Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative characterization by asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation of IgG thermal aggregation with and without polymer protective agents

  • Paper in Forefront
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Complexes formed between poly(acrylates) and polyclonal immunoglobulin G (IgG) in its native conformation and after heat stress were characterized using asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation (AF4) coupled with on-line UV-Vis spectroscopy and multi-angle light-scattering detection (MALS). Mixtures of IgG and poly(acrylates) of increasing structural complexity, sodium poly(acrylate) (PAA), a sodium poly(acrylate) bearing at random 3 mol % n-octadecyl groups, and a random copolymer of sodium acrylate (35 mol %), N-n-octylacrylamide (25 mol %) and N-isopropylacrylamide (40 mol %), were fractionated in a sodium phosphate buffer (0.02 M, pH 6.8) in the presence, or not, of 0.1 M NaCl. The AF4 protocol developed allowed the fractionation of solutions containing free poly(acrylates), native IgG monomer and dimer, poly(acrylates)/IgG complexes made up of one IgG molecule and a few polymer chains, and/or larger poly(acrylates)/IgG aggregates. The molar mass and recovery of the soluble analytes were obtained for mixed solutions of poly(acrylates) and native IgG and for the same solutions incubated at 65 °C for 10 min. From the combined AF4 results, we concluded that in solutions of low ionic strength, the presence of PAA increased the recovery ratio of IgG after thermal stress because of the formation of electrostatically-driven PAA/IgG complexes, but PAA had no protective effect in the presence of 0.1 M NaCl. Poly(acrylates) bearing hydrophobic groups significantly increased IgG recovery after stress, independently of NaCl concentration, because of the synergistic effect of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions. The AF4 results corroborate conclusions drawn from a previous study combining four analytical techniques. This study demonstrates that AF4 is an efficient tool for the analysis of protein formulations subjected to stress, an important achievement given the anticipated important role of proteins in near-future human therapies.

ᅟ

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. Communication with the supplier indicates that the short fragments are not removed readily from the IgG monomer.

References

  1. Bucciantini M, Giannoni E, Chiti F, Baroni F, Formigli L, Zurdo JS, Taddei N, Ramponi G, Dobson CM, Stefani M (2002) Inherent toxicity of aggregates implies a common mechanism for protein misfolding diseases. Nature 416(6880):507–511

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Roberts CJ (2007) Non-native protein aggregation kinetics. Biotechnol Bioeng 98(5):927–938

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang W, Nema S, Teagarden D (2010) Protein aggregation pathways and influencing factors. Int J Pharm 390(2):89–99

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Philo JS (2006) Is any measurement method optimal for all aggregate sizes and types? AAPS J 8(3):E564–E571

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Litzen A, Walter JK, Krischollek H, Wahlund KG (1993) Separation and quantitation of monoclonal-antibody aggregates by asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation and comparison to gel-permeation chromatography. Anal Biochem 212(2):469–480

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wahlund KG (2013) Flow field-flow fractionation: critical overview. J Chromatogr A 1287:97–112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ma PL, Buschmann MD, Winnik FM (2010) Complete physicochemical characterization of DNA/chitosan complexes by multiple detection using asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation. Anal Chem 82(23):9636–9643

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Heroult J, Nischwitz V, Bartczak D, Goenaga-Infante H (2014) The potential of asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation hyphenated to multiple detectors for the quantification and size estimation of silica nanoparticles in a food matrix. Anal Bioanal Chem 406(16):3919–3927

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Pasch H, Makan A, Chirowodza H, Ngaza N, Hiller W (2014) Analysis of complex polymers by multidetector field-flow fractionation. Anal Bioanal Chem 406(6):1585–1596

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hawe A, Romeijn S, Filipe V, Jiskoot W (2012) Asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation method for the analysis of submicron protein aggregates. J Pharm Sci 101(11):4129–4139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Runyon JR, Nilsson L, Alftren J, Bergenstahl B (2013) Characterization of oat proteins and aggregates using asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation. Anal Bioanal Chem 405(21):6649–6655

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Reschiglian P, Roda B, Zattoni A, Tanase M, Marassi V, Serani S (2014) Hollow-fiber flow field-flow fractionation with multi-angle laser scattering detection for aggregation studies of therapeutic proteins. Anal Bioanal Chem 406(6):1619–1627

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Qureshi RN, Kok WT (2011) Application of flow field-flow fractionation for the characterization of macromolecules of biological interest: a review. Anal Bioanal Chem 399(4):1401–1411

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Yohannes G, Jussila M, Hartonen K, Riekkola ML (2011) Asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation technique for separation and characterization of biopolymers and bioparticles. J Chromatogr A 1218(27):4104–4116

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Weiss WF, Young TM, Roberts CJ (2009) Principles, approaches, and challenges for predicting protein aggregation rates and shelf life. J Pharm Sci 98(4):1246–1277

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin N, Ma DW, Herbet A, Boquet D, Winnik FM, Tribet C (2014) Prevention of thermally induced aggregation of igg antibodies by noncovalent interaction with poly(acrylate) derivatives. Biomacromolecules 15(8):2952–2962

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Borrega R, Tribet C, Audebert R (1999) Reversible gelation in hydrophobic polyelectrolyte/protein mixtures: an example of cross-links between soft and hard colloids. Macromolecules 32(23):7798–7806

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hawe A, Friess W, Sutter M, Jiskoot W (2008) Online fluorescent dye detection method for the characterization of immunoglobulin g aggregation by size exclusion chromatography and asymmetrical flow field flow fractionation. Anal Biochem 378(2):115–122

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Zimm BH (1948) The scattering of light and the radial distribution function of high polymer solutions. J Chem Phys 16(12):1093–1099

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnstone A, Thorpe R (1987) Immunochemistry in practice, 2nd edn. Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schachermeyer S, Ashby J, Kwon M, Zhong WW (2012) Impact of carrier fluid composition on recovery of nanoparticles and proteins in flow field flow fractionation. J Chromatogr A 1264:72–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ma DW, Martin N, Herbet A, Boquet D, Tribet C, Winnik FM (2012) The thermally induced aggregation of immunoglobulin G in solution is prevented by amphipols. Chem Lett 41(10):1380–1382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Collaborative Strategic Program) and by the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (program Blanc International, grant INT 1501 and program Investissement d’Avenir ANR-11-LABX-0011-01). F.M.W. also acknowledges financial support from the World Premier International Research Center Initiative (MPI) MEXT Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry and Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, CP 6128 Succursale Centre Ville, Montréal, H3C 3J7, QC, Canada

    Dewang Ma & Françoise M. Winnik

  2. Ecole Normale Supérieure-PSL Research University, Département de Chimie, Sorbonne Universités - UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS UMR 8640 PASTEUR, 24, rue Lhomond, 75005, Paris, France

    Nicolas Martin & Christophe Tribet

  3. WPI International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA), National Institute for Materials Science, 1-1 Namiki, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-0044, Japan

    Françoise M. Winnik

  4. Department of Chemistry and Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

    Françoise M. Winnik

Authors
  1. Dewang Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicolas Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christophe Tribet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Françoise M. Winnik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Françoise M. Winnik.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 46 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, D., Martin, N., Tribet, C. et al. Quantitative characterization by asymmetrical flow field-flow fractionation of IgG thermal aggregation with and without polymer protective agents. Anal Bioanal Chem 406, 7539–7547 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-014-8200-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-014-8200-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation