AQP4 Recombinant Monoclonal Antibody

Shipped with Ice Packs
In Stock

Description

Definition and Structure

AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies are laboratory-produced immunoglobulins derived from clonally expanded plasma cells or engineered using mutagenesis. Key features include:

  • Target Specificity: High-affinity binding to extracellular AQP4 epitopes.

  • Engineering: Fc-region mutations (e.g., L234A/L235A) to neutralize complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC).

  • Affinity Optimization: Mutagenesis in complementary determining regions (CDRs) enhances binding affinity (e.g., Kd ~0.12 nM for affinity-matured AQmab AM) .

Mechanism of Action

These antibodies act via competitive inhibition of pathogenic AQP4-IgG:

MechanismEffect
Blocking AQP4-IgG BindingPrevents AQP4-IgG from binding to astrocytic AQP4, reducing CDC/ADCC .
OAP DisruptionTargets AQP4 orthogonal arrays (OAPs), destabilizing pathogenic autoantibody binding sites .
Complement NeutralizationMutated Fc regions avoid C1q recruitment, halting complement cascade .

Preclinical Studies

  • Cell Culture Models:

    • AQP4-expressing CHO cells showed >90% reduction in CDC/ADCC when treated with AQmab AM (IC50: 40–80 ng/ml) .

    • Blocking antibodies reduced cytotoxicity in spinal cord slice models by displacing pathogenic antibodies .

  • In Vivo Efficacy:

    • Mouse models demonstrated reduced NMO-like lesion formation and neuroinflammation .

Clinical Trials

  • A meta-analysis of 7 randomized trials (775 patients) showed monoclonal antibodies reduced relapse risk (RR 0.33, P<0.00001) and disability progression (EDSS score: -0.19, P=0.002) .

ParameterOutcomeSource
Relapse Risk Reduction67% (RR 0.33)
Annualized Relapse Rate-0.28 (95% CI: -0.35 to -0.20)
CDC Inhibition (EC50)82 ng/ml (AQmab AM without Fc mutations)

Applications in NMOSD Therapy

AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies offer a non-immunosuppressive approach:

  • Targeted Blockade: Competes with polyclonal AQP4-IgG in patient sera, preventing astrocyte injury .

  • Superiority Over Broad Therapies:

    • Eculizumab (anti-C5) showed greater relapse risk reduction (RR 0.07) in AQP4-IgG+ patients .

    • Aquaporumab’s specificity avoids systemic immunosuppression risks .

Development and Production

  • Cloning: AQP4 antibody genes are inserted into expression vectors (e.g., HEK293 cells) .

  • Purification: Affinity chromatography ensures high specificity (e.g., CSB-RA548145A0HU antibody for IHC/ELISA) .

  • Cost: Commercial variants retail at ~$210 per unit .

Challenges and Future Directions

  • Blood-Brain Barrier Penetration: Limited CNS delivery necessitates improved formulations .

  • Epitope Diversity: Polyclonal AQP4-IgG in sera requires broad-spectrum blockers .

  • Clinical Validation: Phase III trials are needed to confirm long-term safety and efficacy .

Comparison with Other NMOSD Therapies

TherapyTargetRelapse Risk ReductionMechanistic Limitation
AQP4 Recombinant mAbAQP467%Limited CNS penetration
EculizumabComplement C593%Risk of meningococcal infections
SatralizumabIL-6 Receptor55%Broad immunosuppression

Q&A

What is AQP4 and why are recombinant monoclonal antibodies against it important for research?

AQP4 (Aquaporin-4) is a water channel protein predominantly expressed on astrocytes in the central nervous system. It plays critical roles in water homeostasis and has been identified as the primary autoantigen in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), an inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the CNS .

Recombinant monoclonal antibodies against AQP4 are critical research tools that allow precise characterization of AQP4 biology and NMOSD pathogenesis. Unlike polyclonal antibodies from patient sera, recombinant monoclonal antibodies offer consistent specificity, affinity, and reproducibility in experimental settings. These antibodies can be engineered with specific properties to study binding mechanisms, epitope recognition, and pathogenic effects, advancing our understanding of how AQP4-IgG contributes to disease .

How do researchers distinguish between pathogenic and non-pathogenic AQP4 antibodies in experimental systems?

Distinguishing between pathogenic and non-pathogenic AQP4 antibodies requires functional assays that measure specific biological effects. The most common method is complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) testing, where antibodies are incubated with AQP4-expressing cells in the presence of complement. Pathogenic antibodies will activate the complement cascade, leading to cell lysis that can be quantified through various cytotoxicity assays .

Another critical difference is the ability to bind to orthogonal arrays of particles (OAPs). Research has shown that pathogenic AQP4-IgG preferentially binds to M23-AQP4, which forms OAPs, compared to M1-AQP4, which does not . Researchers should also assess:

  • Binding affinity using quantitative methods such as fluorescence ratio imaging

  • Ability to trigger internalization of AQP4

  • Fc-dependent effector functions

  • In vitro astrocyte damage capacity

What controls should be included when using AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies in experimental protocols?

When designing experiments with AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies, researchers should include multiple controls to ensure valid interpretation of results:

  • Isotype controls: Matched isotype antibodies (typically IgG1 for AQP4 antibodies) with irrelevant specificity to control for non-specific binding

  • Cell line controls: Both AQP4-expressing and AQP4-negative cell lines to demonstrate specificity

  • Isoform controls: When studying binding properties, both M1 and M23-AQP4 expressing cells should be tested as binding characteristics differ significantly between these isoforms

  • Concentration gradients: Multiple antibody concentrations should be tested to establish dose-dependent effects

  • Complement controls: In CDC assays, heat-inactivated complement serves as a negative control

  • Reference antibodies: Well-characterized commercial or published AQP4 antibodies with known properties

These controls allow researchers to distinguish specific from non-specific effects and provide necessary context for interpreting experimental findings.

What are the optimal methods for quantifying AQP4 antibody binding and affinity?

Several methodologies have been developed to quantify AQP4 antibody binding with high precision:

Fluorescence ratio imaging assay: This technique allows measurement of concentration-dependent binding to both M1-AQP4 and M23-AQP4 separately. Cells expressing AQP4 isoforms are stained with AQP4-IgG and a C-terminus anti-AQP4 antibody to create a quantitative fluorescence ratio . This method has revealed that the affinity of tight-binding AQP4-IgG can reach approximately 15-44 nM .

Surface plasmon resonance (SPR): Provides real-time, label-free measurement of binding kinetics (kon and koff) and equilibrium dissociation constants (KD).

Cell-based flow cytometry: Allows quantification of antibody binding to cell-surface AQP4 and can be adapted to measure internalization kinetics.

For the most comprehensive characterization, researchers should measure:

  • Relative binding to M1 vs. M23-AQP4

  • Absolute binding affinities

  • Epitope specificity through competition assays

  • Temperature and pH dependence of binding

How do AQP4 isoforms affect experimental outcomes when testing AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies?

AQP4 exists in two major isoforms, M1 and M23, which dramatically influence experimental outcomes with anti-AQP4 antibodies. Key differences include:

ParameterM1-AQP4M23-AQP4Research Implications
Cellular patternSmooth, diffusePunctateVisual distinction in immunofluorescence
OAP formationDoes not form OAPsForms OAPsAffects antibody binding avidity
Antibody bindingVariable, often weakerTypically strongerM23 provides higher sensitivity for detection
Electrophoresis patternSingle band (tetramer)Multiple higher-order bandsDistinguishable by native gel analysis
CDC susceptibilityGenerally resistantSusceptibleCritical for pathogenicity studies

The differential binding of AQP4-IgG to M1 vs. M23-AQP4 varies widely among antibody clones, with some showing similar binding to both isoforms while others bind exclusively to M23-AQP4 . This variation has significant implications for experimental design and interpretation.

Researchers must specify which isoform(s) they are using and consider how this choice affects their results, particularly when studying complement-dependent cytotoxicity, as cells expressing M1-AQP4 may be resistant to CDC caused by AQP4-IgG .

What methodologies are most effective for profiling AQP4-IgG antibody repertoires in patient samples?

Recent advances have enabled comprehensive profiling of AQP4-IgG repertoires in patient samples through combined analytical approaches:

High-throughput sequencing coupled with quantitative immunoproteomics allows simultaneous determination of both B-cell receptor (BCR) and serologic (IgG) anti-AQP4 antibody repertoires in peripheral blood of NMOSD patients . This integrated approach provides several advantages:

  • Identification of distinct AQP4-IgG lineages circulating in patients

  • Quantification of relative abundance of different antibody clones

  • Characterization of repertoire polarization (polyclonal vs. pauciclonal)

  • Correlation of specific antibody clones with functional properties

  • Monitoring of repertoire changes over time or in response to treatment

Research has revealed that patient AQP4-IgG repertoires can vary dramatically in their composition, with some patients exhibiting highly polarized (pauciclonal) repertoires while others show more diverse polyclonal distributions . The functional characterization of identified monoclonal antibodies demonstrated that most (3 out of 4 in one study) induced complement-dependent cytotoxicity .

How can researchers evaluate the complement-activating potential of AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies?

Complement activation is a key pathogenic mechanism in NMOSD, making it essential to evaluate the complement-activating potential of AQP4 antibodies. The most effective methodological approach involves:

  • Cell-based CDC assays: AQP4-expressing cells (preferably M23-AQP4) are incubated with the antibody of interest at various concentrations in the presence of human complement. Cell death is then quantified using viability markers such as calcein-AM or propidium iodide . This provides a direct measure of the antibody's pathogenic potential.

  • C1q binding assays: As the first step in classical complement activation involves binding of C1q to antibody Fc regions, researchers can use labeled C1q to quantify binding to AQP4-antibody complexes on cell surfaces.

  • C3d/C5b-9 deposition: Immunofluorescence detection of complement components on AQP4-expressing cells can demonstrate progression through the complement cascade.

The mechanism of complement activation by AQP4-IgG appears to rely on multivalent binding of C1q to Fc regions of clustered AQP4-IgG bound to OAP-assembled AQP4 . This explains why M23-AQP4, which forms OAPs, is more susceptible to complement-mediated damage.

How can researchers address contradictory findings when working with different AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies?

Contradictory findings are common when working with different AQP4 antibodies due to their diverse binding properties and functional characteristics. To address these challenges:

What are the most reliable methods for validating the specificity of newly developed AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies?

Validating the specificity of new AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies requires a multi-faceted approach:

  • Competitive binding assays: Test whether the antibody's binding is inhibited by established anti-AQP4 antibodies with confirmed specificity.

  • Knockdown/knockout validation: Demonstrate loss of binding in cells where AQP4 expression has been silenced through siRNA or CRISPR-Cas9 techniques.

  • Cross-reactivity testing: Evaluate binding to related aquaporins (AQP1, AQP3, etc.) to ensure selectivity for AQP4.

  • Epitope mapping: Use mutational analysis of AQP4 extracellular loops to identify specific binding determinants, though this approach requires careful interpretation as mutations can affect AQP4 processing and surface expression .

  • Western blotting under native conditions: Native gel electrophoresis can distinguish between binding to AQP4 tetramers versus OAPs .

  • Immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry: Confirm that the antibody pulls down AQP4 and associated proteins without non-specific interactions.

  • Tissue immunostaining patterns: Verify that staining patterns in tissues match the known distribution of AQP4, including the characteristic perivascular pattern in CNS tissues .

How might AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies be utilized in developing targeted therapies for neuromyelitis optica?

The development of therapeutic applications for AQP4 recombinant monoclonal antibodies represents an exciting frontier in NMOSD research. Several promising approaches include:

  • Aquaporumab: Non-pathogenic antibody blockers of AQP4-IgG binding can compete with pathogenic autoantibodies without activating complement or other effector functions . These engineered antibodies maintain high affinity for AQP4 but have modified Fc regions to eliminate pathogenicity.

  • Blockade of complement activation: Based on the understanding that CDC is a key pathogenic mechanism, therapeutic strategies targeting complement components (like eculizumab) show promise .

  • Inhibition of neutrophil activation: Neutrophil elastase inhibitors like sivelestat may prevent tissue damage in NMOSD by targeting downstream inflammatory mechanisms .

  • Biomarker development: Recombinant AQP4 antibodies with defined specificities can serve as standards for developing more sensitive and specific diagnostic assays.

  • Personalized monitoring: The identification and quantification of distinct AQP4-IgG lineages in individual patients could enable personalized therapeutic approaches and monitoring disease activity over time .

  • Targeted immunotherapies: Deeper understanding of specific B-cell clones producing pathogenic AQP4-IgG could lead to targeted depletion of these cells while sparing protective immune responses.

These approaches build on our growing understanding of AQP4 biology and the pathogenic mechanisms of AQP4-IgG in NMOSD, highlighting the critical importance of continued research with well-characterized recombinant monoclonal antibodies.

Quick Inquiry

Personal Email Detected
Please use an institutional or corporate email address for inquiries. Personal email accounts ( such as Gmail, Yahoo, and Outlook) are not accepted. *
© Copyright 2025 TheBiotek. All Rights Reserved.