Affinity Chromatography: the Fine Print by Pete Gagnon, Validated Biosystems

Affinity Chromatography: the Fine Print by Pete Gagnon, Validated Biosystems

Affinity Chromatography: The Fine Print by Pete Gagnon, Validated Biosystems Affinity chr o m a t o g ra p h y is often held up effector functions. Antibodies are a good as the ideal in chr o m a t o g ra p h y. Exquisite example. The non antigen-binding parts of sp e c i f i c i t y . Unmatched simplicity. Load it, the molecule are richly endowed with recep- wash it, elute the purified product. Wh a t tors that interact with a variety of proteins, could be better? Affinity chr o m a t o g ra p h y ca r b o hy d r ates, and cells in the immune sys- could be better for one thing. There is a ver y tem. Conformational modification of these high price tag for both the specificity and the receptors can alter their functionality. All of si m p l i c i t y , and this isn’t referring to the dollar these factors — elevated tendency towar d cost for the media itself. Affinity chr o m a t o g - aggregation, proteolysis, and alteration of rap h y invol v es complications that have effector functions — can alter product effec- immensely important ramifications in purifi- tiv i t y , safety, and pharmacokinetics — and cation process development. The only thing this is before even taking into considerat i o n more costly than the complications them- that the elution conditions may have altered se l v es, is overlooking them. a protein’s primary therapeutic function. Pr oduct denatur at i o n . One of the most One of the ways to deal with product serious and persistent concerns about affinity al t e r ation is to develop milder elution condi- chr o m a t o g ra p h y is the potential for product tions. The first objection to this suggestion is de n a t u r ation. This is especially the case with usually that “If I use a less extreme pH, then strong affinity ligands that require harsh con- the elution will be less effective. ” In fact, elu- ditions for elution. The elution method of tion pH can often be raised without any loss choice is usually exposure to low pH, typical- of effectivi t y , and it’s certainly worth eval u a t - ly in the range of pH 2.5-3.0. Detailed studies ing a given application to find out what the of protein conformation under these condi- real limits are. If modifying pH alone doesn’t tions have documented permanent conforma- bear fruit, there are other opportunities. tional changes as a result of such exposure. Biological affinity interactions are mediated Hydrophobic residues normally protected in by complex combinations of hyd r o p h o b i c the interiors of the primary structural domains in t e r actions, charge interactions, hyd r o g e n become exposed on the surface, increasing bonding, and other mechanisms. Instead of the tendency for the protein to become using just low pH to twist a protein out of in vol v ed in nonspecific hydrophobic interac - shape so severely that it can’t remain bound tions. Elevated tendency toward aggregation to an affinity ligand, it is almost always possi- is one of the results, as is easily proven by ble to target one or more of the actual bind- examining size exclusion chr o m a t o g ra p h y ing mechanisms. This alone usually won ’ t be profiles following affinity purification. sufficient to cause elution, but it almost A usually less obvious but still common al w ays ameliorates the severity of the pH side effect of such changes is an elevat e d conditions required to elute the protein. For te n d e n c y toward proteolysis of the product. example, hydrophobic interactions can be This tends not to be noticed unless it’s weakened with up to 50% ethylene glycol. se v ere, but it’s common nevertheless. The Et h ylene glycol is actually stabilizing to most most insidious side effect — and the most proteins up to this level, but at the same time overlooked — is modification of secondary it is a very effective polarity reducer. It’s also 2 nonionic and won ’ t interfere with down - studied affinity interactions consistently stream charge-based purification methods. re v eal that when binding occurs, it is accom- Hydrogen bonds can be suspended by the panied by a phenomenon called induced fit. inclusion of 1.0M urea. At this concentrat i o n Induced fit refers to a situation where after it ’ s conformational effects on a protein are coming into contact with one another, either nil, and like ethylene glycol, it is nonionic. the affinity ligand, its receptor, or both, 0.5-1.0M NaCl will help to suspend any undergo conformational changes that lock charge interactions, without significant them into place. One of the best prac t i c a l enhancement of hydrophobic interac t i o n s . indicators that induced fit is occurring is The alternative use of a chaotropic salt like when you can bind a product to an affinity sodium perchl o r ate at the same concentrat i o n ligand under mild conditions, but very harsh will likewise suspend charge interactions and conditions are required to remove it. One of ma y further weaken the interaction through the best cha r acterized examples of this is the its chaotropic properties. binding of protein A to IgG, whi c h binds in Using combinations of these mecha n i s m s the hydrophobic cleft between the Cg2 and often makes it possible to raise elution pH by Cg3 domains. X-ray crystallographic data a full pH unit; sometimes substantially more. sh o ws that the Cg3 domain is unaffected by The question invariably arises: Don’t these the contact, but the adjacent Cg2 domain is complex formulations exert the same denatu- displaced longitudinally toward the protein A rat i ve effects as pH alone? They don’t. Thi n k and Cg3. Besides altering the local confor- of it like this. Let’s say that you have a partic- mation, this destabilizes the receptor-r i c h dis- ular oak board that you would like to remove tal third of the Cg2 domain, whi c h in turn from a wall so that you can use it for some- causes a partial rotation and destabilization thing else. It is screwed to the wall, nailed to of the carbohyd r ate domains between the the wall, and glued to the wall. If you just try Cg2 domains. The effect is apparently perma- to rip it off with a crow- b a r , your chances of nent. No matter how careful you are to devel - re c o vering it intact are grim. But if you op gentle elution conditions, comparison of re m o ve the screws and nails, then weaken the purified product against a non-affinity the glue by pouring hot water around the purified control virtually always confirms edges, you can remove it with much less me a s u r able changes in key behavi o r al fea- fo r ce, and your chances of recovering it tures of the product. This is not to say that intact are improved proportionately. This rai s - de v eloping mild elution conditions is not es the second objection to this approach: it wor t h w hile. Doing so can make an immense cancels out part of the simplicity of affinity difference. But it may not be able able to chr o m a t o g ra p h y. Library research will often avert denaturation problems entirely. lighten the load by revealing the dominant Le a ch i n g . The second major concern with me c hanisms of an affinity interaction, but affinity chr o m a t o g ra p h y is leaching of bioac- there will still need to be some experimenta- ti ve ligand and contaminants that may be tion to develop the most effective while least associated with it. This issue gets under- denaturing elution buffer. pl a yed but it is very serious. The inevitability In spite of taking great pains to develop a of leaching is the reason the FDA insists that nondenaturing elution buffer, you may still an y biological affinity ligand used in the find that your product has an elevated ten- manufacture of a biological product meet the de n c y to aggregate, or that it exhibits elevat - same application requirements as the end ed vulnerability to proteolysis, or that it product itself. This extends even to how the exhibits modified primary or secondary func- affinity ligand is purified. For example, the tions. The ugly truth is — to varying degrees protein A going into many chr o m a t o g ra p h y — that this is largely inevitable. The best products is purified by affinity chr o m a t o g r a- 3 ph y on immobilized human polyclonal IgG. se c o n d a r y , like complement fixation. Thi s The IgG column is potentially contaminated le a ves you with a high probability that with virus, whi c h can potentially leach into le a c hed affinity ligand will interfere with the purified protein A, and from there into either the direct function of your product, or your final product.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    5 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us