| Literature DB >> 35294290 |
Junming Ren1,2, Alexander E Chu3,4, Kevin M Jude1,2, Lora K Picton1,2, Aris J Kare3, Leon Su1,2, Alejandra Montano Romero3, Po-Ssu Huang3,4, K Christopher Garcia1,2,5.
Abstract
Affinity maturation of protein–protein interactions is an important approach in the development of therapeutic proteins such as cytokines. Typical experimental strategies involve targeting the cytokine-receptor interface with combinatorial libraries and then selecting for higher-affinity variants. Mutations to the binding scaffold are usually not considered main drivers for improved affinity. Here we demonstrate that computational design can provide affinity-enhanced variants of interleukin-2 (IL-2) “out of the box” without any requirement for interface engineering. Using a strategy of global IL-2 structural stabilization targeting metastable regions of the three-dimensional structure, rather than the receptor binding interfaces, we computationally designed thermostable IL-2 variants with up to 40-fold higher affinity for IL-2Rβ without any library-based optimization. These IL-2 analogs exhibited CD25-independent activities on T and natural killer (NK) cells both in vitro and in vivo, mimicking the properties of the IL-2 superkine “super-2” that was engineered through yeast surface display [A. M. Levin et al., Nature, 484, 529–533 (2012)]. Structure-guided stabilization of cytokines is a powerful approach to affinity maturation with applications to many cytokine and protein–protein interactions.Entities:
Keywords: immunology; in silico design; protein engineering; structural biology
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35294290 PMCID: PMC8944926 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2117401119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 12.779
Fig. 1.Design strategies for stabilizing IL-2. (A) Structural context of the IL-2 receptor complex (PDB: 2B5I), with targeted regions of IL-2 (gray) color coded by design strategy. (B) Design strategies for stabilizing IL-2 and improving affinity to IL-2Rβ. Four main strategies were used: thermostabilizing by sequence redesign using the iterative enrichment algorithm (yellow); idealizing the loop structure between helices B and C (blue); N-terminal helix capping (green); and redesigning position 72, which is influential for CD25 interaction (pink). Helices A to D of IL-2 are labeled. (C) Sequence comparisons of stabIL-2 designs with WT IL-2 and super-2 H9. Colors correspond to the strategies described in B.
Fig. 2.Functional properties and steady-state binding of stabIL-2 designs. (A and B) Dose-response curve (Left) and histogram at indicated concentration (Right) showing STAT5 phosphorylation in (A) CD25+ and (B) CD25− YT cells following a 15-min cytokine stimulation. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of triplicate wells and are representative of two independent experiments. (C) Steady-state binding affinities measured by surface plasmon resonance. (D) EC50 values for stat5 phosphorylation, measured on CD25− YT cells. (E) Correlation of improved IL-2Rβ binding affinity with improved signaling in CD25- YT cells. The Pearson correlation coefficient (R) is calculated. (F) Correlation of IL-2Rβ binding affinity with signaling in CD25+ YT cells.
Functional and biophysical parameters of S1 and S15 compared to WT and super-2 H9
| Seq | Tm (°C) | EC50, CD25− YT (nM) | EC50, CD25+ YT (nM) | IL-2Rβ Kd, steady state (nM) | IL-2Rβ ΔH (kcal/mol) | IL-2Rβ ΔS (kcal/mol) | IL-2Rβ Kd (ITC) (nM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WT | 43.2 | 1.104 | 0.01837 | 374 | −7.64 (1) | 4.79 (1) | 144 (1) |
| H9 | 52.0 | 0.204 | 0.02088 | 16 | −15.0 (1) | −13.1 (1) | 2.92 (1) |
| S1 | 79.0 | 0.1606 | 0.03897 | 61 | −14.13 ± 0.46 | −12.3 | 9.4 ± 5.7 |
| S15 | 75.4 | 0.2051 | 0.02011 | 11.5 | 9.4 ± 0.3 | 1.6 | 30 ± 10 |
ITC measurements taken at 288 K.
Fig. 3.Increased stability and binding affinity, and structures, of stabIL-2 S1 and S15. (A) S1 and S15 designs adopt secondary structure profiles similar to WT and H9 as measured by far-UV CD. (B) Thermal stability of S1, S15, WT, and H9 assessed by heat denaturation monitored by CD at 222 nm. (C and D) Thermodynamic binding affinity of S1 (C) and S15 (D) against IL-2Rβ compared to WT and H9, measured by isothermal titration calorimetry. (E and F) Steady-state binding affinity of S1 (E) and S15 (F) against IL-2Rβ ECD compared to WT and H9, measured by surface plasmon resonance. (G) Crystal structures of S1 (Left, PDB: 7RA9) and S15 (Right, PDB: 7RAA) overlaid against WT (PDB: 1M47). Helices A to D are labeled on each structure.
Fig. 4.In vivo activity of stabIL-2 designs. (A and B) CD4+ Treg and CD8+ Teff were isolated from Foxp3-GFP reporter mice (C57BL6/J). A total of 250,000 cells were incubated with stabIL-2s for 15 min at 37 °C. Dose-response curve showing STAT5 phosphorylation in (A) CD4+ Tregs and (B) CD8+ cells following a 15-min cytokine stimulation. (C) Schematic of the in vivo immune cell profiling of stabIL-2 designs in mice. (D–G) Quantification of stabIL-2 designs administration on BL6 mice (B and C) Treg (CD4+CD25+Foxp3+)and (D and E) CD8+ Teffs (CD44+CD62L−). (H and I), Quantification of cytokine administration on C57BL/6 mice CD8+ production of IFN-γ upon ex vivo restimulation with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) and ionomycin in (F) spleen and (G) lymph nodes (LNs). (J and K) Total cell count of immune cells in the (H) spleen and (I) LNs after stabIL-2 administration. Bar graphs show mean ± SD and were analyzed by one-way ANOVA relative to WT IL-2. Multiple comparisons were corrected using Dunnett’s test. Data are representative of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001. ns, not significant.