Patent Grant
11929151
The instant application contains a Sequence Listing which has been submitted electronically in ASCII format and is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. Said ASCII copy, created on Apr. 22, 2021, is named 49723USSEQLISTING_ST25.txt and is 9,101 bytes in size.
The present invention relates to a method for predicting whether a binding peptide, which binds to a target peptide, preferably a target peptide that is presented in the context of major histocompatibility complex (MHC), and is for administration to a subject, will cross react with another peptide in the subject in vivo.
MHC class I and class II are immunoglobulin superfamily proteins specialised for antigen presentation, with a polymorphic peptide binding site which enables them to present a diverse array of short peptide fragments at the surface of the antigen presenting cell. Peptides presented by MHC are derived from proteins which have been proteosomally processed within the cell. In humans, MHC molecules are known as human leukocyte antigens (HLA).
A number of emerging immunotherapies rely on the administration to a subject to be treated of a binding peptide that binds a target peptide-MHC complex. The binding peptide may be an immune binding peptide such as, for example, an antibody or antigen binding fragment thereof or a T cell receptor or antigen binding fragment thereof. Such binding peptides bind to a binding sequence, comprising the amino acid sequence of the target MHC presented peptide. Often the binding sequence of the target peptide is known. There is a risk with such therapies that the binding peptide binds to peptides other than the target peptide (referred to herein as “off target peptides”), causing unwanted side effects. It is therefore desirable to identify whether such off target peptides exist. This allows binding peptides to be chosen and designed that do not bind to off target peptides and consequently have a far greater chance of not causing unwanted side effects.
Reasons for unwanted side effects derived from off target specificities in adoptive T cell therapy are; mispairing of transduced TCR chains with endogenous chains, insertion mutagenesis associated with TCR transduction, or alloreactivity (Amos et al., Blood 2011, 118(3):499-509; Daniel-Meshulam et al., Front Immuol 2012, 3:186). To date, the way to prevent off target toxicity is to include apoptosis genes to destroy T cells if toxicity arises after administration to the patient (Restifo, et al., Nat Rev Immunol 2012, 12(4): 269-81.)
Thus a person skilled in the art would be motivated to provide mechanisms that deal with binding to off target peptides jag administration of a binding peptide. It is therefore unlikely that a person skilled in the art would consider trying to identify off target peptides before the binding peptide is administered. In the highly unlikely event that the skilled person took this latter approach, one option would be to search protein sequence databases for peptides with similarity to the target MHC presented peptide. But, this often returns a large number of peptides, all of which would need to be tested and even then off-target peptides may not be identified. Lowering the stringency of the search parameters would further increase the number of potential epitopes that would have to be tested and again may still not reveal off target peptides. Alternatively, the skilled person may measure any immune response generated by the binding peptide in the presence of cells derived from normal tissue(s) (which preferably do not express the target peptide). However, this can be a difficult process, depending on the number and type of cells tested. Furthermore, primary cells cultured in vitro, may have a different protein expression profile compared to the same cell type in vivo. This may result in a false assessment of potential cross reactivity in vivo. Finally, the skilled person may use animal models to measure any immune response generated by the binding peptide. Because of the differences between human protein sequences and those of the animal, the absence of unwanted side effects in the animal may not translate to humans.
Thus, these approaches do not accurately indicate, especially when administered to a subject, whether the binding peptide will indeed give rise to unwanted side effects derived from off target specificities, especially in an individualised or personalised setting. In short, any attempt heretofore to identify off target peptides before the binding peptide is administered had no reasonable expectation of success. Indeed, as is explained in more detail below, the inventors have found that such approaches will not necessarily identify off target peptides that cause an unwanted side effect. Although these approaches were performed on the a3a T cells described in the examples below, off-target activation of a3a T cells only become apparent when the binding peptide was administered to patients (manuscript in preparation).
Citation or identification of any document in this application is not an admission that such document is available as prior art to the present invention.
It is therefore desirable to provide an alternative method for predicting whether a binding peptide will or at least is likely to bind to an off target peptide, which addresses drawbacks of the prior art.
In an aspect, the present invention provides a method for predicting whether a binding peptide, which binds to a target peptide presented by a Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) and is for administration to a subject, has the potential to cross react with another peptide in the subject in vivo, the method which may comprise:
In another aspect, the invention comprehends a method of treating a human or animal mammalian subject in need thereof—advantageously which may comprise providing individualized or personalized treatment involving a binding peptide—which may comprise:
The at least one binding motif may be identified by:
Methods of the invention may further comprise, where an amino acid residue at a position in the binding sequence is not identified as being part of the binding motif, substituting this position with at least one additional amino acid and testing for activity relative to the wild type peptide,
Methods of the invention may further comprise creating a series of mutants, each mutant having the amino acid residue at one position in the binding sequence substituted for an alternative amino acid, such that over the series of mutants the amino acid residue in each position in the binding sequence is substituted for all alternative amino acids, and testing each mutant in the series for activity relative to the wild type peptide,
The activity that is tested may be the ability of the mutant to bind to the binding peptide and/or to elicit the biological response caused by binding to the binding peptide.
The alternative amino acid may have a different side chain to that of the amino acid for which it is being substituted.
The alternative amino acid may be one that does not appear in the sequence that is involved in binding to the target peptide.
The alternative amino acid may be alanine or glycine.
The search may be carried out for peptides that are expressed in selected tissue(s) and/or accessible to the binding peptide.
Methods of the invention may further comprise testing binding to the target peptide of any peptide that is present in the subject that may comprise the at least one binding motif.
Methods of the invention may further comprise:
The treatment effective amount of the binding peptide is that amount typically given to the suitable mammalian patient. Thus, the invention comprehends testing known binding peptide treatments for whether such treatment binding peptides will bind to peptides other than the target peptide. The treatment effective amount of the alternative binding peptide is within the ambit of the skilled person from this disclosure and the knowledge in the art. For example, the treatment effective amount can be determined by comparing the binding properties and/or ability to elicit the desired treatment biological response of the binding peptide with the binding properties and/or ability to elicit the desired treatment biological response of the alternative binding peptide, and adjusting the dosage of the binding peptide based on the difference in binding and/or ability to elicit the biological response of the alternative binding peptide in comparison with the binding and/or ability to elicit the biological response of the binding peptide. In advantageous embodiments, the alternative binding peptide has binding properties and/or biological response eliciting properties akin to that of the binding peptide, and hence its dosage or amount to be administered is analogous to that of the binding peptide.
In certain aspects, the invention therefore provides an improvement in a method of treating a human or animal mammalian subject in need thereof which may comprise administering a binding peptide. This improvement may comprise:
This method can include, when there is the presence of one or more such peptides and hence an indication that the binding peptide has the potential to cross react in vivo, preparing an alternative binding peptide having the absence of one or more of such peptides and hence the indication that the alternative binding peptide has the potential not to cross react in vivo, and administering a treatment effective amount of the alternative binding peptide to the subject.
Moreover, the invention has utility in the preparation of pharmaceutical compositions which may comprise a binding peptide. In this respect, the invention provides a method for preparing a pharmaceutical composition which may comprise a binding peptide, or an improvement to methods for preparing a pharmaceutical composition which may comprise a binding peptide, which may comprise:
Accordingly, it is an object of the invention not to encompass within the invention any previously known product, process of making the product, or method of using the product such that Applicants reserve the right and hereby disclose a disclaimer of any previously known product, process, or method. It is further noted that the invention does not intend to encompass within the scope of the invention any product, process, or making of the product or method of using the product, which does not meet the written description and enablement requirements of the USPTO (35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph) or the EPO (Article 83 of the EPC), such that Applicants reserve the right and hereby disclose a disclaimer of any previously described product, process of making the product, or method of using the product. It may be advantageous in the practice of the invention to be in compliance with Art. 53(c) EPC and Rule 28(b) and (c) EPC. Nothing herein is to be construed as a promise.
It is noted that in this disclosure and particularly in the claims and/or paragraphs, terms such as “comprises”, “comprised”, “comprising” and the like can have the meaning attributed to it in U.S. Patent law; e.g., they can mean “includes”, “included”, “including”, and the like; and that terms such as “consisting essentially of” and “consists essentially of” have the meaning ascribed to them in U.S. Patent law, e.g., they allow for elements not explicitly recited, but exclude elements that are found in the prior art or that affect a basic or novel characteristic of the invention.
These and other embodiments are disclosed or are obvious from and encompassed by, the following Detailed Description.
The following Detailed Description, given by way of example, but not intended to limit the invention solely to the specific embodiments described, may best be understood in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The inventors have found that, by identifying the binding motif in the target peptide to which the binding peptide binds, rather than the known binding sequence, off target peptides—that have the potential to, or will, cross react in vivo—can be identified far more accurately. If off target peptides are found, this allows binding peptides to be altered so that they do not bind to these off target peptides.
The binding motif(s) may be identified by creating a series of mutants of the target peptide, each mutant having the amino acid residue at one position in the sequence thereof that is involved in binding to the binding peptide (the “binding sequence”) substituted for an alternative amino acid, such that over the series of mutants the amino acid residue in each position in the binding sequence is substituted for an alternative amino acid. Each mutant in the series is then tested for its activity relative to the wild type target peptide. An amino acid residue at a position within the binding sequence may be identified as being part of the binding motif if the mutant in which the amino acid at that position is mutated to an alternative amino acid has a substantial loss of activity relative to the wild type target peptide, such as 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90% or greater loss of activity. This may result in a binding motif which may comprise amino acid(s) at one or a plurality of positions (such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 or more) within the binding sequence being identified.
Where an amino acid residue at a position in the binding sequence is not identified as being part of the binding motif (using the technique described above for example), this position may be further substituted with at least one additional amino acid and tested for activity relative to the wild type peptide. Amino acid substitutions which result in a substantial loss of activity relative to the wild type target peptide, such as 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90% or greater loss of activity, are considered to be non-tolerated amino acids and/or not part of the binding motif. Conversely, amino acid substitutions which do not result in a substantial loss of activity (for example of at least 50%) relative to the wild type target peptide may be considered as part of the binding motif. This may result in a binding motif as defined above and additionally in which one or a plurality of positions are represented by more than one but not all amino acids.
Alternatively or additionally, a series of mutants may be made in which the amino acid residue at each position of the binding sequence is mutated to all alternative amino acids (relative to the wild type amino acid). For a binding sequence of nine amino acids, this would mean 171 peptides. Each mutant in the series is tested for activity relative to the wild type peptide. Amino acid substitutions which result in a substantial loss of activity relative to the wild type target peptide, such as 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90% or greater loss of activity, are considered to be non-tolerated amino acids and/or not part of the binding motif. Conversely, amino acid substitutions which do not result in a substantial loss of activity (for example of at least 50%) relative to the wild type target peptide may be considered as part of the binding motif. This may result in a binding motif in which each position is represented by at least one but not all amino acids.
The activity that is tested may be the ability of the mutant to bind to the binding peptide (this can be measured using Surface Plasmon Resonance for example) and/or to elicit the biological response caused by binding to the binding peptide. The biological response may be, for example, activation of immune system cells such as T cells, measured by cytokine production or destruction of the target cell; activation of an enzyme, measured by accumulation of product or disappearance of substrate; or activation of a signalling cascade (measured by monitoring protein phosphorylation, or changes in gene expression and protein production).
The alternative amino acid substituted into the mutants may be alanine, glycine or indeed any amino acid, provided that it has a different side chain to that of the amino acid for which it is being substituted. Preferably, the alternative amino acid is one that does not appear in the binding sequence. Thus, any one of the following amino acids may be used: alanine, asparagine, aspartic acid, arginine, cysteine, glutamine, glycine, glutamic acid, histidine, isoleucine, lysine, leucine, phenylalanine, methionine, serine, proline, tryptophan, threonine, tyrosine, valine, as well as non-naturally occurring amino acids. Such techniques, known as “amino acid scanning”, are known in the art and have been used to determine a binding motif. See Wells, Methods Enzymol 1991; 202: 390-411 for example. A similar approach is also known for detecting other specificities of a T cell receptor (for example Udyavar et al. J Immunol 2009; 182(7):4439-47). However, such amino acid scanning has not been used to identify off-target peptides which may cause undesirable side effects.
Once the binding motif has been identified, protein databases may be searched for proteins which contain the binding motif. Suitable protein databases include but are not limited to UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot (http//www.uniprot.org/), Protein Information Resource (PIR) (http//pir.georgetown.edu/pirwww/index.shtml), and/or Reference Sequence (RefSeq) (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/RefSeq).
Searching for a peptide motif may be carried out using any one of a number of tools, which may be found on bioinformatics resource sites such as ExPASY (http//www.expasy.org/). For example, the search tool ScanProsite identifies user-defined motifs in all protein sequences in the UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot Protein Knowledgebase (De Castro et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006 Jul. 1; 34 (Web Server issue):W362-5).
It is preferred that peptides containing the exact binding motif, i.e. with 100% identity to the binding motif, are identified. However, proteins containing motifs that have less than 100% identity to the binding motif may be identified. For the purposes of searching, the binding motif may be modified to include ambiguity at certain positions, for example with amino acids which have similar properties (e.g. leucine/isoleucine, etc), or where it is already known in the literature that a particular amino acid is tolerated at a certain position (such as HLA anchor residues).
The search may be carried out for peptides that are of human origin or of organisms which are commonly present in humans, such as viral or bacterial pathogens, or commensal bacteria. However, where the method of the present invention is applied to non-human animals, such as non-human mammals, the search may be carried out for peptides that are of the relevant non-human animal origin or of organisms which are commonly present in such non-human animals. Additionally or alternatively, the search may be carried out for peptides that are expressed in selected tissue(s) and/or accessible to the binding peptide. Such information may be obtained from the literature.
Peptides identified in the search as which may comprise the at least one binding motif may be confirmed as an off target peptide and cross reacting with binding peptide by determining the ability of the identified peptide to bind to the binding peptide (for example using Surface Plasmon Resonance), or assessing the biological response generated by binding of the binding peptide to the identified peptide. The biological response may be for example, activation of immune system cells such as T cells, measured by cytokine production or destruction of the target cell; activation of an enzyme, measured by accumulation of product or disappearance of substrate; or, activation of a signalling cascade (measured by monitoring protein phosphorylation, or changes in gene expression and protein production).
Once one or more off target peptides have been identified, the potential of the (or each) off target peptide to cause unwanted side effects when bound by the binding peptide may be determined. This may include searching literature sources to determine expression of the off target peptide in normal tissue. For example, where expression of the off target peptide in normal tissue is non-existent or limited (for example with cancer testis antigens), the binding peptide may be considered suitable for administration in vivo. In cases where expression of the off target peptide in normal tissue is widespread or is in critical tissues, such as heart cells, binding may optionally be additionally confirmed in vitro using cells which express the off target peptide. In some situations the binding peptide may not be administered in vivo because of the cross reaction that this can cause. The binding peptide may be redesigned so that there is no longer any cross reactivity to the off target peptide(s), while maintaining binding, preferably with high affinity, to the target peptide. For example, T cell receptors can be redesigned by mutagenesis using the methods described in WO 03/020763. Where redesigning does not prevent cross reactivity to the off target peptide, an alternative binding peptide may be sought, for example, an alternative T cell receptor, which binds the target peptide.
If no off target peptides are found, or if the binding to the off target peptides is not expected to cause unwanted side effects (for example by virtue of the off target peptide being expressed in limited or non-critical tissues), the binding peptide may be used in a method of preventing or treating a disease or condition which is ameliorated by administration of the binding peptide. Methods of treatment include but are not limited to immunotherapies; for example, administration to a patient of modified T cells (adoptive therapy), such as those transduced with affinity enhanced T cell receptors or chimeric antibody receptors; administration of monoclonal antibodies or monoclonal antibody fragments, especially TCR-like antibodies; administration of novel bi-specific immunotherapeutic agents such as ImmTACs (Immune mobilising TCRs against cancer) (Liddy, et al. (2012) Nat Med 18: 980-987) or BiTEs (Bispecific T cell engaging antibodies) (Baeuerle, et at. (2009). Curr Opin Mol Ther 11(1): 22-30).
Such treatments may be provided in a pharmaceutical composition together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers or excipients. Therapeutic TCRs, or cells, will usually be supplied as part of a sterile, pharmaceutical composition which will normally include a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. This pharmaceutical composition may be in any suitable form (depending upon the desired method of administering it to a patient). It may be provided in unit dosage form, will generally be provided in a sealed container and may be provided as part of a kit. Such a kit would normally (although not necessarily) include instructions for use. It may include a plurality of said unit dosage forms.
The pharmaceutical composition may be adapted for administration by any appropriate route, such as a parenteral (including subcutaneous, intramuscular, or intravenous) route. Such compositions may be prepared by any method known in the art of pharmacy, for example by mixing the active ingredient with the carrier(s) or excipient(s) under sterile conditions.
Dosages of the substances of the present invention can vary between wide limits, depending upon the disease or disorder to be treated, the age and condition of the individual to be treated, etc.; for example, a suitable dose range for an ImmTAC reagent may be between 25 ng/kg and 50 μg/kg. A physician will ultimately determine appropriate dosages to be used.
In the present invention, the binding peptide that binds to MHC presented peptide may be an immune binding peptide, which may be an immunotherapeutic peptide. Binding peptides can be derived from natural sources, or they may be partly or wholly synthetically produced. Examples of immune binding peptides include T cell receptors (“TCRs”—which term includes antigen binding fragments of T cell receptors). As is described in WO 99/60120, TCRs mediate the recognition of specific Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC)-peptide complexes by T cells and, as such, are essential to the functioning of the cellular arm of the immune system. The TCR is a heterodimeric cell surface protein of the immunoglobulin superfamily which is associated with invariant proteins of the CD3 complex involved in mediating signal transduction. TCRs exist in as and 78 forms, which are structurally similar but T cells expressing them have quite distinct anatomical locations and probably functions. The extracellular portion of the receptor consists of two membrane-proximal constant domains, and two membrane-distal variable domains bearing polymorphic loops analogous to the complementarity determining regions (CDRs) of antibodies. It is these loops which form the binding site of the TCR molecule and determine peptide specificity.
The TCR may be in soluble form (e.g. having no transmembrane or cytoplasmic domains), for example a monoclonal TCR as described in WO03/020763, and/or in single chain form, as described in WO2004/033685. For stability, soluble TCRs preferably have an introduced disulphide bond between residues of the respective constant domains, as described, for example, in WO 03/020763. Single chain formats include up TCR polypeptides of the Vα-L-Vβ, Vβ-L-Vα, Vα-Cα-L-Vβ or Vα-L-Vβ-C types, wherein Vα and Vβ are TCR α and β variable regions respectively, Ca and CO are TCR α and β constant regions respectively, and L is a linker sequence. Alternatively or additionally, the TCR may be fused to an immune effector domain for use as a targeting agent for delivering therapeutic agents to an antigen presenting cell. Such therapeutic agents include for example antibodies or antibody fragments such as an anti-CD3 fragment, immunomodulators such as cytokines, enzymes such as perforin, or chemotherapeutic agents, such as cis-platin. TCRs may also be expressed on a cell, such as a T cell. Said T cells may be used in adoptive therapy.
Other binding peptides encompassed by the present invention include antibodies, such as TCR like antibodies, which have been engineered to bind to MHC presented peptides (for example see, Sergeeva, A., G. et al. (2011). Blood 117(16): 4262-72 and/or Dahan, R., and Y. Reiter. 2012. Expert Rev Mol Med. 14:e6. The term “antibody” as used herein refers to immunoglobulin molecules and immunologically active portions of immunoglobulin molecules, i.e., molecules that contain an antigen binding site that specifically binds an antigen, whether natural or partly or wholly synthetically produced. The term also covers any polypeptide or protein having a binding domain which is, or is homologous to, an antibody binding domain. Examples of antibodies are the immunoglobulin isotypes (e.g., IgG, IgE, IgM, IgD and IgA) and their isotypic subclasses; fragments which may comprise an antigen binding domain such as Fab, scFv, Fv, dAb, Fd; and diabodies. Antibodies may be polyclonal or monoclonal. A monoclonal antibody may be referred to herein as “mab”.
It is possible to take monoclonal and other antibodies and use techniques of recombinant DNA technology to produce other antibodies or chimeric molecules which retain the specificity of the original antibody. Such techniques may involve introducing DNA encoding the immunoglobulin variable region, or the complementary determining regions (CDRs), of an antibody to the constant regions, or constant regions plus framework regions, of a different immunoglobulin. See, for instance, EP-A-184187, GB 2188638A or EP-A-239400. A hybridoma or other cell producing an antibody may be subject to genetic mutation or other changes, which may or may not alter the binding specificity of antibodies produced.
As antibodies can be modified in a number of ways, the term “antibody” should be construed as covering antibody fragments, derivatives, functional equivalents and homologues of antibodies, humanised antibodies, including any polypeptide which may comprise an immunoglobulin binding domain, whether natural or wholly or partially synthetic. Chimeric molecules which may comprise an immunoglobulin binding domain, or equivalent, fused to another polypeptide are therefore included. Cloning and expression of chimeric antibodies are described in EP-A-0120694 and EP-A-0125023. A humanised antibody may be a modified antibody having the variable regions of a non-human, e.g. murine, antibody and the constant region of a human antibody. Methods for making humanised antibodies are described in, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,225,539.
It has been shown that fragments of a whole antibody can perform the function of binding antigens. Examples of binding fragments are (i) the Fab fragment consisting of VL, VH, CL and CH1 domains; (ii) the Fd fragment consisting of the VH and CH1 domains; (iii) the Fv fragment consisting of the VL and VH domains of a single antibody; (iv) the dAb fragment (Ward, E. S. et al., Nature 341:544-546 (1989)) which consists of a VH domain; (v) isolated CDR regions; (vi) F(ab′)2 fragments, a bivalent fragment which may comprise two linked Fab fragments; (vii) single chain Fv molecules (scFv), wherein a VH domain and a VL domain are linked by a peptide linker which allows the two domains to associate to form an antigen binding site (Bird et al., Science 242:423-426 (1988); Huston et al., PNAS USA 85:5879-5883 (1988)); (viii) bispecific single chain Fv dimers (PCT/US92/09965) and (ix) “diabodies”, multivalent or multispecific fragments constructed by gene fusion (WO94/13804; P. Hollinger et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 6444-6448 (1993)). Diabodies are multimers of polypeptides, each polypeptide which may comprise a first domain which may comprise a binding region of an immunoglobulin light chain and a second domain which may comprise a binding region of an immunoglobulin heavy chain, the two domains being linked (e.g. by a peptide linker) but unable to associate with each other to form an antigen binding site: antigen binding sites are formed by the association of the first domain of one polypeptide within the multimer with the second domain of another polypeptide within the multimer (WO94/13804). Where bispecific antibodies are to be used, these may be conventional bispecific antibodies, which can be manufactured in a variety of ways (Hollinger & Winter, Current Opinion Biotechnol. 4:446-449 (1993)), e.g. prepared chemically or from hybrid hybridomas, or may be any of the bispecific antibody fragments mentioned above. It may be preferable to use scFv dimers or diabodies rather than whole antibodies. Diabodies and scFv can be constructed without an Fc region, using only variable domains, potentially reducing the effects of anti-idiotypic reaction. Other forms of bispecific antibodies include the single chain “Janusins” described in Traunecker et al., EMBO Journal 10:3655-3659 (1991). Bispecific diabodies, as opposed to bispecific whole antibodies, may also be useful because they can be readily constructed and expressed in E. coli. Diabodies (and many other polypeptides such as antibody fragments) of appropriate binding specificities can be readily selected using phage display (WO94/13804) from libraries. If one arm of the diabody is to be kept constant, for instance, with a specificity directed against antigen X, then a library can be made where the other arm is varied and an antibody of appropriate specificity selected. An “antigen binding domain” is the part of an antibody which may comprise the area which specifically binds to and is complementary to part or all of an antigen. Where an antigen is large, an antibody may only bind to a particular part of the antigen, which part is termed an epitope. An antigen binding domain may be provided by one or more antibody variable domains. An antigen binding domain may comprise an antibody light chain variable region (VL) and an antibody heavy chain variable region (VH).
Also encompassed within the present invention are binding peptides that bind to MHC presented peptides and are based on engineered protein scaffolds. Protein scaffolds are derived from stable, soluble, natural protein structures which have been modified to provide a binding site for a target molecule of interest. Examples of engineered protein scaffolds include, but are not limited to, affibodies, which are based on the Z-domain of staphylococcal protein A that provides a binding interface on two of its a-helices (Nygren, P. A. (2008). FEBS J 275(11): 2668-76); anticalins, derived from lipocalins, that incorporate binding sites for small ligands at the open end of a beta-barrel fold (Skerra, A. (2008) FEBS J 275(11): 2677-83), nanobodies, and DARPins. Engineered protein scaffolds are typically targeted to bind the same antigenic proteins as antibodies, and are potential therapeutic agents. They may act as inhibitors or antagonists, or as delivery vehicles to target molecules, such as toxins, to a specific tissue in vivo (Gebauer, M. and A. Skerra (2009). Curr Opin Chem Biol 13(3): 245-55). Short peptides may also be used to bind a target protein. Phylomers are natural structured peptides derived from bacterial genomes. Such peptides represent a diverse array of protein structural folds and can be used to inhibit/disrupt protein-protein interactions in vivo (Watt, P. M. (2006). Nat Biotechnol 24(2): 177-83)].
Although the present invention has been described with reference to predicting whether a binding peptide, which binds to a target peptide that is presented in the context of MHC, will cross react with another peptide in a subject in vivo, it is to be understood that the techniques described herein can be applied to any target peptide, regardless of whether it is presented in the context of MHC. Thus, binding peptide and target peptide may be any pair of molecules which have binding specificity for one another. Other examples of such pairs of molecules include hormone-hormone receptor, receptor-ligand, enzyme-substrate. With regard to the methods of the invention, as an example, the invention can be practiced with regard to any known antibody treatments. Examples of FDA-approved therapeutic monoclonal antibodies are set forth in the following table.
In this regard, mention is also made of bispecific antibodies with which the invention can also be practiced. Bispecific antibodies are a particular class of therapeutic antibodies that have yielded promising results in clinical trials, and in April 2009, the bispecific antibody catumaxomab was approved in the European Union.
The methods of the invention can be practiced with such binding peptides as these monoclonal and bispecific antibody treatments, and hence the skilled person readily knows the formulation and dose and means to administer if there is no cross reactivity detected using the instant invention, and from the dosages of these known binding peptides, can readily determine, using the herein disclosure and the knowledge in the art, the formulation, and dose and means to administer alternative binding peptides.
Preferred features of each aspect of the invention are as for each of the other aspects mutatis mutandis. The prior art documents mentioned herein are incorporated to the fullest extent permitted by law. The present invention will be further illustrated in the following Examples which are given for illustration purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention in any way; but rather, the Applicants reserve the right to both generalise from the Examples when claiming, and provide from the Examples specific claims.
Although the present invention and its advantages have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations can be made herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
The present invention will be further illustrated in the following Examples which are given for illustration purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention in any way.
The present invention will now be described with reference to the following non-limiting examples.
The target MHC presented peptide used in this example is derived from human cancer testis antigen MAGE A3 and has the following amino acid sequence; EVDPIGHLY. MAGE A3 peptide is presented on antigen presenting cells in the context of HLA-A*01.
The binding peptide used in this example may comprise a modified T cell receptor (TCR) which has been engineered to possess enhanced affinity for MAGE A3 peptide. Methods to produce affinity enhanced TCRs are known in the art (for example, phage display WO 03/020763). The native MAGE A3 TCR was obtained from a MAGE A3 T cell clone, as described in WO2012/013913. Two versions of the modified MAGE A3 TCR are used. A moderately affinity enhanced version, expressed by transduced T cells (termed a3a T cells) as described in WO2012/013913, and a high affinity version, produced as a soluble protein fused to a T cell activating anti-CD3 fragment (termed IMCmage1), according to the method of WO2010/133828.
1.1 Identification of the Binding Motif
Variants of the native MAGE A3 peptide were obtained in which each amino acid position was sequentially replaced with alanine, as shown below (in each case the alanine substitution is underlined). Peptides were obtained from Peptide Protein Research Limited, UK.
A V D P I G H L Y
The native and alanine-substituted peptides were pulsed on to antigen presenting cells, and interferon γ (IFNγ) production, as measured using the ELISpot assay, used as a read-out for T cell activation. Essential positions were defined by a greater than 50% reduction in T cell activity relative to the native peptide.
1.1a) Activation of a 3a T Cells by Alanine-Substituted Peptides
ELISpot assays were carried out according to the manufacturer's instructions (BD BioSciences). HLA-A1+ hepatocyte cells were used as target cells and pulsed with 10 μM of each peptide. Target cells were counted and plated at 50,000 cells per well in 50 μl assay buffer (10% FCS, 88% RPMI 1640, 1% glutamine and 1% penicillin/streptomycin). Effector T cells used in this method were a 1:1 mix of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells (obtained by negative selection (using the CD4 and CD8 Negative Isolation Kits, Dynal) from peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) obtained from a healthy donor). Cells were stimulated with anti CD3/CD28 coated beads (T cell expander, Invitrogen), transduced with lentivirus carrying the gene encoding a3a T cell receptor, and expanded in assay media containing 50 U/ml IL-2 until between 10 and 13 days post transduction. Effector T cells were plated at 15,000 cells per well. Plates were incubated overnight at 37° C./5% CO2 and quantified, after development, using an automated ELISpot reader (Immunospot Series 5 Analyzer, Cellular Technology Ltd.). Non-transduced PBLs from the same healthy donor were used as a negative control. All experiments were carried out in triplicate.
1.1b) Activation of IMCmage1 Redirected T Cells by Alanine-Substituted Peptides
ELISpot assays were carried out as described in section (1.1a), except effector cells were prepared from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) blood using standard procedures utilising Lymphoprep (Axis-Shields, cat #NYC-1114547) and Leucosep tubes (Greiner, cat #227290), and plated at 25,000 cells per well. IMCmage1 was added to a final concentration of 0.1 nM per well. Controls were carried out in the absence of IMCmage1 (effectors+targets+peptide); and in the absence of peptide-pulsed target cells (effectors+IMCmage1).
1.1c) Activation of IMCmage1 Redirected T Cells by Glycine-Substituted Peptides
The same procedure was followed as detailed in section (1.1b) except the HLA-A*01+hepatocyte target cells were pulsed with glycine-substituted peptides. MAGE A3 peptide contains one native glycine residue; in this case the native glycine was considered non-essential for the purposes of defining the motif.
1.2 Identification of Potential Off-Target Peptides
The ScanProsite tool (http://prosite.expasy.org/scanprosite) was used to search all UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot (release 2012_10 of 31 Oct. 12: 538259 entries) database sequences, for proteins which contain the motif identified above (entered as E-X-D-P-I-X-X-X-Y). No filters were used. Pattern options were set to allow at most 1 X sequence characters to match a conserved position in the pattern and the match mode was set to ‘greedy, overlaps, no includes’.
Five unique human proteins were identified: native MAGE A3, MAGE family members A6 and B18, the muscle protein Titin, and a protein known as Dos. The amino acid sequences of the motif-containing peptides are shown in the table below (residues which may comprise the motif are underlined).
E
D
P
I
Y
E
D
P
I
Y
E
D
P
I
Y
E
D
P
I
Y
E
D
P
I
Y
The search results also identified a number of motif-containing peptides from common human pathogens. Two peptides were selected from the list as examples for further testing; a nuclease protein present in three strains of Epstein Barr Virus (EBV), and a ribosomal maturation factor from Clostridium difficile, the amino acid sequences of these peptides are shown below.
C. difficile protein
1.3 Confirming Cross Reactivity of Off Target Peptides
Potential off target peptides, identified above, were tested for their ability to cross react with a3a T cells and IMCmage1 redirected T cells using an IFNγ ELISpot assay. 1.3a) Testing for activation of a3a T cells by HLA-A*01+hepatocyte cells pulsed with potential off-target peptides
All peptides were produced synthetically by Peptide Protein Research Limited, UK. Activation of a3a T cells was determined by IFNγ ELISpot assay using the same procedure as described in section 1.1a. HLA-A*01+hepatocyte cells were used as targets and pulsed with 10 μM of each peptide. T cells were prepared from peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) obtained from a healthy donor, and transduced with the a3a TCR. Non-transduced donor T cells were used as a negative control. T cell activation in response to cells pulsed with each of the motif-containing peptides was compared to activation by native MAGE A3 peptide pulsed cells.
1.3b) Testing for Activation of IMCmage1 Redirected T Cells by HLA-A*01+Hepatocyte Cells Pulsed with Potential Off Target Peptides
Peptide pulsed cells were prepared as described in 1.3a. Activation of IMCmage1 redirected T cells was determined by IFNγ ELISpot assay using the same procedure as described in section 1.1b.
The experiments described in 1.3a and 1.3b confirm that there are three off target peptides which are bound by a3a T cells and IMCmage1 redirected T cells; MAGE A6, MAGE B18, and Titin. Of the three only Titin is relevant in a clinical context. Normal tissue expression of MAGE family proteins is restricted to male germ-line cells, whereas Titin is expressed in cardiac and skeletal muscle (Uniprot Protein Knowledgebase (http://www.uniprot.org/uniprot)).
1.3c) Measuring Affinity to T Cell Activating Peptides
Affinity was determined by surface plasmon resonance using a BIAcore 3000 instrument and reported in terms of an equilibrium dissociation constant (KD). Soluble versions of the a3a and IMCmage1 TCRs were prepared using the method described in Boulter, et al., Protein Eng, 2003. 16: 707-711. Biotinylated specific and control pMHC monomers were prepared as described in Garboczi, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992. 89: 3429-3433 and O'Callaghan, et al., Anal Biochem 1999. 266: 9-15, and immobilized on to a streptavidin-coupled CM-5 sensor chip. All measurements were performed at 25° C. in PBS buffer (Sigma) supplemented with 0.005% Tween (Sigma) at a constant flow rate. To measure affinity, serial dilutions of the soluble TCRs were flowed over the immobilized pMHCs and the response values at equilibrium were determined for each concentration. Equilibrium dissociation constants (KD) were determined by plotting the specific equilibrium binding against protein concentration followed by a least squares fit to the Langmuir binding equation, assuming a 1:1 interaction.
The results summarised in the table below confirm Titin peptide binds to soluble versions of the TCRs used in a3a T cells and IMCmage1. The affinity (KD) is shown in the table below:
1.3d) Cytotoxicity of IMCmage1 Redirected T Cells to HLA-A*01+Hepatocyte Cells Pulsed with Titin Peptide
Killing assays were carried out using the IncuCyte FLR-Platform (Essen Biosciences). Flat bottomed 96 well plates were used for assay. The assay medium was RPMI (w/o phenol red+10% FCS+1% Pen/strep+1% Glu). HLA-A*01+hepatocyte cells were plated at 10,000 cells per well and incubated overnight to allow them to adhere. Peptides were made up at 10 μM final concentration and added at 25 μl (60 μM) per well. Effector T cells (prepared as described in 1.1b) were thawed from liquid N2, counted and plated at 100,000/well. IMCmage1 was added to a final concentration of 1 nM. Control measurements were carried out in the absence of IMCmage1 (effectors+targets). Images were taken every 2 h, over a three day period, and the number of apoptotic cells per mm2 was quantified using the CellPlayer 96-well Kinetic Caspase 3/7 reagent and the IncuCyte FLR-Platform. The reagent is cleaved by activated Caspase 3/7 upon target cell apoptosis resulting in the release of the dye and green fluorescent staining of nuclear DNA.
1.3e) Activation of a 3a T Cells by Cells Naturally Presenting Titin Peptide
iCell cardiomyocytes were obtained from Cellular Dynamics International. iCell cardiomyocytes are highly purified human cardiomyocytes derived from induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells and are electrically active with typical mechanical characteristics of cardiac tissue. These cells are positive for Titin and negative for MAGE A3 as determined by standard RT-PCR methods.
iCell cardiomyocytes were revived from liquid nitrogen and plated at 50,000 cells per well four days prior to the assay and treated as per the manufacturer's instructions. The iCell cardiomyocytes were virally transduced with HLA-A*01. EJM and colo205 (positive and negative controls respectively) were plated at 50,000 cells per well on the day of assay. iCell cardiomyocytes were washed once with R10 (RPMI+10% FCS+1% Pen/strep+1% Glu) and then incubated in R10 for the assay. a3a transduced T cells and corresponding non-transduced cells were taken from culture and plated at 50,000 cells per well. The cells were cultured for 24 h and then centrifuged at 800×g for 4 min, 100 ul of supernatant was then removed and placed in a clean plate. The plates were stored at −70° C. until thawing and developing to measure multiple cytokine release (IFNγ, GM-CSF and MIP-1β) by Luminex (25-plex kit), in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.
1.3f) Killing of Cells Naturally Presenting Tin Peptide by a3a T Cells
Phase contrast images were obtained after 24 h on the IncuCyte FLR-Platform (Essen Biosciences), using the same experimental set-up as that described above (1.3e).
The following experiments show how the methods currently available in art do not, or would not, identify Titin as an off target peptide. These methods were not able to predict unwanted side effects when a3a T cells were administered to patients (manuscript in preparation).
a) Similarity Search
The RefSeq database was searched for human peptides with a similar sequence to MAGE A3, using protein BLAST (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool) version 2.227 (Altschul, et al, Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 25:3389-3402, http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?CMD=Web&PAGE_TYPE=BlastHome). Algorithm parameters were adjusted automatically for a short protein. (General parameters; expect threshold=200000, word size=2: Scoring parameters; matrix=PAM30, gap costs=existence 9 extension 1; no compositional adjustments.)
The BLAST search returned over 100 hits, including MAGE A3, MAGE A6, and MAGE B18, but not Titin. 15 sequences were selected for testing using peptide pulsed targets (HLA-A*01+hepatocyte cells) and IFNγ ELISpot assays as described in Example 1 (section 1.1a and 1.1b). The peptide sequences are detailed in
b) Primary Cell Screening
HLA-A*01+human cells from various tissues were screened for their ability to induce activation of a3a T cells and IMCmage1 redirected T cells. T cell activation was assessed by IFNγ release using an ELISpot assay as described in Example 1 (section 1.1a and 1.1b). Multiple lots were used for most primary cell types. Cells were grown in 2D culture.
Results showed no obvious reactivity for IMCmage1 and a3a transduced T cells. Since expression of MAGE family proteins is restricted to male germ line cells, cross reactivity with MAGE A6 and MAGE B18 is not detected. However, despite Titin being expressed in cardiac and skeletal muscle, this experiment failed to detect cross reactivity with skeletal and muscle cells. Since titin expression is known to be upregulated in differentiated tissue (Van der Loop, et al. (1996). J Muscle Res Cell Motil. 17:23-36), detecting cross reactivity required more specialised cell cultures (such as the iCells shown above).
c) Would a Mouse Model have Identified Off-Target Toxicity?
Sequence alignment of the full length human Titin protein with the mouse Titin protein was carried out using the align function on the Uniprot knowledgebase (http://www.uniprot.org/align) The equivalent mouse Titin peptide has the following sequence:
Activation of a3a T cells was assessed using HLA-A*01+hepatocyte cells pulsed with MAGE A3, human Titin or mouse Titin peptides. T cell activation was determined by IFNγ ELISpot assay as described above. Synthetic peptides were obtained from Peptide Protein Research Limited, UK.
The target MHC-presented peptide used in this example is derived from human cancer testis antigen NY-ESO-1 and has the following amino acid sequence; SLLMWITQC. NY-ESO-1 peptide is presented on antigen presenting cells in the context of HLA-A*02.
The binding peptide used in this example may comprise a modified T cell receptor (TCR) fusion protein which has been engineered to possess enhanced affinity for NY-ESO-1 peptide, and is termed ImmTAC-NYESO in this example. Production of such fusion proteins is described in McCormack et aL, 2013, Cancer Immunol Immunother, 62 (4):773-85 and Liddy et al, 2012, Nat Med, 8:980-987.
2.1 Identification of the Binding Motif by Substitution with Alanine
Variants of the native NY-ESO-1 peptide were obtained in which each amino acid position was sequentially replaced with alanine, as shown below (in each case the alanine substitution is underlined). Peptides were obtained from Peptide Protein Research Limited, UK.
A L L M W I T Q C
The native and alanine-substituted peptides were pulsed on to antigen presenting cells, and interferon γ (IFNγ) production, as measured using the ELISpot assay, used as a read-out for T cell activation. Essential positions were defined by a greater than 50% reduction in T cell activity relative to the native peptide.
ELISpot assays were carried as described in Example 1 section 1.1b except that HLA-A2+T2 cells were used as target cells and effector PBMCs were plated at 40,000 cells per well. ImmTAC-NYESO was added to a final concentration of 0.1 nM per well.
2.2 Identification of Potential Off-Target Peptides
The ScanProsite tool (http://prosite.expasy.org.scanprosite) was used to search the UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot database (release date 13 Nov. 2013) for proteins which contain the motif identified above (entered as X L X M W I T Q X). The search was limited to human sequences.
Two unique human proteins were identified, NY-ESO-1 (accession no: P78358) and LAGE-lA (accession no: 075638-2) an alternative cancer testis antigen possessing the same 9 amino acid sequence as the NY-ESO-1 peptide. TCRs that bind to the NY-ESO-1 peptide are known to recognise cancer cells expressing LAGE-A1 (McCormack et al, 2013, Cancer Immunol Immunother, 62 (4):773-85).
2.3 Identification of the Binding Motif by Substitution with all Alternative Amino Acids
Variants of the native NY-ESO peptide were obtained in which the amino acid residue at each position was sequentially replaced with all 19 alternative naturally-occurring amino acids, such that 171 peptides were prepared in total. The native and amino-acid substituted peptides were pulsed on to antigen presenting cells, and interferon γ (IFNγ) production, as measured using the ELISpot assay, used as a read-out for T cell activation. Essential positions were defined by a greater than 50% reduction in T cell activity relative to the native peptide.
ELISpot assays were carried as described in section 2.1a.
The tolerated residues at each position of the peptide are shown below. For each position the first tolerated residue shown corresponds to the native (WT) residue at that position.
2.4 Identification of Potential Off-Target Peptides
The ScanProsite tool was used as described in section 2.2, to search for proteins containing the tolerated residues at the indicated positions (entered as [SVTYMFAGHNQKPRWLI]-[LI]-[LVAMICQNH]-[MQVTN]-W-[ITLMS]-[TSD]-[QG]-[CLVMSTGAI])
Two unique proteins were found (exincluding NY-ESO and LAGE A1).
Peptides from Plexin-D1 and protein 5B1 are tested in vitro as described in Example 1.3, to confirm recognition by ImmTAC-NYESO. The potential of these off-target peptides to cause unwanted side effects in vivo is determined by, for example, reference to literature sources detailing expression of Plexin-D1 and protein 5B1 in normal tissue. Where expression in normal tissue is widespread, or in critical tissues, binding of ImmTAC-NYESO may additionally be confirmed in vitro using cells which express the off target peptide.
a) Similarity Search
A similarity search was performed on the WT sequence of the NY-ESO-1 peptide using the BLAST tool as described in Comparative Example 1a. The top 100 hits did not return either of the two motif containing peptides identified above.
b) Comparison with Peptides from Homologous Proteins in Mouse
Sequence alignment of the full length human Plexin D1 and 5B1 proteins with the homologous protein from mouse (accession no: NP_080652.2 and NP_083677.1, respectively) was carried out using the align function on the Uniprot knowledgebase (http://www.uniprot.org/align). Comparison of the respective peptide sequences is shown below:
Neither of the mouse peptides contains the motif identified in section 2.3, therefore a mouse model may not identify potential cross reactivity.
The invention is further described by the following numbered paragraphs:
Having thus described in detail preferred embodiments of the present invention, it is to be understood that the invention defined by the above paragraphs is not to be limited to particular details set forth in the above description as many apparent variations thereof are possible without departing from the spirit or scope of the present invention.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1223172 | Dec 2012 | GB | national |
This application is a continuation of co-pending U.S. application Ser. No. 14/741,828, filed Jun. 17, 2015, which is a continuation-in-part application of international patent application Serial No. PCT/GB2013/053320 filed 17 Dec. 2013, which published as PCT Publication No. WO 2014/096803 on 26 Jun. 2014, which claims benefit of GB patent application Serial No. 1223172.6 filed 21 Dec. 2012. The foregoing applications, and all documents cited therein or during their prosecution (“appln cited documents”) and all documents cited or referenced in the appln cited documents, and all documents cited or referenced herein (“herein cited documents”), and all documents cited or referenced in herein cited documents, together with any manufacturer's instructions, descriptions, product specifications, and product sheets for any products mentioned herein or in any document incorporated by reference herein, are hereby incorporated herein by reference, and may be employed in the practice of the invention. More specifically, all referenced documents are incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual document was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5225539 | Winter | Jul 1993 | A |
| 6982086 | Haynes et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 11017882 | Cameron | May 2021 | B2 |
| 20150191524 | Smith | Jul 2015 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0120694 | Oct 1983 | EP |
| 0125023 | Nov 1984 | EP |
| 0184187 | Jun 1986 | EP |
| 0239400 | Sep 1987 | EP |
| 2188638 | Oct 1987 | GB |
| WO 199311161 | Jun 1993 | WO |
| WO 199413804 | Jun 1994 | WO |
| WO 199960120 | Nov 1999 | WO |
| WO 2003020763 | Mar 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004033685 | Apr 2004 | WO |
| WO 2010133828 | Nov 2010 | WO |
| WO 2011161127 | Dec 2011 | WO |
| WO 2012013913 | Feb 2012 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Elsawa et al (Expert Review of Vaccines 3:563-575). (Year: 2004). |
| Altschul, et al. “Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs” Nucleic Acids Research 25(17):3389-3402, Jul. 1997. |
| Amos, et al. “Autoimmunity associated with immunotherapy of cancer” Blood 118(3):499-509, Jul. 2011. |
| Audehm, S. et al., “Key Features Relevant to Select Antigens and TCR From the MHC-Mismatched Repertoire to Trea Cancer”, Frontiers in Immunology, 2019, 10:1-16 and Supplementary Material, 1-11. |
| Baeuerle, et al. “BITE: Teaching antibodies to engage T-cells for cancer therapy” Current Opinion in Molecular Therapeutics 11(1):22-30, 2009. |
| Bijen, H.M. et al., “Preclinical Strategies to Identify Off-Target Toxicity of High-Affinity TCRs”, Molecular Therapy, 2018 6(5):1206-1214. |
| Bird, et al. “Single-Chain Antigen-Binding Proteins” Science 242:423-426, Oct. 1988. |
| Braese, S. “Combinatorial Chemistry on Solid Support: Multiple Peptide Synthesis to Identify Bioactive Hormone Structures”, 2007, 2.2.1 Alanine Scan Studies and Single Amino Acid Replacements, p. 253. |
| Brawley and Concannon, “Systematic Mutagenesis of TCR Complementarity-Determining Region 3 Residues: A Single Conservative Substitution Dramatically Improves Response to Both Multiple LHA-DR Alleles and Peptide Variants”, 2012, J Immunol, 163:4946-4952. |
| Cameron, et al. “Immunotherapy Identification of a Titin-Derived HLA-A1-Presented Peptide as a Cross-Reactive Target for Engineered MAGE A3-Directed T Cells” Science Translation Medicine 5:197-200, Aug. 2013. |
| Chinnasamy, et al., “A TCR Targeting the HLA-A*0201-Restricted Epitope of MAGE-A3 Recognizes Multiple Epitopes of the MAGE-A Antigen Superfamily in Several Types of Cancer” The Journal of Immunology 186 (2):685-696, Jan. 2011. |
| Dahan, et al. “T-cell-receptor-like antibodies—generation, function and applications” Expert Reviews in Molecular Medicine 14:e6, Feb. 2012. |
| Daniel-Meshulam, et al. “How {specific) would you like your T-cells today? Generating T-cell therapeutic function through TCR-gene transfer” Frontiers in Immunology 3(186):1-13, Jul. 2012. |
| De Castro, et al. “ScanProsite: detection of PROSITE signature matches and ProRule-associated functional and structural residues in proteins” Nucleic Acids Research 34(Web Server Issue):W362-W365, Mar. 2006. |
| Frankild, et al. “Amino Acid Similarity Accounts for T Cell Cross-Reactivity and for “Holes” in the T Cell Repertoire” PLoS One 3(3):e1831, Mar. 2008. |
| Garboczi, et al. “HLA-A2-peptide complexes: Refolding and crystallization of molecules expressed in Escherichia coli and complexed with single antigenic peptides” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 89(8):3429-3433, Apr. 1992. |
| Gebauer, et al. “Engineered protein scaffolds as next-generation antibody therapeutics” Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 13:245-255, 2009. |
| Grogan, J.L. et al., “Cross-Reactivity of Myelin Basic Protein-Specific T Cells with Multiple Microbial Peptides: Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis Induction in TCR Transgenic Mice”, Journal of Immunology, 1999, 63:3764-3770. |
| Hard, RL. et al., “HDAC6 and Ubp-M BUZ Domains Recognize Specific C-Terminal Sequences of Proteins”, Biochemistry, 2010, 49(50):10737-10746. |
| Hausmann, et al. “Peptide Recognition by Two HLA-A2/Tax{11-19)-Specific T Cell Clones in Relationship to their MHC/Peptide/TCR Crystal Structures” The Journal of Immunology 162:5389-5397, 1997. |
| Hemmer, et al. “Contribution of Individual Amino Acids within MHC Molecule or Antigenic Peptide to TCR Ligand Potency” The Journal of Immunology 164(2):861-871, Jan. 2000. |
| Holliger, et al. ““Diabodies”: Small bivalent and bispecific antibody fragments” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 90(14):6444-6448, Jul. 1993. |
| Holliger, et al. “Engineering bispecific antibodies” Current Opinion in Biotechnology 4(4):446-449, Aug. 1993. |
| Hudson et al., “Multiplex epitope mapping using bacterial surface display reveals both linear and conformational epitopes”, Sci Rep, 2012, 2, 706. |
| Huston, et al. “Protein engineering of antibody binding sites: Recovery of specific activity in an anti-digoxin single-chain Fv analogue producted in Escherichia coli” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 85(16):5879-5883, Aug. 1988. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/GB2013/053320, dated Apr. 10, 2014. |
| Kinnunen, T. et al., “The Immunodominant Epitope of Lipocalin Allergen Bos D 2 is Suboptimal for Human T Cells”, Eur J Immunol, 2003, 33:1717-1726. |
| Kita et al., “Analysis of TCR Antagonism and Molecular Mimicry of HLA-A*0201-Restricted CTL Epitope in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis”, Hepatology, 2002, 36(4 pt 1), pp. 918-926. |
| Kosmopoulou, et al. “T-cell epitopes of the La/SSB autoantigen: Prediction based on the homology modeling of HLA-DQ2/DQ7 with the insulin-B peptide/HLA-DQ8 complex” Journal of Computational Chemistry 27(9):1033-1044, Jul. 2006. |
| Lee et al., “T Cell Cross-Reactivity and Conformational Changes during TCR Engagement,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 200, Issue 11 Dec. 6, 2004, pp. 1455-1466. |
| Levitsky, V. et al., “The Clonal Composition of a Peptide-Specific Oligoclonal CTL Repertoire Selected in Response to Persistent EBV Infection Is Stable Over Time”, J Exp Med, 1998, 161:594-601. |
| Liddy, et al. “Monoclonal TCR-redirected tumor cell killing” Nature Medicine 18(6):980-988, Jun. 2012. |
| Linnemann, et al., “Mimotopes for tumor-specific T lymphocytes in human cancer determined with combinational peptide libraries,” Eur. J. Immunol., 31:156-65) (Year: 2001). |
| Linnemann, et al., “T-Cell Receptor Gene Therapy: Critical Parameters for Clinical Success” Journal of Investigative Dermatology 131:1806-1816, Jun. 2011. |
| MacDonald, I.K. et al., “MCH Class | Bound to an Immunodominant Theileria parva Epitope Demonstrates Unconventional Presentation to T Cell Receptors”, 2010, PLoS Pathog, 6(10):e10O1149. |
| Maier B. et al., “Multipe Cross-Reactive Self-Ligands For Borrelia Burgdorferi-Specific HLA-DR4-Restricted T Cells”, Eur J Immunol, 2000, 30:448-457. |
| McCormack et al. “Bi-specific TCR-anti CD3 redirected T-cell targeting of NY-ESO-1- and LAGE-1-postive tumors” Cancer Immunology Immunotherapy 62(4):773-785, 2013. |
| Mishra, et al. “Immunoinformatics and modeling perspective of T cell epitope-based cancer immunotherapy: a holistic picture” Journal of Biomolecular Structure & Dynamics 27(3):293-306, Dec. 2009. |
| Nilges et al., “Human Papillomavirus Type 16 E7 Peptide-Directed CD8+ T Cells from Patients with Cervical Cancer Are Cross-Reactive with the Coronavirus NS2 Protein,” Journal of Virology, May 2003, 77 (9), pp. 5464-5474. |
| Nygren, et al. “Alternative binding proteins: Affibody binding proteins developed from a small three-helix bundle scaffold” FEBS Journal 275(11):2668-2676, 2008. |
| Obenaus, M. et al., “Identification of Human T-Cell Receptors With Optimal Affinity to Cancer Antigens Using Antigen-Negative Humanized Mice”, Nature Biotechnology, 2015, 33(4):402-409 and Supplementary Material, 1-12. |
| O'Callaghan, et al. “BirA Enzyme: Production and Application in the Study of Membrane Receptor-Ligand Interactions by Site-Specific Biotinylation” Analytical Biochemistry 266(1):9-15, Jan. 1999. |
| Petrova, G. et al., “Cross-Reactivity of T Cells and Its Role in the Immune System”, 2012, Grit Rev Immunol., 32 4):349-372. |
| Rammensee, H. et al., “SYFPEITHI: database for MHC ligands and peptide motifs”, Immunogenetics, 1999, 00:213-219. |
| Restifo, et al. “Adoptive immunotherapy for cancer: harnessing the T cell response” Nature Reviews Immunology 12(4):269-281, Apr. 2012. |
| Sergeeva, et al. “An anti-PR1/HLA-A2 T-cell receptor-like antibody mediates complement-dependent cytotoxicity against acute myeloid leukemia progenitor cells” Blood 117(16):4262-4272, Apr. 2011. |
| Sethi, D.K. et al., “A Highly Tilted Binding Mode By a Self-Reactive T Cell Receptor Results in Altered Engagement of Peptide and MHC”, J Exp Med, 2011, 208(1):91-102. |
| Sidney, J. et al., “Quantitative peptide binding motifs for 19 human and mouse MHC class I molecules derived using positional scanning combinatorial peptide libraries”, Immunome Research, 2008, 4:2. |
| Skerra, “Alternative binding proteins: Anticalins—harnessing the structural plasticity of the lipocalin ligand pocket to engineer novel binding activities” FEBS Journal 275(11):2677-2683, 2008. |
| Stone, J.D. and Kranz, D.M., “Role of T Cell Receptor Affinity in the Efficacy and Specificity of Adoptive T Cell Irherapies”, Front. Immunol., 2013, 4(244):1-16. |
| Third Party Observation dated Dec. 5, 2017 in related European Patenet Application No. 13811256, publication No. EP2936158. |
| Traunecker, et al. “Bispecific single chain molecules (Janusins) target cytotoxic lymphocytes on HIV infected cells” The EMBO Journal 10(12):3655-3659, 1991. |
| Udyavar, et al. “Subtle Affinity-Enhancing Mutations in a Myelin Oligodendrocyte Glycoprotein-Specific TCR Alter Specificity and Generate New Self-Reactivity” The Journal Of Immunology 182(7):4439-4447, Apr. 2009. |
| Uemura, Y. et al., “Systematic Analysis of the Combinatorial Nature of Epitopes Recognized by TCR Leads to dentification of Mimicry Epitopes for Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase 65-Specific TCRs”, J Immunol, 2003, 170:947-960. |
| Van Der Loop, et al. “Titin expression as an early indication of heart and skeletal muscle differentiation in vitro. Developmental re-organisation in relation to cytoskeletal constituents” Journal of Muscle Research and Cell Motility 17 (1):23-36, 1996. |
| Ward, et al. “Binding activities of a repertoire of single immunoglobulin variable domains secreted from Escherichia coli” Nature 341(6242):544-546, Oct. 1989. |
| Watt, “Screening for peptide drugs from the natural repertoire of biodiverse protein folds” Nature Biotechnology 24 (2):177-183, Feb. 2006. |
| Weiss et al., “Rapid Mapping of Protein Functional Epitopes by Combinatorial Alanine Scanning”, PNAS, 2000, 97 16), pp. 8950-8954. |
| Wells, “Systematic Mutational Analyses of Protein-Protein Interfaces” Methods in Enzymology 202:390-411, 1991. |
| Woolridge, L. et al., “A Single Autoimmune T Cell Receptor Recognizes More Than a Million Different Peptides”, The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2012, 287(2):1168-1177. |
| Glusman et al., “Comparative Genomics of the Human and Mouse T Cell Receptor Loci,” Immunity, vol. 15, Issue 3, Sep. 2001, pp. 337-349. |
| Margulies et al., “Studying interactions involving the T-cell antigen receptor by surface plasmon resonance,” Current Opinion in Immunology, vol. 8, Issue 2, Apr. 1996, pp. 262-270. |
| Matsui et al., “Kinetics of T-cell receptor binding to peptide/I-Ek complexes: correlation of the dissociation rate with T-cell responsiveness,” PNAS, Dec. 20, 1994, vol. 91 (26), pp. 12862-12866. |
| Piepenbrink et al., “Chapter 15—Methods for Quantifying T cell Receptor Binding Affinities and Thermodynamics,” Methods in Enzymology, vol. 466, 2009, pp. 359-381. |
| Preliminary opinion in European patent application No. 13811256.0, dated Jun. 26, 2020, twenty-two pages. |
| Response on the summons to oral proceedings in opposition proceedings of EP 2936158 (European patent application 13811256.0), Jan. 26, 2021, twenty-two pages. |
| Third party observations proceedings in proceedings of EP 3373013 (European patent application 18162980.9), Feb. 3, 2021, twenty-five pages. |
| Wikipedia, In vitro, retrieved online Jan. 2, 2021 from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=In vitro&oldid=991819389, six pages. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20210241854 A1 | Aug 2021 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14741828 | Jun 2015 | US |
| Child | 17158940 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | PCT/GB2013/053320 | Dec 2013 | US |
| Child | 14741828 | US |
