2022
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2609-2_17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structural Considerations in Affinity Maturation of Antibody-Based Biotherapeutic Candidates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, cocrystallized antibody-antigen complexes are typically preferred over structure-based homology models or AI predictions, which may lead to less reliable results if CDRs are not precisely modeled. The in silico affinity maturation relies on accurate molecular interactions for free energy or MM-GBSA-based calculations (Comeau et al, 2023;Thorsteinson et al, 2023), highlighting the importance of improving antibody-antigen complex predictions and the implicit incorporation of multiple conformational ensembles to enhance the effectiveness of in silico calculations and optimize library design. Despite this limitation, these methods have been already applied to predicted antibody-antigen complexes , facilitating the generation of in silico affinity maturation libraries (Conti et al, 2022;Thorsteinson et al, 2023).…”
Section: In Silico Affinity Maturation Of Lead Candidatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, cocrystallized antibody-antigen complexes are typically preferred over structure-based homology models or AI predictions, which may lead to less reliable results if CDRs are not precisely modeled. The in silico affinity maturation relies on accurate molecular interactions for free energy or MM-GBSA-based calculations (Comeau et al, 2023;Thorsteinson et al, 2023), highlighting the importance of improving antibody-antigen complex predictions and the implicit incorporation of multiple conformational ensembles to enhance the effectiveness of in silico calculations and optimize library design. Despite this limitation, these methods have been already applied to predicted antibody-antigen complexes , facilitating the generation of in silico affinity maturation libraries (Conti et al, 2022;Thorsteinson et al, 2023).…”
Section: In Silico Affinity Maturation Of Lead Candidatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, co-crystallized antibody–antigen complexes are typically preferred over structure-based homology models or AI predictions, which may lead to less reliable results if CDRs are not precisely modeled. The in silico affinity maturation relies on accurate molecular interactions for free energy or MM-GBSA–based calculations ( Comeau et al, 2023 ; Thorsteinson et al, 2023 ), highlighting the importance of improving antibody–antigen complex predictions and the implicit incorporation of multiple conformational ensembles to enhance the effectiveness of in silico calculations and optimize library design. Despite this limitation, these methods have been already applied to predicted antibody–antigen complexes ( Rangel et al, 2022 ), facilitating the generation of in silico affinity maturation libraries ( Conti et al, 2022 ; Thorsteinson et al, 2023 ).…”
Section: Opportunities For Computation At Various Stages Of Biotherap...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The subsequent challenge involves designing a combinatorial assembly of these mutations into a library suitable for phage/yeast display. This is because the in silico affinity maturation often involves computationally expensive calculations that tend to be more accurate at identifying the single point mutations rather than combinations thereof ( Comeau et al, 2023 ; Thorsteinson et al, 2023 ). The physical display libraries built using computational guidance can be used to pan combinatorial mutations.…”
Section: Opportunities For Computation At Various Stages Of Biotherap...mentioning
confidence: 99%