Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 90, Issue 2, pp 553–564 | Cite as

An altered camelid-like single domain anti-idiotypic antibody fragment of HM-1 killer toxin: acts as an effective antifungal agent

  • M. Enamul Kabir
  • Senthilkumar Krishnaswamy
  • Masahiko Miyamoto
  • Yasuhiro Furuichi
  • Tadazumi KomiyamaEmail author
Biotechnologically Relevant Enzymes and Proteins


Phage-display and competitive panning elution leads to the identification of minimum-sized antigen binders together with conventional antibodies from a mouse cDNA library constructed from HM-1 killer toxin neutralizing monoclonal antibody (nmAb-KT). Antigen-specific altered camelid-like single-domain heavy chain antibody (scFv K2) and a conventional antibody (scFv K1) have been isolated against the idiotypic antigen nmAb-KT. The objectives of the study were to examine (1) their properties as compared to conventional antibodies and also (2) their antifungal activity against different pathogenic and non-pathogenic fungal species. The alternative small antigen-binder, i.e., the single-domain heavy chain antibody, was originated from a conventional mouse scFv phage library through somatic hyper-mutation while selection against antigen. This single-domain antibody fragment was well expressed in bacteria and specifically bound with the idiotypic antigen nmAb-KT and had a high stability and solubility. Experimental data showed that the binding affinity for this single-domain antibody was 272-fold higher (K d = 1.07 × 10−10 M) and antifungal activity was three- to fivefold more efficient (IC50 = 0.46 × 10−6 to 1.17 × 10−6 M) than that for the conventional antibody (K d = 2.91 × 10−8 M and IC50 = 2.14 × 10−6 to 3.78 × 10−6 M). The derived single-domain antibody might be an ideal scaffold for anti-idiotypic antibody therapy and the development of smaller peptides or peptide mimetic drugs due to their less complex antigen-binding site. We expect that such single-domain synthetic antibodies will find their way into a number of biotechnological or medical applications.


Phage-display panning Single-domain antibody fragment Antifungal activity HM-1 killer toxin Killer toxin (HM-1) neutralizing monoclonal antibody 



This research work was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Authors’ contributions

M.E. Kabir and T. Komiyama conceived and designed the experiments. M.E. Kabir and S. Krishnaswamy performed the experiments. M.E. Kabir, M. Miyamoto, Y. Furuichi, and T. Komiyama analyzed the data. M.E. Kabir wrote the paper.


  1. Bird RE, Hardman KD, Jacobson JW, Johnson S, Kaufman BM, Lee SM, Lee T, Pope SH, Riordan GS, Whitlow M (1988) Single-chain antigen-binding proteins. Science 242:423–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cassone A (2008) Fungal vaccines: real progress from real challenges. Lancet Infect Dis 2:114–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cutler JE, Deepe GS Jr, Klein BS (2007) Advances in combating fungal diseases: vaccines on the threshold. Nat Rev Microbiol 1:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Haard HJ, van Neer N, Reurs A, Hufton SE, Roovers RC, Henderikx P, de Bruïne AP, Arends JW, Hoogenboom HR (1999) A large non-immunized human Fab fragment phage library that permits rapid isolation and kinetic analysis of high affinity antibodies. J Biol Chem 274:18218–18230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dumoulin M, Conrath K, Van Meirhaeghe A, Meersman F, Heremans K, Frenken LG, Muyldermans S, Wyns L, Matagne A (2002) Single-domain antibody fragments with high conformational stability. Protein Sci 11:500–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ghahroudi MA, Desmyter A, Wyns L, Hamers R, Muyldermans S (1997) Selection and identification of single domain antibody fragments from camel heavy-chain antibodies. FEBS Lett 414:521–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Griffiths AD, Williams SC, Hartley O, Tomlinson IM, Waterhouse P, Crosby WL, Kontermann RE, Jones PT, Low NM, Allison TJ, Prospero TD, Hoogenboom HR, Nissim A, Cox JPL, Harrison JL, Zaccolo M, Gherardi E, Winter G (1994) Isolation of high affinity human antibodies directly from large synthetic repertoires. EMBO J 13:3245–3260Google Scholar
  8. Gruen LC, Kortt AA, Nice E (1993) Determination of relative binding affinity of influenza virus N9 sialidases with the Fab fragment of monoclonal antibody NC41 using biosensor technology. Eur J Biochem 217:319–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hamers-Casterman C, Atarhouch T, Muyldermans S, Robinson G, Hamers C, Songa EB, Bendahman N, Hamers R (1993) Naturally occurring antibodies devoid of light chains. Nature 363:446–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harmsen MM, De Haard HJ (2007) Properties, production, and applications of camelid single domain antibody fragments. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 77:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holliger P, Prospero T, Winter G (1993) “Diabodies”: small bivalent and bispecific antibody fragments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:6444–6448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoogenboom HR (2002) Overview of antibody phage-display technology and its applications. Methods Mol Biol 178:1–37Google Scholar
  13. Huston JS, Levinson D, Mudgett-Hunter M, Tai MS, Novotný J, Margolies MN, Ridge RJ, Bruccoleri RE, Haber E, Crea R, Oppermann H (1988) Protein engineering of antibody binding sites: recovery of specific activity in an anti-digoxin single-chain Fv analogue produced in Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:5879–5883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kabat EA, Wu TT (1991) Identical V region amino acid sequences and segments of sequences in antibodies of different specificities. Relative contributions of VH and VL genes, minigenes, and complementarity-determining regions to binding of antibody-combining sites. J Immunol 147:1709–1719Google Scholar
  15. Kabat EA, Wu TT, Perry H, Gottesman K, Foeller C (1991) Sequences of proteins of immunological interest, 5th edn. National Institutes of Health, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  16. Kabir ME, Krishnaswamy S, Miyamoto M, Furuichi Y, Komiyama T (2009) An improved phage-display panning method to produce an HM-1 killer toxin anti-idotypic antibody. BMC Biotechnol 9:99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kabir ME, Krishnaswamy S, Miyamoto M, Furuichi Y, Komiyama T (2010) Purification and functional characterization of a camelid-like single-domain antimycotic antibody by engineering in affinity tag. Protein Expr Purif 72:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kasahara S, Ben Inoue S, Mio T, Yamada T, Nakajima T, Ichishima E, Furuichi Y, Yamada H (1994) Involvement of cell wall beta-glucan in the action of HM-1 killer toxin. FEBS Lett 1:27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Komiyama T, Ohta T, Urakami H, Shiratori Y, Takasuka T, Satoh M, Watanabe T, Furuichi Y (1996) Pore formation on proliferating yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae cell buds by HM-1 killer toxin. J Biochem 4:731–736Google Scholar
  20. Komiyama T, Shirai T, Ohta T, Urakami H, Furuichi Y, Ohta Y, Tsukada Y (1998) Action properties of HYI killer toxin from Williopsis saturnus var. saturnus, and antibiotics, aculeacin A and papulacandin B. Biol Pharm Bull 10:1013–1019Google Scholar
  21. Lendvai N, Qu XW, Hsueh W, Casadevall A (2000) Mechanism for the isotype dependence of antibody-mediated toxicity in Cryptococcus neoformans-infected mice. J Immunol 164:4367–4374Google Scholar
  22. Levitz SM (1991) The ecology of Cryptococcus neoformans and the epidemiology of cryptococcosis. Rev Infect Dis 13:1163–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lu D, Shen J, Vil MD, Zhang H, Jimenez X, Bohlen P, Whitte L, Zhu Z (2003) Tailoring in vitro selection for a picomolar affinity human antibody directed against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 for enhanced neutralizing activity. J Biol Chem 278:43496–43507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Majidi J, Barar J, Baradaran B, Abdolalizadeh J, Omidi Y (2009) Target therapy of cancer: implementation of monoclonal antibodies and nanobodies. Hum Antibodies 18:81–100Google Scholar
  25. Mitchell TG, Perfect JR (1995) Cryptococcosis in the era of AIDS: 100 years after the discovery of Cryptococcus neoformans. Clin Microbiol Rev 8:515–548Google Scholar
  26. Muyldermans S, Atarhouch T, Saldanha J, Barbosa JA, Hamers R (1994) Sequence and structure of VH domain from naturally occurring camel heavy chain immunoglobulins lacking light chains. Protein Eng 7:1129–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ (2007) Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev 20:133–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rahbarizadeh F, Rasaee MJ, Forouzandeh-Moghadam M, Allameh AA (2005) High expression and purification of the recombinant camelid anti-MUC1 single domain antibodies in Escherichia coli. Protein Expr Purif 44:32–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Selvakumar D, Miyamoto M, Furuichi Y, Komiyama T (2006) Inhibition of fungal β-1,3-glucan synthase and cell growth by HM-1 killer toxin single-chain anti-idiotypic antibodies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50:3090–3097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shoham S, Levitz SM (2005) The immune response to fungal infections. Br J Haematol 129:569–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Singh N, Gayowski T, Wagener MM, Marino IR (1997) Clinical spectrum of invasive cryptococcosis in liver transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus. Clin Transplant 11:66–70Google Scholar
  32. Takasuka T, Komiyama T, Furuichi Y, Watanabe T (1995) Cell wall synthesis specific cytocidal effect of Hansenula mrakii toxin-1 on Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cell Mol Biol Res 41:575–581Google Scholar
  33. Van Bockstaele F, Holz JB, Revets H (2009) The development of nanobodies for therapeutic applications. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 10:1212–1224Google Scholar
  34. Vaughan TJ, Williams AJ, Pritchard K, Osbourn JK, Pope AR, Earnshaw JC, McCafferty J, Hodits RA, Wilton J, Johnson KS (1996) Human antibodies with sub-nanomolar affinities isolated from a large non-immunized phage display library. Nat Biotechnol 14:309–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ward ES, Güssow D, Griffiths AD, Jones PT, Winter G (1989) Binding activities of a repertoire of single immunoglobulin variable domains secreted from Escherichia coli. Nature 341:544–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yamamoto T, Imai M, Tachibana K, Mayumi M (1986) Application of monoclonal antibodies to the isolation and characterization of a killer toxin secreted by Hansenula mrakii. FEBS Lett 195:253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yamamoto T, Uchida K, Hiratani T, Miyazaki T, Yagiu J, Yamaguchi H (1988) In vitro activity of the killer toxin from yeast Hansenula mrakii against yeasts and molds. J Antibiot (Tokyo) 41:398–403Google Scholar
  38. Yau KYF, Tout NL, Trevors JT, Lee H, Hall JC (1998) Bacterial expression and characterization of a picloram-specific recombinant Fab for residue analysis. J Agric Food Chem 46:4457–4463CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Enamul Kabir
    • 1
  • Senthilkumar Krishnaswamy
    • 1
  • Masahiko Miyamoto
    • 1
  • Yasuhiro Furuichi
    • 2
  • Tadazumi Komiyama
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical SciencesNiigata University of Pharmacy and Applied Life SciencesNiigataJapan
  2. 2.GeneCare Research Institute Co. Ltd.KamakuraJapan

Personalised recommendations