Biased selection of propagation-related TUPs from phage display peptide libraries
- 257 Downloads
Phage display is rapidly advancing as a screening strategy in drug discovery and drug delivery. Phage-encoded combinatorial peptide libraries can be screened through the affinity selection procedure of biopanning to find pharmaceutically relevant cell-specific ligands. However, the unwanted enrichment of target-unrelated peptides (TUPs) with no true affinity for the target presents an important barrier to the successful screening of phage display libraries. Propagation-related TUPs (Pr-TUPs) are an emerging but less-studied category of phage display-derived false-positive hits that are displayed on the surface of clones with faster propagation rates. Despite long regarded as an unbiased selection system, accumulating evidence suggests that biopanning may create biological bias toward selection of phage clones with certain displayed peptides. This bias can be dependent on or independent of the displayed sequence and may act as a major driving force for the isolation of fast-growing clones. Sequence-dependent bias is reflected by censorship or over-representation of some amino acids in the displayed peptide and sequence-independent bias is derived from either point mutations or rare recombination events occurring in the phage genome. It is of utmost interest to clean biopanning data by identifying and removing Pr-TUPs. Experimental and bioinformatic approaches can be exploited for Pr-TUP discovery. With no doubt, obtaining deeper insight into how Pr-TUPs emerge during biopanning and how they could be detected provides a basis for using cell-targeting peptides isolated from phage display screening in the development of disease-specific diagnostic and therapeutic platforms.
KeywordsPeptide phage display Combinatorial library Propagation-related TUP Biological bias Targeting
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.
- Barbas C, Burton D, Scott J, Silverman G (2001) Phage display: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, PlainviewGoogle Scholar
- De Smit MH (1998) Translational control by mRNA structure in eubacteria: molecular biology and physical chemistry. Cold Spring Harbor Monogr Arch 35:495–540Google Scholar
- Heemskerk JA, Van Deutekom JCT, Van Kuik-Romeijn P, Platenburg GJ (2013) Molecules for targeting compounds to various selected organs or tissues. Google PatentsGoogle Scholar
- Herman RE, Makienko EG, Badders DL, Fuller M (2010) Phage displayed cell binding peptides. Google PatentsGoogle Scholar
- Nemudraya A, Richter V, Kuligina E (2016) Phage peptide libraries as a source of targeted ligands. Acta Nat 8(1):48–57Google Scholar
- Tikunova N, Morozova V (2009) Phage display on the base of filamentous bacteriophages: application for recombinant antibodies selection. Acta Nat 1(3):8–20Google Scholar
- Umlauf BJ, McGuire MJ, Brown KC (2014) Introduction of plasmid encoding for rare tRNAs reduces amplification bias in phage display biopanning. Biotechniques 58:81Google Scholar