throbber
Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA
`Vol. 86, pp. 10029-10033, December 1989
`Immunology
`
`A humanized antibody that binds to the interleukin 2 receptor
`(chimeric antibody/antibody affinity/autoimmune disease)
`CARY QUEEN*, WILLIAM P. SCHNEIDER*, HAROLD E. SELICK*t, PHILIP W. PAYNE*,
`NICHOLAS F. LANDOLFI*, JAMES F. DUNCAN*t, NEVENKA M. AVDALOVIC*, MICHAEL LEVITT§,
`RICHARD P. JUNGHANS¶, AND THOMAS A. WALDMANN¶
`*Protein Design Labs, 3181 Porter Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94304; §Department of Cell Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305; and IMetabolism
`Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892
`Contributed by Thomas A. Waldmann, August 30, 1989
`
`ABSTRACT
`The anti-Tac monoclonal antibody is known
`to bind to the p55 chain ofthe human interleukin 2 receptor and
`to inhibit proliferation of T cells by blocking interleukin 2
`binding. However, use of anti-Tac as an immunosuppressant
`drug would be impaired by the human immune response
`against this murine antibody. We have therefore constructed a
`"humanized" antibody by combining the complementarity-
`determining regions (CDRs) of the anti-Tac antibody with
`human framework and constant regions. The human frame-
`work regions were chosen to maximize homology with the
`anti-Tac antibody sequence. In addition, a computer model of
`murine anti-Tac was used to identify several amino acids
`which, while outside the CDRs, are likely to interact with the
`CDRs or antigen. These mouse amino acids were also retained
`in the humanized antibody. The humanized anti-Tac antibody
`has an affinity for p55 of 3 x 109 M-1, about 1/3 that ofmurine
`anti-Tac.
`
`The cellular receptor for the lymphokine interleukin 2 (IL-2)
`plays an important role in regulation of the immune response
`(reviewed in ref. 1). The complete IL-2 receptor (IL-2R)
`consists of at least two IL-2-binding peptide chains: the p55
`or Tac peptide (2, 3), and the recently discovered p75 peptide
`(4, 5). Identification and characterization of the p55 peptide
`were facilitated by the development of a monoclonal anti-
`body, anti-Tac, which binds to human p55 (2). The p55
`peptide was found to be expressed on the surface of T cells
`activated by an antigen or mitogen but not on resting T cells.
`Treatment of human T cells with anti-Tac antibody strongly
`inhibits their proliferative response to antigen or to IL-2 by
`preventing IL-2 binding (3, 6).
`These results suggested that anti-IL-2R antibodies would
`be immunosuppressive when administered in vivo. Indeed,
`injection of an anti-IL-2R antibody into mice and rats greatly
`prolonged survival of heart allografts (7, 8). Anti-IL-2R was
`also effective in rats against experimental graft-versus-host
`disease (9). In animal models of autoimmune disease, an
`anti-IL-2R antibody alleviated insulitis in nonobese diabetic
`mice and lupus nephritis in NZB x NZW mice (10). Anti-Tac
`itself was highly effective in prolonging survival of kidney
`allografts in cynomolgus monkeys (11).
`In human patients, the specificity of anti-Tac for activated
`T cells might give it an advantage as an immunosuppressive
`agent over OKT3 (monoclonal anti-CD3), which is effective
`in treating kidney transplant rejection (12), but which sup-
`presses the entire peripheral T-cell population. In fact, in
`phase I clinical trials for kidney transplantation, prophylactic
`administration of anti-Tac significantly reduced the incidence
`of early rejection episodes, without associated toxicity (13).
`Furthermore, treatment with anti-Tac induced temporary
`
`The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge
`payment. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement"
`in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact.
`
`partial or complete remission in three of nine patients with
`Tac-expressing adult T-cell leukemia (14). However, as a
`murine monoclonal antibody, anti-Tac elicits a strong human
`antibody response against itself, as does OKT3 (15). This
`response would prevent its long-term use in treating autoim-
`mune conditions or suppressing organ transplant rejection.
`The immune response against a murine monoclonal anti-
`body may potentially be reduced by transforming it into a
`chimeric antibody. Such antibodies, produced by methods of
`genetic engineering, combine the variable (V) region binding
`domain of a mouse (or rat) antibody with human antibody
`constant (C) regions (16-18). Hence, a chimeric antibody
`retains the binding specificity of the original mouse antibody
`but contains less amino acid sequence foreign to the human
`immune system. Chimeric antibodies have been produced
`against a number of tumor-associated antigens (19-21). In
`some but not all cases, the chimeric antibodies have mediated
`human complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) or anti-
`body-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) more efficient-
`ly than the mouse antibodies (21).
`When the murine antibody OKT3 is used in human pa-
`tients, much of the resulting antibody response is directed
`against the V region of OKT3 rather than the C region (15).
`Hence, chimeric antibodies in which the V region is still
`nonhuman may not have sufficient therapeutic advantages
`over mouse antibodies. To further reduce the immunogenic-
`ity of murine antibodies, Winter and colleagues constructed
`"humanized" antibodies in which only the minimum neces-
`sary parts of the mouse antibody, the complementarity-
`determining regions (CDRs), were combined with human V
`region frameworks and human C regions (22-25). We report
`here the construction of chimeric and humanized anti-Tac
`antibodies. 11 For the humanized antibody, sequence homol-
`ogy and molecular modeling were used to select a combina-
`tion of mouse and human sequence elements that would
`reduce immunogenicity while retaining high binding affinity.
`
`MATERIALS AND METHODS
`Construction of Plasmids. cDNA cloning was by the
`method of Gubler and Hoffman (26), and sequencing was by
`the dideoxy method (27). The plasmid pVK1 (Fig. 1A) was
`constructed from the following fragments: an approximately
`4550-base-pair (bp) BamHI-EcoRI fragment from the plas-
`
`Abbreviations: IL-2R, interleukin 2 receptor; CDR, complementar-
`ity-determining region; CDC, complement-dependent cytotoxicity;
`ADCC, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity; V, variable; J,
`joining; C, constant.
`tPresent address: Biospan, 440 Chesapeake Drive, Redwood City,
`CA 94063.
`tPresent address: Beckman Instruments, 1050 Page Mill Road, Palo
`Alto, CA 94304.
`"The sequences reported in this paper have been deposited in the
`GenBank data base (accession nos. M28250 and M28251).
`
`10029
`
`Lassen - Exhibit 1060, p. 1
`
`

`

`10030
`
`Immunology: Queen et al.
`
`Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86 (1989)
`
`E H
`
`Eco RI
`
`Eco RI
`
`Gpt
`
`Hybridize
`primer
`
`Ago\
`
`V
`Extend
`
`I
`
`J
`
`C
`
`A
`
`Amp
`
`B
`
`Xba
`
`|14+I
`
`Denature.
`Hybridize
`rev. primer
`
`_
`
`Extend
`and cut
`
`|
`4
`
`D5
`
`,$
`
`Xba I
`
`V
`
`J
`
`(A) Schematic diagram of the plasmids PVK1 and pLTac.
`FIG. 1.
`Light chain exons are shown as boxes. An arrow indicates the
`direction of transcription from the K promoter. EH, heavy chain
`enhancer. Not drawn to scale. (B) Schematic diagram of the method
`used to excise the V-J region. SD, splice donor sequence; rev.
`primer, reverse primer.
`mid pSV2gpt (28) containing the amp and gpt genes; an
`1800-bp EcoRI-Bgl II fragment from pKcatH (29) containing
`the heavy chain enhancer and K promoter; and a 1500-bp
`EcoRI-Xba I fragment containing the human CK region (30).
`Similarly, pVyl was constructed starting from a 4850-bp
`BamHI-EcoRI fragment of the plasmid pSV2hph (a gift of A.
`Smith, A. Miyajima, and D. Strehlow, Stanford University),
`which is analogous to pSV2gpt except that the gpt gene is
`replaced by the hyg gene (31). This fragment was combined
`with the EcoRI-Bgl II fragment from pKcatH and a 2800-bp
`HindIII-Pvu II fragment containing the human yl constant
`region, isolated from a phage kindly provided by L. Hood
`(32). In each case, the fragments were combined by standard
`methods (ref. 33, pp. 390-401), with an Xba I linker inserted
`between the K promoter fragment and the 5' end of the C
`region fragment.
`Construction of Chimeric Genes. EcoRI fragments contain-
`ing the anti-Tac light and heavy chain cDNAs were sepa-
`rately inserted into the EcoRI site of the phage M13mpllD,
`a variant of M13mpll (34) in which the EcoRI and Xba I sites
`of the polylinker were filled in and joined. The resulting
`phage, in which the 5' ends of the cDNAs abutted the Xba I
`site, were respectively denoted M13L and M13H. The V-J (J,
`joining) segments of the cDNAs, followed by splice donor
`signals, were precisely excised from these phage, using a
`double-priming scheme (Fig. 1B). For the light chain, the
`following primer was synthesized (Applied Biosystems
`model 380B DNA synthesizer) and purified by gel electro-
`phoresis: 5 '-CCAGAATTCTAGAAAAGTGTACTTAC-
`GTTTCAGCTCCAGCTTGGTCCC-3'. From the 3' end, the
`first 22 residues of the primer are the same as the last 22
`residues of the JK5 segment (noncoding strand). The next 16
`nucleotides are the same as the sequence that follows JK5 in
`
`mouse genomic DNA and therefore includes a splice donor
`signal. The final 10 nucleotides of the oligonucleotide include
`an Xba I site.
`We hybridized this oligonucleotide to M13L and extended
`it with the Klenow fragment of DNA polymerase. The DNA
`was heat-denatured, hybridized with an excess of the "re-
`verse primer" 5'-AACAGCTATGACCATG-3', again ex-
`tended with Klenow DNA polymerase, and digested with
`Xba I. The digested DNA was run on a gel, and an approx-
`imately 400-bp fragment was excised and inserted into the
`Xba I site of pVK1. Sequencing showed that the fragment
`consisted of the V-J region of the light chain cDNA followed
`by the splice donor "tail," as expected (Fig. 1B), and pLTac,
`a clone with the appropriate orientation, was chosen. In an
`analogous fashion, the heavy chain V-J segment, followed by
`the mouse JH2 splice donor sequence, was excised from
`M13H and inserted into the Xba I site of pVyl to yield pGTac.
`Computer Analysis. Sequences were manipulated and ho-
`mology searches were performed with the MicroGenie Se-
`quence Analysis Software (Beckman). The molecular model
`of the anti-Tac V region was constructed with the ENCAD
`program (35) and examined with the MIDAS program (36) on
`an IRIS 4D-120 graphics workstation (Silicon Graphics).
`Construction of Genes for Humanized Antibody. Nucleotide
`sequences were selected that encoded the protein sequences
`of the humanized light and heavy chain V regions including
`signal peptides (Results), generally utilizing codons found in
`the mouse anti-Tac sequence. These nucleotide sequences
`also included the same splice donor signals used in the
`chimeric genes and an Xba I site at each end. For the heavy
`chain V region, four overlapping 120- to 130-nucleotide-long
`oligonucleotides were synthesized that encompassed the
`entire sequence on alternating strands. The oligonucleotides
`were phosphorylated with polynucleotide kinase, annealed,
`extended with T4 DNA polymerase, cut with Xba I, and
`ligated into the Xba I site of pUC19 (34), using standard
`reaction conditions. An insert with the correct sequence was
`recloned in pVyl. The humanized light chain V region was
`constructed similarly..
`Transfections. For each antibody constructed, the light
`chain plasmid was first transfected into Sp2/0 mouse my-
`eloma cells (ATTC CRL 1581) by electroporation (Bio-Rad
`Gene Pulser) and cells were selected for gpt expression (28).
`Clones secreting a maximal amount of light chain, as deter-
`mined by ELISA, were transfected with the heavy chain
`plasmid and cells were selected for hygromycin B resistance
`(31). Clones secreting a maximal amount of complete anti-
`body were detected by ELISA. The clones were used for
`preparation of chimeric and humanized antibodies.
`Antibody Purification. Medium from confluent cells was
`passed over a column of staphylococcal protein A-Sepharose
`CL-4B (Pharmacia), and antibody was eluted with 3 M
`MgCl2. Antibody was further purified by ion-exchange chro-
`matography on BakerBond ABx (J. T. Baker). Final anti-
`body concentration was determined, assuming that 1 mg/ml
`has an A280 of 1.4. Anti-Tac antibody itself was purified as
`described (2).
`Affiiity Measurements. Affinities were determined by com-
`petition binding. HuT-102 human T-lymphoma cells (ATTC
`TIB 162) were used as source of p55 Tac antigen. Increasing
`amounts of competitor antibody (anti-Tac, chimeric, or hu-
`manized) were added to 1.5 ng of radioiodinated (Pierce
`lodo-Beads) tracer anti-Tac antibody (2 uCi/,g; 1 Ci = 37
`GBq) and incubated with 4 x 105 HuT cells in 0.2 ml of
`binding buffer (RPMI 1040 medium with 10% fetal calf serum,
`human IgG at 100 ,g/ml, 0.1% sodium azide) for 3 hr at room
`temperature. Cells were washed and pelleted, and their
`radioactivities were measured, and the concentrations of
`bound and free tracer antibody were calculated. The affinity
`of mouse anti-Tac was determined by Scatchard plot analy-
`
`Lassen - Exhibit 1060, p. 2
`
`

`

`Immunology: Queen et al.
`sis, using anti-Tac itself as the competitor. Then the affinities
`of the chimeric and humanized antibodies were each calcu-
`lated according to the formula [XI - [anti-Tac] = (1/K,) -
`(1/Ka), where Ka is the affinity of anti-Tac (9 x 109 M-1), K.
`is the affinity of the competitor X, [ ] indicates the concen-
`tration of competitor antibody at which bound/free tracer
`binding is RO/2, and Ro is maximal bound/free tracer binding
`(37).
`
`RESULTS
`Cloning of Light and Heavy Chain cDNA. A cDNA library
`in Agt1O was prepared from anti-Tac hybridoma cells and
`screened with oligonucleotide probes for the mouse K and y2a
`constant regions. The cDNA inserts from four K-positive and
`four y2a-positive phage were subcloned in M13mpl9. Partial
`sequencing showed that two of the K isolates had one
`sequence, and the other two had another sequence. In one
`pair, a VK gene segment was joined to the J,,2 segment out of
`its reading frame. In addition, the conserved cysteine at
`position 23 was absent from this V segment, and the se-
`quences of the two isolates differed slightly. Presumably,
`these clones were the result of an aberrant joining event in
`one K allele, which continued to undergo somatic mutation
`after the formation of the hybridoma.
`The V-J segments of the other pair of K clones were
`sequenced completely and were identical. This light chain
`uses the J,,5 segment. Partial sequencing of the four y2a
`clones showed they were all from the same gene. The V-J
`segments of two were sequenced completely and were iden-
`tical. This heavy chain uses the JH2 segment and is of
`subgroup II (38). The DNA sequences have been deposited
`with GenBank; 11 the deduced protein sequences are shown in
`Fig. 2. As both alleles of the K light chain were accounted for
`and only one heavy chain sequence was detected, we tenta-
`tively assigned these sequences to the anti-Tac antibody
`genes.
`Construction of Chimeric Genes. Plasmid vectors were
`prepared for the construction and expression ofchimeric light
`and heavy chain genes. The plasmid pVK1 (Fig. 1A) contains
`the human genomic C, segment, including 336 bp of the
`preceding intron and the poly(A) signal. It also contains the
`promoter sequence from the MOPC 41 K gene and the heavy
`chain enhancer sequence, which synergize to form a very
`strong transcriptional unit (29). There is a unique Xba I site
`between the promoter and the intron. A similar plasmid,
`pVyl, was prepared by using the human CG1 region in place
`of the C,, region. In that case, the region inserted between the
`Xba I and BamHI sites extended from about 210 bp 5' of the
`CH1 exon to beyond the CH3 exon.
`Our strategy was to insert the V-J region from the anti-Tac
`K cDNA, followed by a splice donor signal, at the Xba I site
`B
`A
`
`Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86 (1989)
`
`10031
`
`of pVK1 to construct the plasmid pLTac. Doing so created a
`chimeric K gene with a short synthetic intron between the
`mouse V-J and human CK segments (Fig. LA). For this
`purpose, we used a form of double primer-directed mutagen-
`esis (Materials and Methods; Fig. 1B). Similarly, the V-J
`region from the anti-Tac y2a heavy chain cDNA, followed by
`a splice donor signal, was inserted into the Xba I site of pVyl.
`The resulting plasmid, pGTac, contained a chimeric heavy
`chain gene, with a synthetic intron between the mouse V-J
`and human C,,1 segments.
`Construction of a Humanized Anti-Tac Antibody. In select-
`ing a human antibody to provide the variable region frame-
`work for the humanized anti-Tac antibody, we reasoned that
`the more homologous the human antibody was to the original
`anti-Tac antibody, the less likely would combining the anti-
`Tac CDRs with the human framework be to introduce dis-
`tortions into the CDRs. The anti-Tac heavy chain sequence
`was therefore compared by computer with all the human
`heavy chain sequences in the National Biomedical Research
`Foundation Protein Identification Resource (release 15). The
`heavy chain V region of the Eu antibody (of human heavy
`chain subgroup I; ref. 38) was 57% identical to the anti-Tac
`heavy chain V region (Fig. 2B); all other complete VH regions
`in the data bank were 30-52% identical. However, no one
`human light chain V region was especially homologous to the
`anti-Tac light chain. We therefore chose to use the Eu light
`chain (of human light chain subgroup I; ref. 38) together with
`the Eu heavy chain to supply the framework sequences for
`the humanized antibody. The CDRs in the humanized anti-
`body were of course chosen to be identical to the anti-Tac
`CDRs (Fig. 2).
`A computer program was used to construct a plausible
`molecular model of the anti-Tac V domain (Fig. 3), based on
`homology to other antibody V domains with known crystal
`structure and on energy minimization. Graphic manipulation
`shows that a number of amino acid residues outside of the
`CDRs are in fact close enough to them to either influence
`their conformation or interact directly with antigen. When
`these residues differ between the anti-Tac and Eu antibodies,
`the residue in the humanized antibody was chosen to be the
`anti-Tac residue rather than the Eu residue. This choice was
`made for residues 27, 30, 48, 67, 68, 98, and 106 in the
`humanized heavy chain, and for 47 and 59 in the humanized
`light chain (Figs. 2 and 3; amino acids shown in blue in Fig.
`3), although we now consider the light chain residue 59,
`which was chosen on the basis of an earlier model, to be
`doubtful. In this way, we hoped to better preserve the precise
`structure of the CDRs at the cost of possibly making the
`humanized antibody slightly less "human."
`Different human light or heavy chain V regions exhibit
`strong amino acid homology outside of the CDRs, within the
`framework regions. However, a given V region will usually
`
`D I Q M T Q S P S T L S A S V G D R V T
`
`1
`
`Q V Q L V Q S G A E V K K P G S S V K V
`
`Q I V L T Q S P A I M S A S P G E K V T
`
`1 Q V Q L Q Q S G A E L A K P G A S V K M
`
`1
`
`1
`
`21
`
`21
`
`41
`
`40
`
`61
`
`60
`
`81
`
`80
`
`I T C R A S Q S I N T W L A W Y Q Q K P
`
`I T C S A S S S I
`
`S Y M H W F Q Q K P
`
`G K A P K L L M Y K A S S L E S G V P S
`liiil
`II
`G T S P K L W I Y T T S N L A S G V P A
`
`R F I G S G S G T E F T L T I S S L Q P
`liiil
`II
`II
`1 1
`R F S G S G S G T S Y S L T I S R M E A
`
`D D F A T Y Y C Q Q Y N S D S K M F G Q
`
`E D A A T Y Y C H Q R S T Y P L T F G S
`
`101
`
`100
`
`G T K V E V K
`
`G T K L E L K
`
`21
`
`21
`
`41
`
`41
`
`61
`
`61
`
`81
`
`81
`
`S C K A S G G T F S R S A I I W V R Q A
`II
`II
`1111
`S C K A S G Y T F T S Y R M H W V K Q R
`
`P G
`
`G L E W M G G I V P M F G P P N Y
`
`P G Q G L E W I G Y I N P S T G Y T E
`
`A Q K F Q G R V T I T A D E S T N T A Y
`
`N 0 K F K D K A T L T A D K S S S T A Y
`
`M E L S S L R S E D T A F Y F C A G G Y
`
`M Q L S S L T F E D S A V Y Y C A R G
`
`101 G I Y S P E E Y N G G L V T V S S
`
`100 GGVFD Y W GQ TTLTVSS
`
`FIG. 2. Amino acid sequences of the humanized
`anti-Tac light (A) and heavy (B) chains. The se-
`quences of the Eu antibody light and heavy chains
`(upper lines) are shown aligned above the mouse
`anti-Tac light and heavy chain sequences (lower
`indicating identity of amino acids.
`lines), with a
`The three CDRs in each chain are underlined, and
`the other mouse amino acids used in the humanized
`antibody are double underlined. Hence, the human-
`ized sequences are the same as the upper (Eu)
`sequences, except where the amino acid is under-
`lined or double underlined.
`
`Lassen - Exhibit 1060, p. 3
`
`

`

`10032
`
`Immunology: Queen et al.
`
`Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86 (1989)
`
`Model of the mouse anti-Tac antibody V region, generated with the ENCAD program and displayed with the MIDAS program. Amino
`FIG. 3.
`acids in the CDRs are shown in red; amino acids potentially interacting with the CDRs are shown in blue; other mouse amino acids used in the
`humanized antibody are shown in yellow, as described in the text. Thus, all amino acids transferred from the anti-Tac sequence to the humanized
`antibody are shown in red, blue, or yellow. Residue 1 is the first amino acid of VK; residue 301 is the first amino acid of VH.
`culture medium of cells producing the chimeric or humanized
`contain exceptional amino acids, atypical of other human V
`antibody. When analyzed by reducing SDS/polyacrylamide
`regions, at several framework positions. The Eu antibody
`gel ejectrophoresis, the antibodies showed only two bands,
`contains such unusual residues at positions corresponding to
`having the expected molecular weights 50,000 and 25,000.
`93, 95, 98, 106, 107, 108, and 110 of the humanized heavy
`Flow cytometry showed that the chimeric and humanized
`chain and 47 and 62 of the light chain (Fig. 2), as determined
`antibodies bound to Hut-102 and CRII.2 cells, two human
`by visual comparison of the Eu heavy and light chain V
`T-cell lines that express the p55 chain of the IL-2R, but not
`regions with other human V regions of subgroup 1 (38). The
`to CEM and other cell lines that do not express the IL-2R. To
`Eu antibody contains several other unusual residues, but at
`determine the binding affinity of the chimeric and humanized
`the listed positions, the murine anti-Tac antibody actually has
`antibodies, their ability to compete with labeled mouse
`a residue much more typical of human sequences than does
`anti-Tac for binding to Hut-102 cells was determined. The
`Eu. At these positions, we therefore chose to use the anti-Tac
`affinity of chimeric anti-Tac was indistinguishable from that
`residue rather than the Eu residue in the humanized antibody,
`of anti-Tac (data not shown), as expected from the fact that
`to make the antibody more generically human. Some of these
`their entire V regions are identical. The affinity of humanized
`residues had already been selected because oftheir proximity
`anti-Tac for membrane-bound p55 was 3 x 109 M-1, about
`to the CDRs, as described above (the remaining ones are
`1/3 the measured affinity of 9 x 109 M-1 of anti-Tac itself
`shown in yellow in Fig. 3).
`(Fig. 4).
`These criteria allowed the selection of all amino acids in the
`humanized antibody V regions as coming from either anti-Tac
`or Eu (Fig. 2). DNA segments encoding the desired heavy
`and light chain amino acid sequences were synthesized.
`These DNA segments also encoded typical immunoglobulin
`signal sequences for processing and secretion, and they
`contained splice donor signals at their 3' end. The light and
`heavy chain segments were cloned, respectively, in pVKl and
`pVyl to form the plasmids pHuLTac and pHuGTac.
`Properties of Chimeric and Humanized Antibodies. Sp2/0
`cells, a nonproducing mouse myeloma line, were transfected
`sequentially with pLTac and pGTac (chimeric genes) or with
`pHuLTac and pHuGTac (humanized genes). Cell clones
`were selected first for antibiotic resistance and then for
`maximal antibody secretion, which reached 3 ,lg/106 cells per
`24 hr. S1 nuclease mapping of RNA extracted from the cells
`transfected with pLTac and pGTac showed that the synthetic
`introns between the V and C regions (Fig. LA) were correctly
`spliced (data not shown). Antibody was purified from the
`
`DISCUSSION
`Because monoclonal antibodies can be produced that are
`highly specific for a wide variety of cellular targets, antibody
`therapy holds great promise for the treatment of cancer,
`autoimmune conditions, and other diseases. However, this
`promise has not been widely realized, largely because most
`monoclonal antibodies, which are of mouse origin, are im-
`munogenic when used in human patients and are ineffective
`at recruiting human immune effector functions such as CDC
`and ADCC. A partial solution to this problem is the use of
`chimeric antibodies (16), which combine the V region binding
`domains of mouse antibodies with human antibody C regions.
`Initially, chimeric antibodies were constructed by combining
`genomic clones of the V and C region genes. However, this
`method is very time consuming because of the difficulty of
`genomic cloning, especially from tetraploid hybridomas.
`
`Lassen - Exhibit 1060, p. 4
`
`

`

`Immunology: Queen et al.
`
`Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86 (1989)
`
`10033
`
`W 2.0L RO P
`
`1 1.5
`
`D 1.0
`0~~~~~~
`
`z
`
`Ro ...
`
`0.5
`0.0
`4.0
`3.5
`3.0
`2.5
`2.0
`1.5
`1.0
`LOG CONCENTRATION OF COMPETITOR, pM
`
`Competitive binding of labeled anti-Tac tracer to Hut-102
`FIG. 4.
`cells. Duplicate samples are shown. e, Mouse anti-Tac competitor;
`v, humanized anti-Tac competitor.
`
`More recently, cDNA clones of the V and C regions have
`been combined, but this method is also tedious because of the
`need to join the V and C regions precisely (20, 21). Here we
`show that the V region from a readily obtainable cDNA clone
`can be easily joined to a human genomic C region, which need
`only be cloned once, by leaving a synthetic intron between
`the V and C regions. When linked to suitable transcriptional
`regulatory elements and transfected into an appropriate host
`cell, such chimeric genes produce antibody at a high level.
`Chimeric antibodies represent an improvement over
`mouse antibodies for use in human patients, because they are
`presumably less immunogenic and sometimes mediate CDC
`or ADCC more effectively (21). For example, chimeric
`anti-Tac mediates ADCC with activated human effector cells,
`whereas murine anti-Tac does not (unpublished data). How-
`ever, the mouse V region can itself be highly immunogenic
`(15). Winter and colleagues therefore took the further, inno-
`vative, step of combining the CDRs from a mouse (or rat)
`antibody with the framework region from a human antibody
`(22-25), thus reducing the xenogeneic elements in the hu-
`manized antibody to a minimum. Unfortunately, in some
`cases the humanized antibody had significantly less binding
`affinity for antigen than did the original mouse antibody. This
`is not surprising, because transferring the mouse CDRs from
`the mouse framework to the human framework could easily
`deform them.
`In humanizing the anti-Tac antibody, which binds to the
`p55 chain of the human IL-2R, we have introduced two ideas
`that may have wider applicability. First, the human frame-
`work was chosen to be as homologous as possible to the
`original mouse antibody to reduce any deformation of the
`mouse CDRs. Second, computer modeling was used to
`identify several framework amino acids in the mouse anti-
`body that might interact with the CDRs or directly with
`antigen, and these amino acids were transferred to the human
`framework along with the CDRs. The resulting humanized
`antibody has a high affinity, 3 x 109 M-1, for its antigen.
`Further work is needed to determine to what extent the
`choice of human framework and the preservation of partic-
`ular mouse amino acids in fact contributed to the affinity of
`the humanized antibody. The extent to which humanization
`eliminates immunogenicity will need to be addressed in
`clinical trials, where humanized anti-Tac will be administered
`to patients with Tac-expressing lymphomas or selected au-
`toimmune diseases or to patients receiving organ transplants.
`
`1.
`2.
`
`Waldmann, T. A. (1989) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 58, 875-911.
`Uchiyama, T., Broder, S. & Waldmann, T. A. (1981) J. Immunol.
`126, 1393-1397.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`Leonard, W. J., Depper, J. M., Uchiyama, T., Smith, K. A., Wald-
`mann, T. A. & Greene, W. C. (1982) Nature (London) 300, 267-269.
`Tsudo, M., Kozak, R. W., Goldman, C. K. & Waldmann, T. A.
`(1986) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83, 9694-9698.
`Sharon, M., Klausner, R. D., Cullen, B. R., Chizzonite, R. &
`Leonard, W. J. (1986) Science 234, 859-863.
`Depper, J. M., Leonard, W. J., Robb, R. J., Waldmann, T. A. &
`Greene, W. C. (1983) J. Immunol. 131, 690-696.
`Kirkman, R. L., Barrett, L. V., Gaulton, G. N., Kelley, V. E.,
`Ythier, A. & Strom, T. B. (1985) J. Exp. Med. 162, 358-362.
`Kupiec-Weglinski, J. W., Diamantstein, T., Tilney, N. L. & Strom,
`T. B. (1986) Proc. Nat!. Acad. Sci. USA 83, 2624-2627.
`Volk, H.-D., Brocke, S., Osawa, H. & Diamantstein, T. (1986) Clin.
`Exp. Immunol. 66, 126-131.
`Kelley, V. E., Gaulton, G. N., Hattori, M., Ikegami, H., Eisen-
`barth, G. & Strom, T. B. (1988) J. Immunol. 140, 59-61.
`Reed, M. H., Shapiro, M. E., Strom, T. B., Milford, E. L., Car-
`penter, C. B., Weinberg, D. S., Reimann, K. A., Letvin, N. L.,
`Waldmann, T. A. & Kirkman, R. L. (1989) Transplantation 47,
`55-59.
`Ortho Multicenter Transplant Study Group (1985) N. Engl. J. Med.
`313, 337-342.
`Kirkman, R. L., Shapiro, M. E., Carpenter, C. B., Milford, E. L.,
`Ramos, E. L., Tilney, N. L., Waldmann, T. A., Zimmerman, C. E.
`& Strom, T. B. (1989) Transplant. Proc. 21, 1766-1768.
`14. Waldmann, T. A., Goldman, C. K., Bongiovanni, K. F., Sharrow,
`S. O., Davey, M. P., Cease, K. B., Greenberg, S. J. & Longo,
`D. L. (1988) Blood 72, 1805-1816.
`Jaffers, G. J., Fuller, T. C., Cosimi, A. B., Russell, P. S., Winn,
`H. J. & Colvin, R. B. (1986) Transplantation 41, 572-578.
`Morrison, S. L., Johnson, M. J., Herzenberg, L. A. & Oi, V. T.
`(1984) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 81, 6851-6855.
`Boulianne, G. L., Hozumi, N. & Shulman, M. J. (1984) Nature
`(London) 312, 643-646.
`Neuberger, M. S., Williams, G. T., Mitchell, E. B., Jouhal, S. S.,
`Flanagan, J. G. & Rabbitts, T. H. (1985) Nature (London) 314,
`268-270.
`Sun, L. K., Curtis, P., Rakowicz-Szulczynska, E., Ghrayeb, J.,
`Chang, N., Morrison, S. L. & Koprowski, H. (1987) Proc. Natl.
`Acad. Sci. USA 84, 214-218.
`Whittle, N., Adair, J., Lloyd, C., Jenkins, L., Devine, J., Schlom,
`J., Raubitschek, A., Colcher, D. & Bodmer, M. (1987) Protein Eng.
`1, 499-505.
`Liu, A. Y., Robinson, R. R., Hellstrom, K. E., Murray, E. D., Jr.,
`- C-hang, C. P. & Hellstrom, I. (1987) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84,
`3439-3443.
`Jones, P. T., Dear, P. H., Foote, J., Neuberger, M. S. & Winter, G.
`(1986) Nature (London) 321, 522-525.
`Verhoeyen, M., Milstein, C. & Winter, G. (1988) Science 239,
`1534-1536.
`Reichmann, L., Clark, M., Waldmann, H. & Winter, G. (1988)
`Nature (London) 332, 323-327.
`Hale, G., Dyer, M. J. S., Clark, M. R., Phillips, J. M., Marcus, R.,
`Riechmann, L., Winter, G. & Waldmann, H. (1988) Lancet i,
`1394-1399.
`Gubler, U. & Hoffman, B. J. (1983) Gene 25, 263-269.
`Sanger, F., Nicklen, S. & Coulson, A. R. (1977) Proc. Nat!. Acad.
`Sci. USA 74, 5463-5467.
`Mulligan, R. C. & Berg, P. (1981) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78,
`2072-2076.
`Garcia, J. V., Bich-Thuy, L. T., Stafford, J. & Queen, C. (1986)
`Nature (London) 322, 383-385.
`Hieter, P. A., Max, E. E., Seidman, J. G., Maizel, J. V., Jr., &
`Leder, P. (1980) Cell 22, 197-207.
`Sugden, B., Marsh, K. & Yates, J. (1985) Mol. Cell. Biol. 5,
`410-413.
`Ellison, J. W., Berson, B. J. & Hood, L. E. (1982) Nucleic Acids
`Res. 10, 4071-4079.
`Maniatis, T., Fritsch, E. F. & Sambrook, J. (1982) Molecular
`Cloning: A Laboratory Manual (Cold Spring Harbor Lab., Cold
`Spring Harbor, NY).
`Yanisch-Perron, C., Vieira, J. & Messing, J. (1985) Gene 33,
`103-119.
`Levitt, M. (1983) J. Mol. Biol. 168, 595-617.
`Ferrin, T. E., Huang, C. C., Jarvis, L. E. & Langridge, R. (1988) J.
`Mol. Graphics 6, 13-27.
`Berzofsky, J. A. & Berkower, I. J. (1984) in Fundamental Immu-
`nology, ed. Paul W. E. (Raven, New York), pp. 595-644.
`Kabat, E. A., Wu, T. T., Reid-Miller, M., Perry, H. M. & Gottes-
`man, K. S. (1987) Sequences ofProteins ofImmunological Interest
`(National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD).
`
`15.
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`23.
`
`24.
`
`25.
`
`26.
`27.
`
`28.
`
`29.
`
`30.
`
`31.
`
`32.
`
`33.
`
`34.
`
`35.
`36.
`
`37.
`
`38.
`
`Lassen - Exhibit 1060, p. 5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket