H umanized Monoclonal Antibody DREG-200 Di rected Against L-Selectin Protects in Feline Myocardial Reperfusion Injury1

ABSTRAC

Comparison of the three-dimensional structures of a humanized and a chimeric Fab of an anti-γ-interferon antibody

The objective of this work is to compare the three-dimensional structures of 'humanized' and mouse-human chimetic forms of a murine monoclonal antibody elicited against human γ-interferon. It is also to provide structural explanations for the small differences in the affinities and biological interactions of the two molecules for this antigen. Antigen-binding fragments (Fabs) were produced by papain hydrolysis of the antibodies and crystallized with polyethylene glycol (PEG) 8000 by nearly identical microseeding procedures. Their structures were solved by X-ray analyses at 2.9 A resolution, using molecular replacement methods and crystallographic refinement. Comparison of these structures revealed marked similarities in the light (L) chains and near identities of the constant (C) domains of the heavy (H) chains. However, the variable (V) domains of the heavy chains exhibited substantial differences in the conformations of all three complementarity-determining regions (CDRs), and in their first framework segments (FR1). In FR1 of the humanized V(H), the substitution of serine for proline in position 7 allowed the N-terminal segment (designated strand 4-1) to be closely juxtaposed to an adjacent strand (4-2) and form hydrogen bonds typical of an antiparallel β-pleated sheet. The tightening of the humanized structure was relayed in such a way as to decrease the space available for the last portion of HFR1 and the first part of HCDR1. This compression led to the formation of an α-helix involving residues 25-32. With fewer steric constraints, the corresponding segment in the chimeric Fab lengthened by at least 1 A to a random coil which terminated in a single turn of 3 helix. In the humanized Fab, HCDR1, which is sandwiched between HCDR2 and HCDR3, significantly influenced the structures of both regions. HCDR2 was forced into a bent and twisted orientation different from that in the chimeric Fab, both at the crown of the loop (around proline H52a) and at its base. As in HCDR1, the last few residues of HCDR2 in the humanized Fab were compressed into a space-saving α-helix, contrasting with a more extended 3 helix in the chimetic form. HCDR3 in the humanized Fab was also adjusted in shape and topography. The observed similarities in the functional binding activities of the two molecules can be rationalized by limited induced fit adjustments in their structures on antigen binding. While not perfect replicas, the two structures are testimonials to the progress in making high affinity monoclonal antibodies safe for human use

Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity

Human activities, especially conversion and degradation of habitats, are causing global biodiversity declines. How local ecological assemblages are responding is less clear--a concern given their importance for many ecosystem functions and services. We analysed a terrestrial assemblage database of unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage to quantify local biodiversity responses to land use and related changes. Here we show that in the worst-affected habitats, these pressures reduce within-sample species richness by an average of 76.5%, total abundance by 39.5% and rarefaction-based richness by 40.3%. We estimate that, globally, these pressures have already slightly reduced average within-sample richness (by 13.6%), total abundance (10.7%) and rarefaction-based richness (8.1%), with changes showing marked spatial variation. Rapid further losses are predicted under a business-as-usual land-use scenario; within-sample richness is projected to fall by a further 3.4% globally by 2100, with losses concentrated in biodiverse but economically poor countries. Strong mitigation can deliver much more positive biodiversity changes (up to a 1.9% average increase) that are less strongly related to countries' socioeconomic status

The database of the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) project

The PREDICTS project-Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems (www.predicts.org.uk)-has collated from published studies a large, reasonably representative database of comparable samples of biodiversity from multiple sites that differ in the nature or intensity of human impacts relating to land use. We have used this evidence base to develop global and regional statistical models of how local biodiversity responds to these measures. We describe and make freely available this 2016 release of the database, containing more than 3.2 million records sampled at over 26,000 locations and representing over 47,000 species. We outline how the database can help in answering a range of questions in ecology and conservation biology. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most geographically and taxonomically representative database of spatial comparisons of biodiversity that has been collated to date; it will be useful to researchers and international efforts wishing to model and understand the global status of biodiversity

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy.

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field