligomers. These residues are located in the antibody constant
region, which is conserved across all IgG classes.[29] In addition, the level of Met-430 oxidation as well as
the deamidation levels of Asn-84 and Asn-386 (all in the heavy chain)
are increased in the HT aggregates relative to LT dimers (Figure B). Thus, these data
indicate that LT and HT dimers have different routes of chemical degradation
that likely underlie the differences in their aggregation mechanisms.
Moreover, the examination of the activation energies accompanying
the dimer formation of mAb1 and mAb3, as well as mAb2 and mAbF1 (see
below) reveals significant differences. While the activation energies
for the formation of different mAb HT dimers are in the 50–150
kcal/mol range, those for LT dimers are only about 10–25 kcal/mol
(Figure C, Table S1). Large activation energies observed
for the HT dimer formation are typical of the (partial) unfolding
of antibodies, whereas lower activation energies, as observed for
the LT pathway, are in the range of energies typically observed for
chemical modifications, such as deamidation, isomerization, or oxidation.[30] Taken together, these data suggest that aggregation
via the LT pathway is likely triggered by chemical modifications,
whereas for the HT pathway, chemical modifications appear to be coupled
to the partial unfolding of the antibodies.
Figure 2
Differences in LT and
HT aggregation pathways at the molecular
level. (A) cIEF results are shown as a difference of isolated species
compared to the unstressed monomer. Error bars are calculated from
the relative standard deviation (RSD) values of several repeats of
analysis of the same sample/standard. Analysis showed increased acidity
of all species exposed to a high temperature relative to the unstressed
monomer for mAb1. (B) Relative percentages of the selected post-translational
modifications in different aggregate species as determined by LC–MS
peptide mapping are shown as a difference to an unstressed monomer.
Error bars are calculated from the RSD values of several repeats of
analysis of the same sample/standard. Oxidation (ox) of Met-254 is
characteristic for low-temperature dimers, while strong oxidation
of Met-254 and, additionally, Met-430 is characteristic for high temperature
dimers and trimers. The oxidation product of all three methionines
was methionine sulfoxide. Deamidaton (deam/iD) levels of Asn-84 and
Asn-386 are also elevated in HT dimers and trimers. (C) Activation
energies of dimer formation in LT and HT pathways, denoted as Ea(NI) and Ea(D2), respectively, for 4 mAbs in 7 different formulations. All
values for Ea(NI) are around 18 kcal/mol,
while values for Ea(D2) range
from 55 to 130 kcal/mol. Error bars represent standard deviations
obtained by Monte Carlo analysis for the first buffer of each mAb.
Exact values are available in Table S1.
Differences in LT and
HT aggregation pathways at the molecular
level. (A) cIEF results are shown as a difference of isolated species
compared to the unstressed monomer. Error bars are calculated from
the relative standard deviation (RSD) values of several repeats of
analysis of the same sample/standard. Analysis showed increased acidity
of all species exposed to a high temperature relative to the unstressed
monomer for mAb1. (B) Relative percentages of the selected post-translational
modifications in different aggregate species as determined by LC–MS
peptide mapping are shown as a difference to an unstressed monomer.
Error bars are calculated from the RSD values of several repeats of
analysis of the same sample/standard. Oxidation (ox) of Met-254 is
characteristic for low-temperature dimers, while strong oxidation
of Met-254 and, additionally, Met-430 is characteristic for high temperature
dimers and trimers. The oxidation product of all three methionines
was methionine sulfoxide. Deamidaton (deam/iD) levels of Asn-84 and
Asn-386 are also elevated in HT dimers and trimers. (C) Activation
energies of dimer formation in LT and HT pathways, denoted as Ea(NI) and Ea(D2), respectively, for 4 mAbs in 7 different formulations. All
values for Ea(NI) are around 18 kcal/mol,
while values for Ea(D2) range
from 55 to 130 kcal/mol. Error bars represent standard deviations
obtained by Monte Carlo analysis for the first buffer of each mAb.
Exact values are available in Table S1.
Long-Term Stability Prediction for a Diverse
Set of Therapeutic
mAbs
We next investigated whether the aggregation data from
thermally stressed conditions could be used for the estimation of
the aggregation profiles at temperatures relevant for the storage
of antibody therapeutics. A direct estimate of the aggregation kinetics
using the LT data is very time-consuming due to extremely slow kinetics
and can take up to one year. To this end, we used the kinetic parameters
obtained from the analysis of mAb1 and mAb3 aggregation data measured
between 40 and 75 °C (Figures A, S2, and S3) and predicted
the aggregate fractions at 5 °C. To verify these predictions,
we performed independent experiments at 5 °C and measured antibody
aggregate fractions using SEC at regular time intervals over the course
of 1–3 years (Figure A, typical chromatograms are shown in Figure S1). Strikingly, the predicted aggregate fractions
formed at 5 °C after 3, 12 and 24 months for mAb1 and mAb3 are
consistent with the experimental data (Figure A).
Figure 3
Accurate prediction of antibody long-term aggregation
and rapid
optimization of antibody formulations. (A) Prediction of mAb long-term
aggregation at 5 °C from the high-temperature aggregation data.
Experimentally determined fractions of aggregates using SEC (white
bars) agree with the predicted ones (grey bars). Predictions for mAbs
1, 2, 3, and F1 are based on the data shown in Figures S2, S3, S6, and S7 using full branched models, while
predictions for mAbs 4 and 5 are based on the data shown in Figure S9 using simplified pseudo-first order
models (Supporting Information protocol 1, eq S2). (B) The method
accurately predicts the aggregate fractions for all six mAbs at different
time points at 5 °C (data up to 36 and 6 months). None of the
experimental data on this graph were used in model parameter calculations.
Solid line has a slope of 1.03 and a R2 of 0.97. Shaded areas show one std intervals as determined form
the Monte Carlo error simulation. (C) A standard protocol for formulation
optimization of mAb6 using accelerated conditions (T = 40 °C) fails to find any differences among different formulations.
White bars show the experimental fractions of aggregates after 3 months
at 40 °C in formulations 1–5. On the other hand, predicted
aggregate fraction (gray bars) at 5 °C after 36 months based
on the high-temperature data series (shown in Figure S10) identifies formulation 5 as the optimal one. (D)
Experimental aggregate fractions (white bars) formed at 5 °C
confirm that the formulation 5 decreases the levels of aggregates
compared to other formulations at different time points (2, 6, and
12 months). Faster formulation optimization aimed specifically at
the storage conditions.
Accurate prediction of antibody long-term aggregation
and rapid
optimization of antibody formulations. (A) Prediction of mAb long-term
aggregation at 5 °C from the high-temperature aggregation data.
Experimentally determined fractions of aggregates using SEC (white
bars) agree with the predicted ones (grey bars). Predictions for mAbs
1, 2, 3, and F1 are based on the data shown in Figures S2, S3, S6, and S7 using full branched models, while
predictions for mAbs 4 and 5 are based on the data shown in Figure S9 using simplified pseudo-first order
models (Supporting Information protocol 1, eq S2). (B) The method
accurately predicts the aggregate fractions for all six mAbs at different
time points at 5 °C (data up to 36 and 6 months). None of the
experimental data on this graph were used in model parameter calculations.
Solid line has a slope of 1.03 and a R2 of 0.97. Shaded areas show one std intervals as determined form
the Monte Carlo error simulation. (C) A standard protocol for formulation
optimization of mAb6 using accelerated conditions (T = 40 °C) fails to find any differences among different formulations.
White bars show the experimental fractions of aggregates after 3 months
at 40 °C in formulations 1–5. On the other hand, predicted
aggregate fraction (gray bars) at 5 °C after 36 months based
on the high-temperature data series (shown in Figure S10) identifies formulation 5 as the optimal one. (D)
Experimental aggregate fractions (white bars) formed at 5 °C
confirm that the formulation 5 decreases the levels of aggregates
compared to other formulations at different time points (2, 6, and
12 months). Faster formulation optimization aimed specifically at
the storage conditions.To test the broader applicability
of this approach, we additionally
analyzed the aggregation kinetics of a fully human therapeutic antibody
mAb2, used to treat skin cancer, and a fusion antibody mAbF1 (TNF
receptor fused to the IgG1 antibody) used in the treatment of autoimmune
diseases. For these mAbs as well, the aggregate fractions at 5 °C
predicted using the high-temperature (between 25 and 60 °C) data
(Figures S6 and S7) are in agreement with
the measured fractions over the course of 3 – 36 months (Figure A). Overall, the
total aggregate fractions at 5 °C predicted by using high-temperature
data for mAb1, mAb2, mAb3, and mAbF1 are in excellent agreement with
the experimental fractions measured at 5 °C, as shown by the
correlation line with the slope = 1.03 and R2 = 0.97 (Figure B). Strikingly, the experimental fraction of mAbF1 aggregates after
3 years agrees well with the model prediction made using the data
obtained over 2 months. This demonstrates that the characterization
of the long-term mAb aggregation is accurate and can be drastically
shortened with the appropriate model analysis of the high temperature
aggregation data.Given the potentially broader utility of the
presented approach,
we developed a simplified protocol (see Supporting Information protocol 1) for the rapid determination of a long-term
therapeutic antibody aggregation. Our model analysis suggests that
the branched mechanism can be simplified to a first-order pseudo-mechanism
if aggregation is described at only a single mAb concentration—a
situation typically encountered in the antibody storage. On the experimental
side, we found that it is sufficient to measure the aggregation time
series at only two to four temperatures (e.g., T =
25, 35, 40, 45 °C) and still obtain accurate long-term predictions
(Figure S8). This simplified approach provides
comparable predictions to those using the original branched model
and is overall in agreement with the experimentally determined aggregate
fractions for 5 °C (Figure S8). Its
application resulted in a successful prediction of aggregate fractions
over a 2-year period for a fully human antibody mAb4 and a chimeric
antibody mAb5 used to treat autoimmune diseases and various cancers,
respectively (Figure A, experimental data for all mAbs and prediction lines in Figure S9). To sum up, the presented platform
provides a way for the reliable prediction of aggregate fractions
on a long-term time scale for a diverse set of investigated six therapeutic
antibodies with different aggregation propensities.Optimization
of antibody formulation requires identification of
buffer conditions that increase the long-term mAb stability at the
storage temperature of 5 °C. However, due to slow aggregate formation
at these temperatures, mAb formulations are usually being optimized
under “stress” conditions, typically at 40 °C,
even though it is not clear how these conditions reflect the aggregation
process at lower temperatures.[31,32] We investigated whether
the analysis of a temperature-dependent mAb aggregation data can be
used to optimize formulation more rapidly, while targeting the stability
at the storage temperature. To this end, we used therapeutic antibody
mAb6 of the IgG2 class used in haematology and measured its aggregation
propensity in different formulations suitable for invasive human use.
In a standard experiment where the aggregation fraction is determined
only at 40 °C, we observe that formulations 1–5 performed
better compared to formulations 6–9 (Figure C). In other words, if the decision was based
only on aggregation data measured at 40 °C, formulations 1–5
would be considered to perform equally well. However, additional aggregation
data measured at 25 and 35 °C (Figure S10) allowed us to predict the aggregate fractions at a storage temperature
5 °C, revealing that the formulation 5 would perform better compared
to the other formulations (Figure C). To verify these predictions, we performed a 12-month
stability study of mAb6 at 5 °C and confirmed that the formulation
5 indeed improves the long-term stability of the antibody relative
to formulations 1 or 9 (Figure D). This demonstrates that our approach based on the analysis
of temperature-dependent aggregation data can be used to optimize
the antibody formulation more rapidly and identify formulations that
improve stability specifically at the storage temperature.
Antibody
Aggregation Phase Space Links mAb Stability to Kinetics
The
generally accepted view is that the formulation conditions
favoring the native mAb conformation and increasing its thermodynamic
stability can effectively slow down mAb aggregation.[20,21] A direct measure of the thermodynamic stability is the apparent
standard free energy of denaturation, ΔGd, which reflects the relative populations of native and non-native
mAb species. To investigate the relationship between thermodynamic
stability and their aggregation propensity, we determined ΔGd of mAb1, mAb2, mAb3, and mAbF2 antibodies
in different formulations using urea denaturation (Figure S11). In contrast to the thermal mAb denaturation,
urea denaturation showed a high degree of reversibility,[20,21] as evidenced by the double dilution experiments (Figure S12). As expected, we observed that the apparent aggregation
rates (kapp 40 °C), estimated by
the simplified pseudo-first-order mechanism, correlate with the corresponding
ΔGd values (Figure S13A). A possible explanation for this correlation
is that different starting concentrations of native and non-native
mAb molecules, determined by the ΔGd, affect the apparent aggregation rate. However, the simulation of
mAb aggregation kinetics shows that different starting concentrations
affect only the kinetics of mAbs with ΔGd < 3 kcal/mol but have a minimal effect on the kinetics
of mAbs with higher stability (Figure S14A). We therefore considered an alternative model, where ΔGd correlates with some kinetic parameters of
the branched aggregation mechanism. Examination of the parameter cross-correlations
reveals only one significant correlation, that is between the rate
constant kI and ΔGd (Figure S13B). Since kI determines the formation of intermediate I,
the first step in the LT aggregation pathway, it appears that increasing
mAb stability specifically reduces aggregation via the LT pathway.
This assumption is confirmed by the excellent agreement between the
experimentally determined and calculated apparent aggregation rates
for four different mAbs (Figure S14B).
Thus, mAb stability affects the aggregation rate via two processes:
(i) it defines the concentrations of native and non-native species
(relevant for mAbs with ΔGd <
3 kcal/mol) and (ii) it affects the rate constant kI. By accounting for these two processes, we obtained
an excellent agreement between simulated kapp–ΔGd dependence and the
experimentally observed one for four different mAbs (Figure S14B).Finally, based on these findings, we link
the model of aggregation kinetics and mAb thermodynamic stability
to illustrate the general rules that govern mAb aggregation. We calculate
the aggregation rate and the aggregate fraction formed via the LT
or HT pathway as a function of temperature and mAb thermodynamic stability,
which can be optimized by different formulations (Figure ). The resulting aggregation
phase space clearly distinguishes between the LT- and HT-dominant
regions, shown in blue and red, respectively. It also shows that the
transitions from the LT to the HT pathway depend strongly on mAb stability
and that temperature at which the shift from the LT to the HT pathway
occurs correlates strongly with the mAb melting temperature (Figures S15 and S16). For example, when the mAb
stability is low (ΔGd < 3 kcal/mol),
the switch from the LT to the HT pathway can occur at moderate temperatures,
due to the increased initial concentration of non-native mAb, which
promotes aggregation. In these cases, the aggregation rate at the
usual 5 °C storage condition is strongly influenced by thermodynamic
stability (black lines corresponding to the aggregation rate are strongly
sloped). Thus, the minimal conformational stability required for the
successful development of aggregation-resistant biopharmaceutical
is ΔGd > 3 kcal/mol. On the other
hand, the aggregation rate for more stable mAbs in the LT region has
a weaker dependence on ΔGd, which
is explained with its correlation with kI rate constant (black lines corresponding to the aggregation rate
are only slightly sloped). Therefore, the increase in stability of
therapeutic mAbs is important in order to avoid aggregation via the
HT pathway but also to lower the value of kI and reduce the LT aggregation rate.
Figure 4
Antibody aggregation phase space. Aggregation
phase space shows
properties of mAb aggregation as a function of mAb thermodynamic stability
and temperature. The colored areas in the heat map show the dominant
regions of LT (blue) and HT (red) aggregation, which is calculated
as the ratio of LT dimer aggregates vs all aggregates at the timepoint
when 1% of any dimers form. Thick black lines show the overall apparent
kinetic constant (in h–1). Thin curved lines show
a nonlinear dependence of ΔGd with
the temperature. The dashed white line separates the conditions where
the apparent aggregation is strongly dependent on mAb stability (ΔGd < 3 kcal/mol) due to increased non-native
protein concentration (black lines are strongly sloped). In contrast
for mAbs with a stability higher than 3 kcal/mol, aggregation depends
weakly on its stability via its linkage with kI kinetic constant (black lines are slightly sloped). For the
presented simulation, the HT pathway model parameters for mAb1 in
formulation buffer 1A were used.
Antibody aggregation phase space. Aggregation
phase space shows
properties of mAb aggregation as a function of mAb thermodynamic stability
and temperature. The colored areas in the heat map show the dominant
regions of LT (blue) and HT (red) aggregation, which is calculated
as the ratio of LT dimer aggregates vs all aggregates at the timepoint
when 1% of any dimers form. Thick black lines show the overall apparent
kinetic constant (in h–1). Thin curved lines show
a nonlinear dependence of ΔGd with
the temperature. The dashed white line separates the conditions where
the apparent aggregation is strongly dependent on mAb stability (ΔGd < 3 kcal/mol) due to increased non-native
protein concentration (black lines are strongly sloped). In contrast
for mAbs with a stability higher than 3 kcal/mol, aggregation depends
weakly on its stability via its linkage with kI kinetic constant (black lines are slightly sloped). For the
presented simulation, the HT pathway model parameters for mAb1 in
formulation buffer 1A were used.
Discussion
We describe a platform that enables a rapid and
accurate assessment
of the long-term aggregation of therapeutic antibodies. Aggregation
kinetics at low temperatures can be an extremely slow process and,
in many cases, it takes several months to obtain a measurable amount
of aggregates. For this reason, long-term stability studies are time-consuming
and unnecessarily prolong the final steps of the mAb formulation development.
Our strategy is based on capturing the kinetic parameters of mAb aggregation
at higher temperatures, where aggregation is much faster. We show
that the aggregation process can be successfully described by a relatively
simple mechanism involving two pathways that provides reliable prediction
of the aggregate fraction at each concentration, temperature, and
time. The idea of accelerating mAb aggregation by increasing the temperature
is not new, and there have been many attempts to establish a suitable
temperature-dependent aggregation model; however, the predictive power
of these models is rather limited.[13,27,33−37] For example, direct application of the Arrhenius equation to describe
the temperature dependence of the rate constant(s) is limited only
to elementary reactions and the temperature range in which the activation
energy of the reaction is relatively constant. As a result, Arrhenius
diagrams for antibody aggregation are usually curved.[27,33−35] Several modified Arrhenius equations have been used
to describe this curvature satisfactorily only over a limited temperature
range.[27,34,38] In contrast,
we show that the branched kinetic mechanism, in which different molecular
pathways control the initial steps of aggregation at low and high
temperatures, can successfully describe mAb aggregation over a range
of mAb concentrations and temperatures. In this model mechanism, all
reaction rates are successfully described by the Arrhenius equation,
which to the best of our knowledge is the first such mechanism to
cover a wide range of pharmaceutically relevant temperatures and concentrations.We hypothesized that different molecular mechanisms drive aggregation
via LT and HT pathways. Although a detailed molecular description
of the aggregation process is very difficult and beyond the scope
of this study, we demonstrated that the isolated kinetic intermediates
formed via the LT and HT pathways contain different chemical modifications.
Using HDX-MS, it has been shown previously that the oxidation of methionine
residues in the Fc-CH2 region can affect thermodynamic
stability and biological activity.[39−42] Such chemical modifications are
often accompanied by structural changes that expose hydrophobic domains
and promote aggregation.[43−45] Recent HDX-MS studies of IgG2,
for example, showed significant structural changes in two regions
of Fc-CH2 when proteins were thermally stressed.[46] In that study, it was observed that dimeric
species obtained under conditions that would most likely promote the
formation of LT dimers were associated with weak non-covalent bonds,
whereas species corresponding to HT dimers exhibited rearranged disulfide
bonds. These results are in general agreement with our observations
,suggesting that HT aggregation is accompanied by partial mAb unfolding.
It is well established that the thermodynamic stability is an important
factor in reducing mAbs aggregation.[20,43,47,48] In contrast, several
studies could not confirm the general assumption that the stabilization
of the native state of mAbs can effectively slow down aggregation
that occurs through the (partially) unfolded state.[14,24,26,27,33,36,49,50] These contradictory results can
be explained using the aggregation phase space shown in Figure . The thermodynamic stability
of mAbs has several effects on the aggregation rate depending on the
LT or the HT pathways. Moreover, the effects of temperature, stability,
and aggregation rate are strongly intertwined and difficult to separate
by a one-parameter strategy. Analysis of these effects in the context
of a branched kinetic mechanism shows that the stabilization of mAb
has multiplicative effects, both by reducing the role of the HT pathway
and by reducing a rate-limiting effect of the LT aggregation pathway.In conclusion, our study represents an important step forward in
understanding the mechanism of antibody aggregation. The described
platform in this study can significantly accelerate the determination
of the long-term mAb aggregation and formulation optimization, which
is critical for a more efficient development of biologic therapeutics.
Materials and Methods
Materials
All
compounds were >95% pure by high performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis. mAbs were manufactured at Lek
Pharmaceuticals, Mengeš, Slovenia and were of human grade quality.
Chemicals for formulation preparation were of pharmaceutical grade,
while chemicals and reagents for chromatography, absorbance, fluorescence
and light scattering analyses were of HPLC grade. Ultra-pure water
obtained from a Milli-Q purification system (A10 Advantage, Millipore
Corporation, Bedford, MA, USA) was always used.
Formulation
Preparation
Protein formulations were prepared
by extensive dialysis using Slide-A-Lyzer dialysis cassettes with
10k molecular weight cut-off (Thermo Scientific, Rockford, IL, USA)
in final buffer formulation. Dialysis was performed for at least 24
h in refrigerated conditions with a minimal of 2 buffer exchanges
and with a sample to buffer ratio approximately 1:500. The protein
concentration after dialysis was determined with a micro-volume spectrophotometer
Trinean DropSense 16 (Unchained Labs, Pleasanton, CA, USA) and diluted
to a desired concentration with a formulation buffer. Final protein
formulations were filtered through 0.22 μm PES membrane filters
(Millex GP, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) and filled aseptically
in 2 mL (mAb3, mAb6), 6 mL (mAb1), or 10 mL (mAb2, mAb5) glass vials
(all Schott Type I plus, Mainz, Germany) or 0.05 mL (mAbF2), 0.8 mL
(mAb4), or 1 mL (mAbF1) glass syringes.
Stability Studies
For long-term stability studies,
all containers were placed at respective conditions at once and pulled
at predefined time intervals. After pulling, aggregation was quenched
by refrigerating the samples for at least 2 h prior to analysis. For
short-term experiments at T > 40 °C, in order
to minimize the time between pulling from storage conditions and analysis,
samples were placed in incubators at predefined time intervals and
pulled all at once. After pulling, aggregation was quenched by refrigerating
the samples for at least 30 min prior to analysis. Samples in vials
and syringes were stored in an inverted and horizontal position, respectively.
Size Exclusion Chromatography
An Acquity H-class UHPLC
system (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) equipped with a quaternary pump,
auto sampler, column thermostat, and photo-diode array detector with
a micro flow cell was used. Samples were analyzed by injecting 0.75
μg protein mass (samples were either diluted to 1 mg/mL with
150 mM potassium phosphate solution, pH 6.5, and 0.75 μL was
injected or when protein concentration was <1 mg/mL, the injection
volume was increased to achieve 0.75 μg loading) onto the column
Waters Acquity BEH200 SEC, 1.7 μm, 4.6 mm × 150 mm (Waters,
Milford, MA, USA) thermostated at 40 °C with 50 mM sodium phosphate
and 400 mM sodium perchlorate, pH 6.0 as the mobile phase. Absorbance
detection was performed at 210 nm, and the chromatograms were analyzed
using Empower Pro 3 software (Waters, Milford, MA, USA). The relative
levels of the monomer, dimer, and trimer were calculated according
to the total area of all of the peaks. The size of aggregates was
confirmed from the calibration curve constructed by injecting the
sample containing molecules of known molecular weights: thyroglobulin
(669 kDa), IgG (150 kDa), and holo-transferrin (80 kDa). In stressed
samples, where the total peak area was lower compared to the unstressed
sample, the decrease was attributed to the larger aggregate species.
Aggregation Kinetic Mechanism
The branched aggregation
mechanism was constructed from several chemical reactions listed in Table S1. Differential equations for the proposed
mechanism cannot be integrated; thus, the linear propagation method
was used. The time interval from time 0 to the last point of the data
set for each concentration and temperature was divided into 3000 parts,
and the linear changes were assumed between them. Parameters, rate
constant at the reference temperature (k5 °C,i) and activation energy (Ea,i), for each
chemical reaction were optimized to minimize the difference between
the experimental data and the model curve globally for the whole data
set of each formulation sample. The “GRG Nonlinear”
method of Microsoft Excel Solver add-in (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA)
was used as the minimization algorithm and the sum of root square
differences between prediction and the experiment point averaged for
each temperature; the concentration subset was used as the minimization
objective.Calculations for the simplified pseudo-first order
aggregation mechanism are described in Supporting Information protocol 1. Equations S2 and S3 are used to calculate the apparent aggregation constant
at 40 °C (kapp 40 °C). Data
from temperatures at which aggregation occurs only through the LT
branch (as determined by the branched aggregation mechanism) were
used. We chose 40 °C as a temperature at which samples for formulation
decision are usually incubated[24,26] and at which the aggregation
rate is above method variability (0.1%/month) for all proteins.
Monte Carlo Analysis
Each experimental data point was
randomly varied to obtain 2000 points normally distributed around
the measured value with standard deviation equal to the SEC measurement
standard error. Model parameters were optimized for each of the obtained
2000 data sets using the same minimization procedure as above. To
calculate the model’s prediction error, each parameter set
was used to construct a prediction curve and prediction interval that
encapsulates 95% curves that are closest to the original prediction
curve.
Purification of the Monomer and Aggregate Fractions
Approximately 160 μg was injected using the method described
in the Size Exclusion Chromatography section,
except that the mobile phase for purification was 150 mM potassium
phosphate solution, pH 6.5. Fractions were collected with Waters Fraction
Manager—Analytical (Waters, Milford, MA, USA). Fractions were
concentrated using 15 and 4 mL Amicon Ultra 50 kDa (Merck Millipore,
Burlington, MA, USA) centrifugal filter devices. Samples were analyzed
for purity with SEC analytical methods described above. Re-analysis
after storing the purified fractions for 2 months at 5 °C showed
complete irreversibility of aggregation.
Capillary Isoelectric Focusing
(cIEF)
Samples were
desalted using a gel filtration spin column, diluted to 0.3 mg/mL
in a running mix solution containing 0.5% pI marker 6.15, 0.5% pI
marker 9.50, 4% Pharmalyte pH 3–10, 0.35% methyl cellulose,
and 1.6 M urea (all reagents were provided by ProteinSimple, San Jose,
CA, USA), and thoroughly vortexed and spun down to remove air bubbles.
They were analyzed on an iCE3 Analyzer (ProteinSimple, San Jose, CA,
USA) equipped with a cIEF capillary cartridge, FC-coated, 100 μm
ID × 50 mm, using a program consisting of sample transfer (60
s at 2000 mBar), sample pre-focusing (1 min at 1500 V), sample focusing
(6 min at 3000 V), and image capture (at 280 nm wavelength). Obtained
electropherograms were calibrated using iCE CFR Software (ProteinSimple,
San Jose, CA, USA) and subsequently processed in Empower Pro 3 software
(Waters, Milford, MA, USA).
Tryptic Peptide Mapping with MS Detection
(PepMap-MS)
Samples were diluted in denaturing buffer (100
mM Tris HCl, pH 8.3,
7.5 M guanidine HCl), reduced with dithiotreitol at 55 °C for
30 min, and carboxymethylated using iodoacetic acid at room temperature
for 15 min. The sample solution was then buffer-exchanged to digestion
buffer (50 mM Tris, pH 7.5) using a gel filtration spin column. After
the addition of the trypsin enzyme (Promega) in an enzyme-to-protein
ratio of 1:10, the digestion mixture was incubated for 2 h min at
37 °C, and finally the reaction was stopped by adding the trifluoroacetic
acid (TFA) solution.The tryptic digest was then analyzed by
reversed-phase UHPLC (Waters BEH C18 column, 2.1 × 150 mm, 1.7
μm particle size, column temperature: 60 °C, flow rate
0.3 mL/min) coupled to an ESI-Q-ToF mass spectrometer (Bruker Compact),
with a 70 min gradient using mobile phase A (0.1% TFA in water) and
mobile phase B (0.1% TFA in acetonitrile). Acquired MS and MS/MS data
were processed and analyzed with Genedata Refiner MS software using
a customized MAM workflow for relative quantification of modified
peptides.
Thermodynamic Properties of Denaturation
Urea-induced
denaturation of mAb1, mAb2, mAb3, and mAbF2 was followed at 25 °C
by measuring the protein fluorescence spectra at urea concentrations
between 0 and 9.5 M. Excitation wavelength was set to 280 nm, and
fluorescence emission spectra were recorded between 360 and 460 nm
on a PerkinElmer LS 50 luminescence spectrometer (PerkinElmer, Buckingamshire,
U.K.) equipped with a thermally controlled cell holder in a cuvette
with 1 cm path length. Experimental data and model curves are provided
in Figure S12. Global model analysis was
performed using either a 2- or 3-state model, depending on the shape
of the denaturation curve. In case of the 3-state model, only first
denaturation transition was used for subsequent data analysis.For the melting experiments, 400 μL of sample at a protein
concentration of 1 mg/mL was loaded in a MicroCal VP-Capillary DSC
(Malvern Panalytical, Malvern, United Kingdom). Samples were heated
from 25 to 95 °C at a heating rate of 1 °C per minute, and
denaturation curves were analyzed with MicroCal VP-Capillary DSC Automated
Analysis software.
Authors: Arne Schön; Benjamin R Clarkson; Rogelio Siles; Patrick Ross; Richard K Brown; Ernesto Freire Journal: Anal Biochem Date: 2015-08-01 Impact factor: 3.365
Authors: Magfur E Alam; Thomas R Slaney; Lina Wu; Tapan K Das; Sambit Kar; Gregory V Barnett; Anthony Leone; Peter M Tessier Journal: J Pharm Sci Date: 2019-10-31 Impact factor: 3.534
Authors: Pedro M Martins; Susanna Navarro; Alexandra Silva; Maria F Pinto; Zsuzsa Sárkány; Francisco Figueiredo; Pedro José Barbosa Pereira; Francisca Pinheiro; Zuzana Bednarikova; Michał Burdukiewicz; Oxana V Galzitskaya; Zuzana Gazova; Cláudio M Gomes; Annalisa Pastore; Louise C Serpell; Rostislav Skrabana; Vytautas Smirnovas; Mantas Ziaunys; Daniel E Otzen; Salvador Ventura; Sandra Macedo-Ribeiro Journal: Front Mol Neurosci Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 5.639