ars.els-cdn.com · web viewis the molar mass, k s the first order concentration coefficient of...
Post on 09-Aug-2020
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
SUPPLEMENTAL SECTION
Peptide Optimization at the Drug Discovery-
Development Interface: Tailoring of Physicochemical
Properties Toward Specific Formulation Requirements
Andreas Evers1,§,*, Stefania Pfeiffer-Marek2,§,*, Martin Bossart1, Christoph Heubel1, Ursula
Stock3, Garima Tiwari1, Birgit Gebauer1, Bettina Elshorst1, Anja Pfenninger4, Ulrike
Lukasczyk5, Gerhard Hessler1, Walter Kamm2, Michael Wagner1,*
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Industriepark Hoechst, Frankfurt am Main, Germany,
1Integrated Drug Discovery, 2Tides Drug Product Pre-Development Sciences, 3Tides
Analytics, 4BioAnalytics, 5DMPK
§: Both authors contributed equally to this work.
*Correspondence to: Andreas Evers, phone: +49 305 12636, E-mail:
Andreas.Evers@sanofi.com ; Stefania Pfeiffer-Marek, phone: +49 305 26566, E-mail:
Stefania.Pfeiffer-Marek@sanofi.com ; Michael Wagner, phone: +49 305 46875, E-mail:
Michael.Wagner@sanofi.com
S1
SUPPLEMENTAL METHODS SECTION:
Peptide purity and confirmation with UHPLC-RP/UV-MS. Peptides were solubilized in
DMSO at a concentration of 1 mg/mL for 1 hour applying gentle agitation. Afterwards the
solutions were centrifuged for 20 minutes at 3000 RCF and a 3 µL aliquot of the supernatant was
injected on a UHPLC system consisting of an Agilent Infinity 1290 LC equipped with a diode-
array detector (DAD) hyphenated to an Agilent TOF 6230. Sample separation was accomplished
on a Waters Acquity column containing CSH C18 1.7 µm particles in a 2.1 x 150 mm column
dimension operated at 50 °C. The UV absorption was detected at 214 nm. Solvent A consisted of
water with 500 ppm TFA and solvent B composed of acetonitrile with 450 ppm TFA running
with a constant flow of 0.5 mL/min. After a column load phase the gradient increases the amount
of acetonitrile from 20% to 75% in a linear curve during 23 min followed by a wash phase.
Gradient details are shown in Table S1.
The mass spectrometer, equipped with a dual AJS electrospray source, was operated according to
the manufacturer’s instructions in the extended dynamic range modus. Spectra were recorded
with positive polarity in the range of 100 to 3000 m/z at a resolution of about 15000 and using
three reference masses (121, 922 and 2421) for improved mass accuracy. By analysing the MS-
spectra of the main peak the expected mass and isotopic distribution of each peptide batch was
confirmed. Peptide purity was calculated by the following equation after manual integration of
the UV chromatogram:
Purity [%]=( peak area)peptide
(total peak area)∗100 % (1)
where (peak area)peptide is the area of the chromatographic peak corresponding to the product and
total peak area refers to the sum of the area of all peaks present in the chromatogram.
S2
Peptide solubility with UHPLC-RP/UV. Solutions from solid samples were prepared in
specific buffer systems with a concentration of 10 mg/mL compound based on the previously
determined purity. Solid peptide was placed in a suitable glass vial and dissolved in 80%
volume of the buffering system while gently stirring for 1h under light protection at 200 rpm.
After re-adjustment of the pH value (if necessary) with hydrochloric acid or sodium
hydroxide, buffering solution was added up to the final volume. After 15 minutes of
homogenization at 200 rpm, the solution was centrifuged at 450 RCF. The supernatant was
filled in a glass vial for quantification of the dissolved amount of peptide. The following
primary buffer systems were used: a) 100 mM acetate buffer pH 4.5, b) 100 mM acetate
buffer pH 5.2, c) 100mM citrate buffer pH 6.5, and d) 100 mM phosphate buffer pH 7.4. In
addition two variations of each buffer system were tested: one with 2.7 mg/mL m-cresol and a
second with 5.0 mg/mL phenol added as preservatives.
After 15 minutes of centrifugation at 2500 RCF a 2 µL aliquot of the 1:10 diluted supernatant
was injected on the UHPLC system consisting of a Waters Acquity I-class UHPLC equipped
with a photodiode-array detector (PDA). Sample separation was accomplished with the same
method as described above (Peptide Purity). The sample concentration (Cpeptide) was determined
by relating the UV area of the main peak of the sample to a linear standard curve of a reference
peptide with known concentration (Cstandard). The different UV extinction coefficients (EC) of
sample and reference peptide were calculated based on the different amino acid sequences
according to reference1 and considered in the concentration calculation as described by the
following equation:
C Peptide=( peak area)peptide∗ECSample( peak area)standard∗ECPeptide
∗CStandard (2)
Chemical stability. Solutions from solid samples were prepared in specific buffer systems
with a concentration of 1 mg/mL compound based on the previously determined purity. Solid
S3
peptide was placed in a suitable glass vial and dissolved in 80% volume of the buffering
system while gently stirring for 1h under light protection at 200 rpm. After re-adjustment of
the pH value (if necessary) with HCl or NaOH, buffering solution was added up to the final
volume. After 15 min of homogenization at 200 rpm, the solution was filtered through 0.22
µm pore size under laminar flow conditions. The flowing buffer systems were used: a) 20 mM
acetate buffer pH 4.5, b) 25 mM acetate buffer pH 4.5, 2.7 mg/mL m-cresol, 15.3 mg/mL
glycerol, 3 mg/mL L-methionine, c) 20 mM phosphate buffer pH 7.4.
The obtained solutions were aliquoted into HPLC glass vials for storage at two different
temperatures for 28 days. One vial was stored at 2 °C as a reference and the second vial was
force degraded at 40 °C. Afterwards two different methods were applied to assess chemical
stability of the peptide by comparing the purity after storage at the two different temperatures.
Method A) Chemical degradation with UHPLC-RP/UV-MS. Prior to measurement the
vials were centrifuged for 15 minutes at 2500 RCF and a 2 µL aliquot of the supernatant was
injected on the UHPLC System consisting of a Waters Acquity I-class LC equipped with a
photodiode-array detector (PDA) that was hyphenated to a Waters LCT Premier TOF. Sample
separation was accomplished with the same method as described above (Peptide Purity). The
mass spectrometer, equipped with an ESI source, was operated according to the
manufacturer’s instructions in the W flight mode. Spectra were recorded with positive polarity
in the range of 300 to 3000 m/z at a resolution of about 10000. The MS-Spectra were created
and analyzed for each integrated UV-peak higher than approximately 0.2% of the total area
for the samples stressed for 28 days at 40 °C. Results were compared with that of the samples
stored at 2 °C in order to discriminate between impurities (also present at 2 °C) and
degradation products (only present after 40 °C stress). Overall, chemical stability was rated
through relative purity loss (degradation) calculated by the following equation:
S4
Relative Purity Loss [% ]=( Purity 2° C )−(Purity 4 0° C)
(Purity 2 °C)∗100 % (3)where the purity values were
calculated from the chromatograms at 214 nm after manual integration as described above.
In addition the mass balance is calculated as:
Mass Balance [% ]=(total peak area 40 °C )−(t otal peak area 2° C)
( t otal peak area2 °C )∗100 % (4)
where total peak area refers to the sum of the area of all peaks in the corresponding
chromatograms (214 nm). This value, that ideally equals 0%, is an indicator for physical
instability (e.g. precipitation would lead to a negative mass balance) and degradation
components eluting outside of the integration window (e.g. very unpolar components could elute
in the wash phase).
Method B) Increase of high molecular weight protein (HMWPs) with UHPLC-SEC/UV-
MS. Prior to measurement the vials were centrifuged for 15 minutes at 2500 RCF and a 2µL
aliquot of the supernatant was injected on the UHPLC System consisting of a Waters Acquity
H-class UHPLC equipped with a photodiode-array detector (PDA) that was hyphenated to an
Waters LCT Premier TOF. Sample separation was accomplished on an Agilent AdvanceBio
SEC column with 130 A 2.7 µm particles in a 4.6x150 mm column dimension operated at 30
°C. The UV absorption was detected at 214 nm. With an isocratic flow of a mixture of 60%
acetonitrile and 40% water containing 0.1% TFA at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min the samples
were eluted within a 12 min run, followed by a 2 min wash time. Growth of HMWPs was
rated by relative HMWP increase calculated by the following equation:
Relative HMWP Increase [%]=(%Monomer 2° C)−(% Monomer 40 ° C)
(%Monomer 2° C)∗100 % (5)
with %Monomer being the percentage of the monomer peak relative to the total peak area.
In addition the mass balance is calculated as:
S5
Mass Balance [% ]=( total peak area 40°C )−(t otal peak area 2° C)
( t otal peak area2 °C )∗100 % (6)
The mass spectrometer, equipped with an ESI source, was operated according to the
manufacturer’s instructions in the W flight mode. Spectra were recorded with positive polarity in
the range of 300 to 3000 m/z at a resolution of about 10000. The MS-Spectra were created and
analyzed for the peptide monomer peak and the HMWP peaks to confirm the molecule size.
Capillary isoelectric focusing for isoelectric point (pI) determination. Solid peptide
samples (lyophilisate) were dissolved in de-ionized water. For injection in the iCE3 system
(ProteinSimple, California), the samples were further diluted with master mix solution
composed of 0.35% methylcellulose, 8% carrier ampholyte (pH 3-10) solution, 0.5% pI 4.22
marker and 0.5% pI 9.46 marker to obtain a 0.2 mg/mL peptide solution. Samples were
injected into a capillary cartridge with electrolytic tanks to fill the capillary column
completely. Peptides and pI markers were separated and focused within 6 minutes based on
their specific pI in the pH gradient that was created by applying 1500-3000 Volt. The UV
detector monitors the whole column which allows analyzing the peptides pI based on position
in the gradient calibrated by the specific pI markers.
Thioflavin T (ThT) binding. Investigations were carried out to determine fibrillation
tendencies under stress conditions by shaking at 37°C within Fluoroskan Ascent FL. For the
tests in Fluoroskan Ascent FL, 200 µL sample were placed into a 96 well mictrotiter plate PS
(Polystyrene), flat bottom, Greiner Fluotrac No. 655076. Plates were sealed with Scotch Tape
(Quiagen). Samples were stressed by continuous cycles of 30 s shaking at 960 rpm and 30 s
rest period at 37°C. Fibrillation kinetics was monitored by measuring fluorescence intensity
S6
every 20 minutes. Peptides were dissolved in a buffer system to a final concentration of 3
mg/ml. 20µL of a 10.1 mM aqueous ThT solution were added to 2 mL of peptide solution to
receive a final concentration of 100 µM ThT. Each sample solution was divided into eight
replicates. The following buffer systems were used: a) 100 mM acetate buffer pH 4.5, b) 100
mM acetate buffer pH 4.5, 2.7 mg/mL m-cresol.
Dynamic light scattering (DLS). Peptides were dissolved in an aqueous buffers to the final
concentration of 5 mg/mL using the following buffering systems: a) 15 mM acetate buffer pH
4.5, b) 15 mM phosphate buffer pH 7.4. In addition, each buffer system was tested with 2.7
mg/mL m-cresol added as preservative. Sample preparation included dissolution of freeze-
dryed peptide, pH adjustment, and a final filtration through 0.22µm pore size (Millipore,
Millex GV, PVDF membrane) into a clean vial. DLS measurements were performed on a
DynaPro Plate Reader II (Wyatt Technology, Santa Barbara, CA, US) using a low volume
non-treated black polystyrene 384 assay plate with clear bottom (Corning, NY, US).
Measurements were taken with a 830 nm laser light source at an angle of 158°. Samples were
measured in a 9 mm insert for 5 seconds (acquisition time) and 15 times (number of
acquisitions). Samples were tempered for 1 hour at +25°C and visually inspected.
Measurement was performed in triplicates. Therefore three times aliquots of 30 µL were
pipetted from the vial into a 384 assay plate and sealed. The plate was centrifuged for 2
minutes at 450 RCF. After removing the seal the samples were measured at 25°C. For every
peptide solution, DLS parameters were determined as an average over triplicates with non-
negatively constrained least squares (NNLS) methods using Dynals algorithms with
regularization fit.
Determination of DLS self-interaction parameter (kD).
S7
The DLS self-interaction parameter (kD) is a measure to describe inter-particle interactions,
where the particles are folded proteins or peptides.2,3 The parameter kD is derived from the
concentration dependence of the diffusion coefficient D, which is given by an expansion in
powers of the concentration c:
D (c )=D0(1+kD c+k iDc2+k jD c3+…) (7)
Neglecting the higher order terms, i.e. kiD = kjD = … = 0, the data can be fitted linearly
according to the equation:
D=D0(1+k D c) (8)
where D is the measured diffusion coefficient, D0 is the diffusion coefficient at a theoretic
sample concentration of zero, c is the sample concentration and kD is the DLS interaction
parameter. Experimental values of D were determined at peptide concentrations of 1 mg/mL,
2 mg/mL, 3.5 mg/mL, and 5 mg/mL and fitted to a straight line using equation (8).
The intercept of this graph is D0 and the slope of the line is kD/D0. kD can therefore be
calculated from the slope of the graph.
The parameter kD can be used to describe the interaction of protein or peptide molecules or
oligomers with oneself in solution and is theoretically related to the second virial coefficient
B22 as for example described by Harding and Johnson,
k D=2 B22 M −ks−ν (9)
where M is the molar mass, ks the first order concentration coefficient of sedimentation
velocity and 𝝂 the partial specific volume.4
Sample preparation included dissolution of freeze-dryed peptide, pH adjustment, and a final
filtration through 0.22µm pore size (Millipore, Millex GV, PVDF membrane) into a clean vial
S8
for the highest concentration. All lower concentrations were prepared by diluting the stock
solution using filtered matching placebo.
Hydrophobicity analysis and identification of aggregation hot spots. The following
amino acids were considered as hydrophobic: Val, Ile, Leu, Met, Phe, Trp, Cys, Ala, Tyr, Pro,
Gly, Aib, Lys(yE-yE-C16). All these amino acids were identified by colour coding (red) in
the peptides 3D structure. The most uninterrupted continuous patches were identified as
aggregation hot spots.
Charge, isoelectric point and electrostatic field calculation. For calculation of charge vs
pH titration curves, the pKa values of titratable main chain and side chain atoms of natural
and unnatural amino acids were computed using epik.5 The total peptide charge at different
pH values is the sum of the positive and negative charges of the individual amino acids that
were calculated according to the Henderson Hasselbalch equation.6 The isoelectric point was
calculated by identifying the pH value where the total peptide charge amounts to 0. For
electrostatic field calculation and visualization at different pH values, we used the Poisson-
Boltzmann (APBS) method7 and maestro.8
Molecular dynamics simulations. MD simulations were carried out using an explicit solvent
MD package, Desmond program (version 4.7, Desmond Molecular Dynamics System; D. E.
Shaw Research, New York, NY, USA and version 3.1, Maestro-Desmond Interoperability
Tools; Schrödinger) with inbuilt optimized potentials for liquid simulation (OPLS 2.1) force
field.9–11 The peptides were prepared for simulation by first checking their correctness using
the Protein Preparation wizard tool and Epik module was used for deriving the protonation
states of the peptides at two different pH values – 4.5 and 7.4. The system was prepared by S9
placing the peptides in a cubic box with periodic boundary conditions specifying the shape
and size of box as 10 Å × 10 Å × 10 Å distance. Predefined TIP3P water model was used as a
solvent and the systems were neutralized by adding appropriate number of ions. The solvated
systems were relaxed by implementing Steepest Descent and the limited-memory Broyden-
Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno algorithms in a hybrid manner. The simulation was performed
under NPT ensemble for 500ns implementing the Berendsen thermostat and barostat methods.
Nose-Hoover thermostat algorithm12,13 was used to maintain a constant temperature of 300 K
and MartynaTobias-Klein Barostat algorithm14 was employed for maintaining 1 atm of
pressure throughout the simulation, respectively. The short-range coulombic interactions were
analyzed using the short-range method with a cut-off value of 9.0 Å. The Particle Mesh Ewald
(PME) method15 was used for treating the long-range electrostatic interactions. All bonds
involving hydrogen atoms were constrained using the SHAKE algorithm.16
Mixed-solvent molecular dynamics simulations. The modeled peptide structures17 were
used as starting structures for mixed-solvent simulations which were carried out using a
mixture of water, acetate and m-cresol molecules. The program Packmol18 was used to place
the desired number of m-cresol and acetate molecules in the solvated systems. These solvated
systems were then neutralized using required number of Na+ ions (1 peptide, 4 Na+, 8 acetate,
10 m-cresol, 8580 T3P). The atom type definition and the associated force field parameters
were derived using Schrödinger suite version 2016-3. Relaxation and production MD
simulations were carried out as described above.
Analysis of molecular dynamics simulations. As an indicator of local backbone fluctuations
over the entire simulation length, standard deviation of Ψ and Φ backbone torsion angles
(Radians) was calculated from 100 snapshots that were generated at equal intervals from the
simulated trajectory. For comprehensive visual analysis of conformational peptide stability,
S10
these 100 snapshots were superimposed to the starting structures using the Cα atoms of a
sequence stretch with low backbone fluctuation (residues 21-27 in all simulations) as
reference. The same fitting parameters were furthermore used for the calculation of root mean
square fluctuations (rmsf) for each residue over the entire simulation.
S11
Supplemental Figures and Tables
Supplemental Figure S1. Standard Deviation of psi and phi backbone torsion angles (Radians) calculated in MD simulations of 500 ns as an indicator of local backbone fluctuations over the entire simulation length. The x-axis represents peptide sequences while the y-axis is radians.
S12
Supplemental Figure S2. Root-mean square fluctuation (rmsf) plot during molecular dynamic (MD) simulations. The figure shows Cα rmsf of peptides 1 and 2 at pH 4.5 in the absence and presence of cresol in MD simulations of 500 ns. The x-axis represents peptide sequences while the y-axis is average rmsf values.
S13
Supplemental Table S1. UHPLC gradient for peptide purity determination.
Time [min] Flow [mL/min] %A %B Curve
1 initial 0.5 80 20
2 3 0.5 80 20
3 23 0.5 25 75 linear
4 23.5 0.5 5 95
5 26.5 0.5 5 95 linear
6 27 0.5 80 20 linear
7 33 0.5 80 20 linear
S14
References
1. Kuipers BJH, Gruppen H. Prediction of molar extinction coefficients of proteins and peptides using UV absorption of the constituent amino acids at 214 nm to enable quantitative reverse phase high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. J Agric Food Chem. 2007;55(14):5445-5451. doi:10.1021/jf070337l
2. Connolly BD, Petry C, Yadav S, et al. Weak Interactions Govern the Viscosity of Concentrated Antibody Solutions: High-Throughput Analysis Using the Diffusion Interaction Parameter. Biophys J. 2012;103(1):69-78. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2012.04.047
3. Yadav S, Liu J, Shire SJ, Kalonia DS. Specific interactions in high concentration antibody solutions resulting in high viscosity. J Pharm Sci. 2010;99(3):1152-1168. doi:10.1002/jps.21898
4. Harding SE, Johnson P. The concentration-dependence of macromolecular parameters. Biochem J. 1985;231(3):543-547.
5. Shelley JC, Cholleti A, Frye LL, Greenwood JR, Timlin MR, Uchimaya M. Epik: a software program for pK( a ) prediction and protonation state generation for drug-like molecules. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2007;21(12):681-691. doi:10.1007/s10822-007-9133-z
6. Po HN, Senozan NM. The Henderson-Hasselbalch Equation: Its History and Limitations. J Chem Educ. 2001;78(11):1499. doi:10.1021/ed078p1499
7. Baker NA, Sept D, Joseph S, Holst MJ, McCammon JA. Electrostatics of nanosystems: application to microtubules and the ribosome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98(18):10037-10041. doi:10.1073/pnas.181342398
8. SC ’06: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2006.
9. Jorgensen WL, Maxwell DS, Tirado-Rives J. Development and Testing of the OPLS All-Atom Force Field on Conformational Energetics and Properties of Organic Liquids. J Am Chem Soc. 1996;118(45):11225-11236. doi:10.1021/ja9621760
10. Jorgensen WL, Tirado-Rives J. The OPLS [optimized potentials for liquid simulations] potential functions for proteins, energy minimizations for crystals of cyclic peptides and crambin. J Am Chem Soc. 1988;110(6):1657-1666. doi:10.1021/ja00214a001
11. Shivakumar D, Harder E, Damm W, Friesner RA, Sherman W. Improving the Prediction of Absolute Solvation Free Energies Using the Next Generation OPLS Force Field. J Chem Theory Comput. 2012;8(8):2553-2558. doi:10.1021/ct300203w
12. Hoover null. Canonical dynamics: Equilibrium phase-space distributions. Phys Rev A Gen Phys. 1985;31(3):1695-1697.
13. Nosé S. A unified formulation of the constant temperature molecular dynamics methods. The Journal of Chemical Physics. 1984;81(1):511-519. doi:10.1063/1.447334
S15
14. Martyna GJ, Tobias DJ, Klein ML. Constant pressure molecular dynamics algorithms. The Journal of Chemical Physics. 1994;101(5):4177-4189. doi:10.1063/1.467468
15. Darden T, York D, Pedersen L. Particle mesh Ewald: An N⋅log(N) method for Ewald sums in large systems. The Journal of Chemical Physics. 1993;98(12):10089-10092. doi:10.1063/1.464397
16. Ryckaert J-P, Ciccotti G, Berendsen HJC. Numerical integration of the cartesian equations of motion of a system with constraints: molecular dynamics of n-alkanes. Journal of Computational Physics. 1977;23(3):327-341. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(77)90098-5
17. Evers A, Bossart M, Pfeiffer-Marek S, et al. Dual Glucagon-like Peptide 1 (GLP-1)/Glucagon Receptor Agonists Specifically Optimized for Multidose Formulations. J Med Chem. 2018;61(13):5580-5593. doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b00292
18. Martínez L, Andrade R, Birgin EG, Martínez JM. PACKMOL: a package for building initial configurations for molecular dynamics simulations. J Comput Chem. 2009;30(13):2157-2164. doi:10.1002/jcc.21224
S16
top related