Sixteen research groups participated in the ISOBM TD-4 Workshop in which the reactivity and specificity of 56 monoclonal antibodies against the MUC1 mucin was investigated using a diverse panel of target antigens and MUC1 mucin- related synthetic peptides and glycopeptides. The majority of antibodies (34/56) defined epitopes located within the 20-amino acid tandem repeat sequence of the MUC1 mucin protein core. Of the remaining 22 antibodies, there was evidence for the involvement of carbohydrate residues in the epitopes for 16 antibodies. There was no obvious relationship between the type of immunogen and the specificity of each antibody. Synthetic peptides and glycopeptides were analyzed for their reactivity with each antibody either by assay of direct binding (e.g. by ELISA or BiaCore) or by determining the capacity of synthetic ligands to inhibit antibody binding interactions. There was good concordance between the research groups in identifying antibodies reactive with peptide epitopes within the MUC1 protein core. Epitope mapping tests were performed using the Pepscan analysis for antibody reactivity against overlapping synthetic peptides, and results were largely consistent between research groups. The dominant feature of epitopes within the MUC1 protein core was the presence, in full or part, of the hydrophilic sequence of PDTRPAP. Carbohydrate epitopes were less easily characterized and the most useful reagents in this respect were defined oligosaccharides, rather than purified mucin preparations enriched in particular carbohydrate moieties. It was evident that carbohydrate residues were involved in many epitopes, by regulating epitope accessibility or masking determinants, or by stabilizing preferred conformations of peptide epitopes within the MUC1 protein core. Overall, the studies highlight concordance between groups rather than exposing inconsistencies which gives added confidence to the results of analyses of the specificity of anti-mucin monoclonal antibodies.
A fluorescent neuraminidase (NA) assay has been developed; 20 samples in five replicates could be analyzed at the same time, allowing us to study the kinetics of the enzyme-substrate interaction. The specificities of six influenza H1N1 virus NAs for BODIPY-labeled 3'SiaLac, 3'SiaLacNAc, SiaLe(c), SiaLe(a), 6'SiaLac, and 6'SiaLacNAc were evaluated. The duck virus NA hydrolyzed 6'SiaLac and 6'SiaLacNAc 50 times more slowly than 2-3 isomers. Swine viruses digested SiaLe(a) and 2-6 sialosides 20 times more slowly than 2-3 trisaccharides. For the human viruses, the difference between 2-6 and 2-3 oligosaccharides desialylation efficiency did not exceed five times; notably, the inner core of 2-3 sialosaccharide was discriminated. The results are evidence that influenza virus NAs can distinguish substrate structure at the tri- and tetrasaccharide level.
A major aspect of carbohydrate-dependent galectin functionality is their cross-linking capacity. Using a cell surface as biorelevant platform for galectin binding and a panel of 40 glycans as sensor part of a fluorescent polyacrylamide neoglycopolymer for profiling galectin reactivity, properties of related proteins can be comparatively analyzed. The group of the chicken galectins (CGs) is an especially suited system toward this end due to its relatively small size, compared with mammalian galectins. The experiments reveal particularly strong reactivity toward N-acetyllactosamine repeats for all tested CGs and shared reactivity of CG-1A and CG-2 to histo-blood group ABH determinants. In cross-species comparison, CG-1B's properties closely resembled those of human galectin-1, as was the case for the galectin-2 (but not galectin-3) ortholog pair. Although binding-site architectures are rather similar, reactivity patterns can well differ.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.