stxA Antibody

Shipped with Ice Packs
In Stock

Product Specs

Buffer
Preservative: 0.03% Proclin 300
Constituents: 50% Glycerol, 0.01M Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS), pH 7.4
Form
Liquid
Lead Time
Made-to-order (14-16 weeks)
Synonyms
stxA antibody; sltA antibody; Shiga-like toxin 1 subunit A antibody; SLT-1 A subunit antibody; SLT-1a antibody; SLT-Ia antibody; EC 3.2.2.22 antibody; Verocytotoxin 1 subunit A antibody; Verotoxin 1 subunit A antibody; rRNA N-glycosidase 1 antibody
Target Names
stxA
Uniprot No.

Target Background

Function
The A subunit of stxA is responsible for inhibiting protein synthesis. It achieves this by catalytically inactivating the 60S ribosomal subunits. Following endocytosis, the A subunit undergoes cleavage by furin, resulting in two fragments: A1 and A2. A1 is the catalytically active fragment, while A2 plays a crucial role in the assembly of the holotoxin with the B subunits.
Protein Families
Ribosome-inactivating protein family
Subcellular Location
Secreted.

Q&A

What are the primary experimental applications of stxA antibodies in Shiga toxin research?

stxA antibodies are critical for detecting and neutralizing the enzymatic A subunit of Shiga toxins (Stx1/Stx2), which inhibit ribosomal protein synthesis. Key applications include:

  • Toxin neutralization assays: Measuring antibody efficacy via in vitro cell viability tests (e.g., HeLa or Vero-B4 cells exposed to Stx) and in vivo models (e.g., murine toxicity or pig edema disease) .

  • Epitope mapping: Identifying antibody binding regions on stxA using computational modeling (e.g., molecular docking) and experimental methods like X-ray crystallography or competitive ELISA .

  • Diagnostic development: Detecting Stx in clinical samples via Western blot (WB) or ELISA, with validation against synthetic peptide targets (e.g., residues 198–212 of Stx2A) .

Table 1: Performance of stxA Antibodies in Neutralization Assays

Antibody TypeNeutralization IC₅₀ (nM)Model SystemKey LimitationsSource
Monoclonal (11E10)10–200HeLa cellsLimited cross-reactivity
Camelid VHH (NbStx2e1)0.5–1.0Pig edema diseaseSpecific to Stx2e
Humanized IgG5–20Murine HUS modelRequires high dosage

How do researchers validate stxA antibody specificity across Shiga toxin subtypes?

Methodological validation involves:

  • Cross-reactivity profiling: Testing against recombinant Stx1A, Stx2A, and subtypes (e.g., Stx2c, Stx2e) using surface plasmon resonance (SPR) or ELISA .

  • Competitive assays: Co-incubating antibodies with synthetic peptides (e.g., ARSVRAVNE for Stx2A) to confirm epitope specificity .

  • Mass spectrometry (MS): Verifying antibody-target interactions in complex biological matrices (e.g., colon epithelial cell lysates) .
    Discrepancies often arise due to conformational epitopes requiring native toxin structures, which synthetic peptides may not replicate .

What controls are essential for stxA antibody-based immunohistochemistry (IHC)?

Critical controls include:

  • Isotype-matched antibodies: To rule out nonspecific binding in tissue sections (e.g., intestinal biopsies).

  • Receptor-blocking experiments: Pre-treating samples with Gb3/Gb4 glycolipids to confirm toxin-antibody binding specificity .

  • Knockout validation: Using CRISPR-edited cell lines lacking stxA or Gb3 synthase to assess background signal .

How can stxA antibody cocktails overcome toxin variant resistance?

Combining antibodies targeting distinct epitopes improves neutralization breadth:

  • Bispecific designs: Fusing anti-stxA VHH with anti-serum albumin domains to extend half-life (e.g., trivalent constructs tested in murine models) .

  • Epitope synergy: Pairing antibodies binding the catalytic cleft (residues 176–188) and receptor-binding domain (residues 246–254) of stxA .

  • Dosage optimization: Balancing molar ratios to prevent steric hindrance while maintaining toxin saturation .

How should researchers resolve contradictions in cross-reactivity data?

Case study: A stxA antibody shows strong WB signal for Stx2A but fails in Stx1A neutralization .
Root-cause analysis steps:

  • Structural alignment: Compare Stx1A/Stx2A sequences (e.g., 40% homology in catalytic domains) .

  • Binding kinetics: Use SPR to measure dissociation constants (K<sub>D</sub>); Stx1A often exhibits 10-fold lower affinity than Stx2A .

  • Functional assays: Test ribotoxic stress response in primary human colon epithelial cells (pHCoEpiCs), which express low Gb3 levels .

What parameters govern bispecific antibody design targeting stxA and host receptors?

Key factors:

  • Linker flexibility: (GGGGS)<sub>n</sub> spacers between scFv domains to ensure simultaneous epitope engagement .

  • Affinity maturation: Directed evolution in yeast display libraries to enhance K<sub>D</sub> below 1 nM .

  • Pharmacokinetics: Incorporating anti-albumin VHH domains to prolong serum half-life from 2h to 72h .

Table 2: Bispecific Antibody Efficacy in Preclinical Models

ConstructTarget EpitopesIn Vivo Survival RateToxin Neutralized
VHH-StxA2 + VHH-AlbuminStxA2 B subunit + albumin95% (murine HUS)Stx2a
IgG-StxA1 + scFv-Gb3StxA1 catalytic + Gb380% (pig edema)Stx1a/Stx2e

Methodological Challenges and Solutions

  • Low toxin recovery in fecal samples: Pre-treat with EDTA to dissociate Stx-antibody complexes, improving ELISA sensitivity .

  • False negatives in IHC: Use cell-free synthesized Stx (e.g., E. coli lysates) as positive controls to confirm antibody activity .

  • Neutralization escape mutants: Employ deep mutational scanning to predict resistance hotspots (e.g., residue R170 in Stx2A) .

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.