Two physics-based models for pH-dependent calculations of protein solubility.

When engineering a protein for its biological function, many physicochemical properties are also optimized throughout the engineering process, and the protein's solubility is among the most important properties to consider. Here, we report two novel computational methods to calculate the pH-dependent protein solubility, and to rank the solubility of mutants. The first is an empirical method developed for fast ranking of the solubility of a large number of mutants of a protein. It takes into account electrostatic solvation energy term calculated using Generalized Born approximation, hydrophobic patches, protein charge, and charge asymmetry, as well as the changes of protein stability upon mutation. This method has been tested on over 100 mutations for 17 globular proteins, as well as on 44 variants of five different antibodies. The prediction rate is over 80%. The antibody tests showed a Pearson correlation coefficient, R, with experimental data from .83 to .91. The second method is based on a novel, completely force-field-based approach using CHARMm program modules to calculate the binding energy of the protein to a part of the crystal lattice, generated from X-ray structure. The method predicted with very high accuracy the solubility of Ribonuclease SA and its 3K and 5K mutants as a function of pH without any parameter adjustments of the existing BIOVIA Discovery Studio binding affinity model. Our methods can be used for rapid screening of large numbers of design candidates based on solubility, and to guide the design of solution conditions for antibody formulation.

Fully automated antibody structure prediction using BIOVIA tools: Validation study.

We describe the methodology and results from our validation study of the fully automated antibody structure prediction tool available in the BIOVIA (formerly Accelrys) protein modeling suite. Extending our previous study, we have validated the automated approach using a larger and more diverse data set (157 unique antibody Fv domains versus 11 in the previous study). In the current study, we explore the effect of varying several parameter settings in order to better understand their influence on the resulting model quality. Specifically, we investigated the dependence on different methods of framework model construction, antibody numbering schemes (Chothia, IMGT, Honegger and Kabat), the influence of compatibility of loop templates using canonical type filtering, wider exploration of model solution space, and others. Our results show that our recently introduced Top5 framework modeling method results in a small but significant improvement in model quality whereas the effect of other parameters is not significant. Our analysis provides improved guidelines of best practices for using our protocol to build antibody structures. We also identify some limitations of the current computational model which will enhance proper evaluation of model quality by users and suggests possible future enhancements.