4.6 Article

Effect of protein immunogenicity and PEG size and branching on the anti-PEG immune response to PEGylated proteins

Journal

PROCESS BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 52, Issue -, Pages 183-191

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.procbio.2016.09.029

Keywords

Immunogenicity; PEGylation; Anti-PEG antibody; Conjugation

Funding

  1. Beijing Natural Science Foundation [7142104]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20906095, 81402861]
  3. STS Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences [KFJ-EW-STS-027, KFJ-EW-STS-098]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PEGylation has successfully improved the pharmacological properties of therapeutic proteins. However, polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been burdened by immunogenicity that renders a negative clinical effect on therapeutic proteins. The anti-PEG immune response to PEGylated proteins possibly depends on the nature of proteins and the conjugated methoxy PEG (mPEG). Thus, it is necessary to investigate the effects of protein immunogenicity, the extent of PEGylation, the molecular weight (Mw), and the branching of mPEG on the anti-PEG immune response. Ovalbumin, tetanus toxoid cm, TT-TT conjugate, and TT-bovine serum albumin conjugate were used as target proteins. PEGylated proteins with different extents of PEGylation were obtained by fractionation of the PEGylated IT with size exclusion chromatography. The PEGylated proteins with different Mw and branching of mPEG were obtained by modification of TT with linear mPEG (5 kDa and 20 kDa) and branched mPEG (20 kDa). The PEGylated proteins elicited high levels of anti-PEG antibodies (predominantly IgM and IgG1). The anti-PEG immune response depended on the immunogenicity of proteins, the extent of PEGylation, and the Mw of mPEG. In contrast, branching of mPEG had an insignificant effect on the anti-PEG immune response to the PEGylated proteins. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available