Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5443_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
Abhishek Singh, Seema Yadav, Narahari Narayan Palei
✶
,
and Biswa Mohan Sahoo
17 Molecular simulation-based technology
for antibody–drug conjugates for tumor
targeting: current scenario and future
insights
Abstract: Molecular simulation-based technology is revolutionizing the field of anti-
body-drug conjugates (ADCs) for tumor targeting. By employing computational methods
to simulate the behavior of molecules at the atomic level, it can provide valuable in-
sights into the interactions among antibodies, drugs, and target tumor cells. ADCs are
extremely promising and have the potential to revolutionize cancer treatment. Their
distinctive design combines the deadly efficacy of small-molecule medicines with the
specificity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), providing some benefits that add to their
significance in the field of oncology. Innovative creation of safe and effective ADCs is
made possible by careful selection of a strong cytotoxic payload, stable linker, and high-
affinity Ab. Numerous mAbs, including cetuximab, rituximab, and avastin, are widely
recognized as conventional therapies for hematological malignancies and solid tumors.
Antibody -drug conjugates (ADCs) combine the powerful cytotoxicity of small-molecule
medicines with the accuracy of mAbs, marking a revolutionary advance in cancer ther-
apy. This chapter discusses various methods of molecular modeling and simulation, the
significance of ADCs in cancer treatment, and their cytotoxic payloads of ADCs. Several
ADCs have undergone or are currently undergoing clinical trials across different cancer
types, including breast cancer, lung cancer, and lymphoma. In conclusion, high-perfor-
mance computing (HPC) and artificial intelligence (AI) are being incorporated into the
dynamic area of molecular simulations for ADCs.
Keywords: Antibody-drug conjugates, molecular modeling, clinical trials, artificial
intelligence
✶
Corresponding author: Narahari Narayan Palei, Amity Institute of Pharmacy, Amity University,
Lucknow Campus, Lucknow 226010, Uttar Pradesh, India, e-mail: nnpalei@lko.amity.edu
Abhishek Singh, Amity Institute of Pharmacy, Amity University, Lucknow Campus, Lucknow 226010,
Uttar Pradesh, India, e-mail: abhishek.singh36@s.amity.edu
Seema Yadav, Amity Institute of Pharmacy, Amity University, Lucknow Campus, Lucknow 226010,
Uttar Pradesh, India, e-mail: seema8400422601@gmail.com
Biswa Mohan Sahoo, School of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Centurion University of Technology &
Management, Bhubaneswar, Khurda-752050, Odisha, India
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111208671-017
https://t.me/med1917
17.1 Introduction
Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are a therapeutic offshoot of Paul Ehrlich’s “magic bul-
let” theory, which was developed as a pharmaceutical response to oncologists’ demands
for more specific and precise tools to target tumor cells [1]. Ehrlich first proposed this
theory more than a century ago. ADCs combine the payload’s ability to kill cancer with
the targeting and pharmacokinetic properties of the antibody moiety [2]. By restricting
theamountoftimethatnormaltissuesareexposedtotheactivecytotoxiccomponent,
this tumor-directed delivery method is intended to minimize off-target effects in patients
[3]. Many pharmacological and safety concerns hindered the development of the first gen-
eration of ADCs, which led to a decrease in the acceptance of this treatment strategy [4].
The ADC sector has made the most significant translational progress, despite the fact that
many site-selective drug delivery techniques have been investigated for delivering che-
motherapeutics more directly to tumors; these are outside the purview of this article [5].
A powerful cytotoxic drug is chemically linked to a monoclonal antibody (mAb) that de-
tects tumor-associated antigens to form ADCs. ADCs are a newly developed family of tar-
geted anticancer drug delivery agents that give tumors continuous and targeted delivery
of cytotoxic drugs [6]. The three primary structural components of an ADC are the linker,
the cytotoxic drug, and the antibody. The innovative creation of safe and effective ADCs
is made possible by the careful selection of a strong cytotoxic payload, stable linker, and
high-affinity Ab. Numerous mAbs, including cetuximab, rituximab, and avastin, are
widely recognized as conventional therapies for hematological malignancies and solid tu-
mors [7]. On the other hand, because of their nonspecific toxicity, pristine chemothera-
peutics like vinblastine, doxorubicin, and paclitaxel have limited application in the
treatment of cancer, which narrows the therapeutic window and increases drug resis-
tance. Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) combine the powerful cytotoxicity of small-
molecule medicines with the accuracy of mAbs, marking a revolutionary advance in
cancer therapy. Remarkable progress has been made in this special class of biothera-
peutics, as demonstrated by the approval of therapeutically successful ADCs like trastu-
zumab emtansine and brentuximab vedotin. Targeted cancer treatment has never been
easier because of the ADC framework’s strategic combination of immunotherapy and
chemotherapy [3]. But creating ADCs is a difficult procedure that involves several ob-
stacles. These molecules, which include linkers, cytotoxic payloads, and antibodies, are
structurally complicated and require a thorough understanding of their dynamic inter-
actions. Effective payload release, pharmacokinetic optimization, and stability issues
present significant challenges for ADC translation from lab to bedside [8]. Molecular
simulations prove to be a crucial tool in tackling these problems, offering a priceless
window into the complex world of ADCs at the molecular level. A virtual laboratory is
provided via Monte Carlo (MC) techniques, computational methodologies, and molecu-
lar dynamic (MD) simulations to investigate and comprehend the dynamic behavior of
ADC components. With the goal of providing a thorough analysis of the current ap-
proaches, successful applications, and prospective future trajectory, this paper aims to
384 Abhishek Singh et al.
https://t.me/med1917
explore the state of molecular simulation-based technology for ADCs in tumor targeting
[9]. We begin our investigation as scientists navigating the challenging terrain of ADC
creation by analyzing the structural subtleties of ADCs and emphasizing their impor-
tance within the larger context of cancer treatment [10]. The difficulties involved in de-
veloping ADCs are then elucidated, emphasizing the particular obstacles that molecular
simulations seek to surmount. Molecular simulations offer a distinct perspective for de-
ciphering the complex interplay among antibodies, linkers, and payloads, which de-
mands a sophisticated comprehension [11]. We explore the present status of ADC
development in the sections that follow, highlighting the importance of molecular simu-
lations in forecasting antibody–antigen interactions, analyzing payload-release dynam-
ics, and assessing stability and pharmacokinetics. By examining case studies and
success stories, we shed light on situations in which molecular simulations have been
essential in directing the design and development of ADCs. The discovery of ADCs
closed the therapeutic window gap between anticancer agents and cytotoxic drugs, re-
sulting in highly selective anticancer medications. Mylotarg
®
, the first ADC approved by
the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was created for acute myelogenous leuke-
mia (AML) and was a conjugation of the CD33 Ab and a calicheamicin payload [12].
However, 10 years af ter it was first licensed, the drug was taken off the market.
Adcetris
®
, a combination of monomethyl auristatin E and CD30 Ab, is authorized for
the treatment of lymphoma. Emtansine (DM1) was the cytotoxic agent used in the 2013
commercialization of Kadcyla
®
, a medication used to treat HER-2-positive metastatic
breast cancer. Despite the fact that ADCs are made to target antigens specific to tumors,
there are issues with Ab immunogenicity, antigen expression, early drug release, and
low chemotherapeutic drug potency. But over time, bioengineering developments have
enhanced the safety profile of ADCs, especially third-generation ADCs. We go over the
present outlook and the technological advancements in ADCs in this review, with the
goal of creating more effective and safe individualized cancer treatment [13]. Utilizing
the knowledge gained from the collective experience of the early triumphs and failures,
significant technological breakthroughs have been made that currently impact several
ADC design areas, such as conjugation methods, antibody engineering, and chemical
linker optimization. As seen by the four licensed ADCs that are currently accessible in
the USA and the more than 60 others that are undergoing clinical trials, there is new
interest in ADC-based therapy as a revolutionary approach to cancer treatment [14].
17.2 Methods of molecular modeling and simulation
In comparison to its early days, “molecular modeling” has undergone substantial devel-
opment. To demonstrate how atoms combine to form molecules in chemistry classes,
many of us probably remember the plastic balls and sticks [15]. Although computer-
generated models have mostly replaced these physical models, these models did find
17 Molecular simulation-based technology for antibody–drug conjugates 385
https://t.me/med1917
use in study. The term “molecular modeling” nowadays refers to the use of computer-
generated models in the study of molecules, ranging from tiny atomic structures to
complex biomolecules. In order to simulate processes that span an amazing range of
time scales, from extremely fast occurrences lasting only femtoseconds (10−15 s) to con-
siderably slower processes that may take several seconds, these computer-generated
models are essential. It is critical to understand that the size and time span of the sys-
tem under study affect the accuracy and degree of detail offered by these models [16].
Molecular modeling, for example, can identify sub-Ångström variations (less than a bil-
lionth of a meter) between structures, which can significantly affect the binding of a
medicinal molecule to its intended receptor. On the other hand, a distinct set of model-
ing techniques is needed when working with big protein complexes that are orders of
magnitude larger [17]. Essentially, the particular problem being studied has a significant
influence on the modeling approach selected. In the field of molecular modeling, there
is a basic trade-off: the more precise the approach, the longer it takes and the more
computer power needed to get useful findings, particularly when comparing systems of
similar sizes [18]. As a resu lt, scientists need to be very attentive when choosing a
modeling strategy that fits the particulars of their study subject. Because of its flexibil-
ity, molecular modeling is a useful and essential tool for scientific research in a variety
of scientific fields. While it is possible to model groups of molecules in the field of mo-
lecular modeling, such as many peptides and lipids, most studies in the field of cancer
research tend to concentrate on atomistic details [19]. These techniques do have certain
drawbacks, though. They are mainly useful for molecules for which structural informa-
tion has been obtained experimentally using methods such as nuclear magnetic reso-
nance or X-ray crystallography, or for molecules that can be precisely modeled using
computational methods (explained below). Particular restrictions apply to the size and
timescale of systems that atomistic modeling can adequately handle. For example, mod-
ern methods make it possible to analyze soluble proteins on the order of 10
−7
to 10
−6
s,
providing insights into the motions of particular domains within a protein [20]. When it
comes to looking at more significant structural changes, including protein folding or
ion channel activation, they frequently fall short [21]. Longer processes and larger mole-
cule complexes can still be modeled, although doing so requires the use of sophisticated
and relatively imprecise computational techniques. In order to make things more un-
derstandable, this article will address several molecular modeling techniques and their
applications. These techniques will be divided into four categories: atomistic simulation
and modeling methods, protein and protein complex modeling, drug–protein interac-
tion modeling, and simplified techniques that do not provide atomistic-level details [22].
These classifications are a little arbitrary, as several techniques fall into more than one
category or overlap. In these situations, the classification indicates the areas in which
each technique is most frequently used or where it has the greatest potential to be use-
ful in cancer research [23]. An executive summary detailing the advantages, disadvan-
tages, and broad applicability of each method is presented before a succinct but
386 Abhishek Singh et al.
https://t.me/med1917
educational exposition. Figure 17.1 provides a graphical representation of some of the
most popular techniques for ease of viewing [24].
17.3 Significance of ADCs in cancer treatment
ADCs are extremely promising and have the potential to revolutionize the treatment
of cancer. Their distinctive design combines the deadly efficacy of small-molecule
medicines with the specificity of mAbs, providing a number of benefits that add to
their significance in the field of oncology:
17.3.1 Precision targeting
mAbs that bind to antigens overexpressed on the surface of cancer cells are used to
specifically target cancer cells via ADCs [25]. The negative effects of conventional che-
motherapy are often reduced by this focused method, which also reduces damage to
healthy tissues.
Figure 17.1: Newton’s equations for protein dynamics (molecular dynamics), Brownian dynamics for
complex formation, and normal mode analysis for domain motions are examples of standard modeling
and simulation techniques.
17 Molecular simulation-based technology for antibody–drug conjugates 387
https://t.me/med1917
17.3.2 Enhanced therapeutic index
ADCs seek to combine systemic toxicity reduction with maximum therapeutic efficacy
by delivering strong cytotoxic medicines straight to cancer cells. By improving the
therapeutic index, this selective targeting helps to reduce side effects and enable the
administration of bigger doses of drug.
17.3.3 Reduced side effects
ADCs’ precise targeting helps prevent chemotherapy’sharmfuleffectsonhealthy
cells. The overall quality of life for patients receiving therapy is improved when off-
target effects, such as nausea, hair loss, and immunological suppression, are re-
duced [26].
17.3.4 Overcoming drug resistance
ADCs offer a unique approach to conquering drug resistance, a prevalent obstacle in
the treatment of cancer. Targeted antibody delivery, combined with a strong cytotoxic
payload, can get around the defenses that cancer cells have put in place to withstand
conventional treatment.
17.3.5 Diverse applicability
ADCs are adaptable in treating diverse malignancies because they have demonstrated
efficacy across a range of cancer types. Their versatility highlights their potential to
be a key component in the management of solid tumors as well as hematological ma-
lignancies [27].
17.3.6 Potential for personalized medicine
ADCs’ targeted nature makes it possible to customize cancer treatment in certain
ways. ADCs can be created to target certain molecular markers linked to the cancers
of individual patients as our knowledge of tumor biology and genetics develops, open-
ing the door to more individualized and successful treatment approaches.
388 Abhishek Singh et al.
https://t.me/med1917
17.3.7 Clinical success stories
Numerous ADCs have shown clinical efficacy and gained regulatory approval, demon-
strating their usefulness in practical contexts. The therapeutic impact and potential of
ADCs are demonstrated by examples like trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive
breast cancer and benuximab vedotin for Hodgkin’s lymphoma [28].
17.3.8 Innovative research and development
Within the biotechnology and pharmaceutical indust ries, the creation of ADCs has
sparked creative research and teamwork. Because ADCs have been so successful, more
money has been invested in this area, which has led to the discovery of new targets,
enhanced linker technologies, and improvements in drug conjugation methods.
Because they can target cancer cells with powerful therapeutic payloads while
causing the least amount of collateral damage to healthy tissues, ADCs are important
in the treatment of cancer. In the continuous search for more efficient and individual-
ized cancer treatments, ADCs are seen as a promising and developing paradigm due
to their precise targeting, possibility for fewer side effects, and capacity to overcome
drug resistance [29].
17.4 Motivation for molecular simulations
The various difficulties in designing, optimizing, and comprehending the dynamic be-
havior of ADCs provide the impetus for using molecular simulations in this process.
Molecular simulations provide a strong and adaptable toolkit that tackles various cru-
cial elements of ADC development, advancing this novel class of medicines. The fol-
lowing are the main reasons why molecular simulations are used in ADC research.
17.4.1 Structural complexity of ADCs
ADCs are very complex molecules made up of cytotoxic payloads, linkers, and mAbs.
A thorough comprehension of the structural dynamics of these complex molecules is
necessary for their logical design and optimization.
Through the use of molecular simulations, specifically MD simulations, scientists
can investigate the atomic and molecular dynamics of ADC components. This facili-
tates the interpretation of the subtle structural interactions that are essential to the
overall stability and effectiveness of ADCs [30].
17 Molecular simulation-based technology for antibody–drug conjugates 389
https://t.me/med1917
17.4.2 Stability challenges
For ADCs to be therapeutically effective, stability must be maintained throughout stor-
age, circulation, and delivery to the target location. The integrity of ADCs may be jeop-
ardized by stability problems, which could impact their pharmacokinetics and overall
effectiveness.
Through the use of simulations, researchers may examine the stability of ADCs in
a variety of scenarios, identifying potential destabilizing variables and suggesting
changes to improve the stability profile. This knowledge is crucial for enhancing ADC
formulations for reliable clinical outcomes [31].
17.4.3 Efficient payload release
One of the most important components of ADC effectiveness is the efficient and regu-
lated release of cytotoxic payloads within cancer cells. One major problem is the dy-
namic nature of payload release, which is regulated by various factors such as
intracellular circumstances and linker design.
Through the use of molecular simulations, such as MC techniques, scientists may
model how linkers behave in various physiological contexts. This facilitates compre-
hension of the payload-release dynamics and directs linker design optimization for
accurate and timely drug delivery.
17.4.4 Understanding antibody–antigen interactions
Antibodies that specifically attach to antigens on cancer cells are necessary for the
effectiveness of ADCs. The development of antibodies with improved binding specific-
ity is essential for therapeutic efficacy and target selectivity [32].
By shedding light on the dynamic binding events, simulations aid in the predic-
tion of antibody–antigen interactions. The building of antibodies with enhanced affin-
ity and selectivity for cancer cell targets is guided by this knowledge.
17.4.5 Pharmacokinetic optimization
Determining the circulation time, biodistribution, and overall efficacy of ADCs re-
quires achieving appropriate pharmacokinetics.
By helping to comprehend the structural dynamics affecting pharmacokinetics,
simulations can help in the logical design of ADCs for extended circulation and im-
proved bioavailability [33].
390 Abhishek Singh et al.
https://t.me/med1917
17.4.6 Accelerating drug development timelines
Drug discovery using traditional experimental approaches can be resource- and time-
intensive. A q uicker and more affordable way to investigate a variety of scenarios
and forecast molecular behaviors is through the use of molecular simulations.
Molecular simulations expedite the drug discovery process by giving researchers a
virtual platform for experimentation [34]. This platform allows them to cycle through
designs, forecast results, and concentrate their experimental efforts on the most prom-
ising candidates.
In short, the rationale behind integrating molecular simulations into ADC research
is their capacity to furnish an intricate and dynamic comprehension of the molecular
mechanisms that dictate ADC conduct. Molecular simulations aid in the optimization of
these novel therapies by tackling the difficulties associated with ADC creation, which
eventually makes it easier for them to go from research to clinical use.
17.5 Overview of antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs)
ADCs, are a novel class of medicinal medicines that combine the cytotoxic potential of
small-molecule medications with the accuracy of mAbs. This convergence presents a
focused method of treating cancer with the goal of maximizing effectiveness and re-
ducing systemic toxicity [35].
17.5.1 Components of ADCs
mAbs: Starting with mAbs that are engineered to identify and attach to particular
antigens expressed on the surface of cancer cells, ADCs are created.
Linkers: Linkers, which join the cytotoxic payload to the antibody, are essential for
preserving stability during circulation, facilitating controlled payload release.
Cytotoxic payloads : These medications are tiny molecules with strong cytotoxic
properties. The antibody minimizes damage to healthy tissues by preferentially deliv-
ering the payload to cancer cells [36].
17.6 Key elements of ADC design
The antibody, linker, and payload (Figure 17.2) are the three structural elements of an
ADC. The bioconjugation method, or how the components are put together, is also cru-
cial in the design of an effective therapeutic, as these elements collectively define the
17 Molecular simulation-based technology for antibody–drug conjugates 391
https://t.me/med1917
overall biophysical and physiological disposition characteristics of the ADC molecules
itself.
17.7 Antibody
The antibody moiety’s main job is to target the tumor location specifically and deliver the
cytotoxic drug payload there. There are many tumor-associated antigens that have been
suggested as candidates for immunotherapy-based cancer therapies, but there are many
fewerviablecellulartargetsthatcanbetargeted using ADCs [37]. To minimize off-target
toxicities, the target antigen should ideally be widely expressed on the surface of cancer
cells and exhibit a distinct distribution pattern from normal tissues. The antigenic targets
of the majority of ADCs in development are, in actuality, either absent in critical or regen-
erative tissues, expressed at low levels on normal cells, or are, at best, selectively ex-
pressed in malignant cells [38]. It has been claimed that an extremely high affinity may
actually work against the distribution of antibodies throughout solid tumors. Neverthe-
less, the antibody should bind with enough affinity for selective accumulation and long-
lasting retention at the tumor site. The great majority of ADCs in the market today are
made specifically to target tumor cells. On the other hand, ADC targeting of the tumor
stromal compartment is a growing field of study [39].The same characteristics of the
tumor-associated stroma across different forms of cancer may eventually make ADC ther-
apeutic applications more widespread than just tumor-targeting approaches, which are
restricted to certain patient populations who test positive for antigen. For the payload to
be delivered intracellularly, the antibody–antigen combination needs to internalize as a
result of the antibody attaching to its cellular ligand [40]. Therefore, choosing the right
antigen is largely dependent on the target’s endocytic characteristics. The ADC strategy,
in contrast to unconjugated antibody therapies, does not require the antibody to have
any functional activity (such as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, or ADCC), how-
ever these characteristics may have additional therapeutic benefits. In fact, designing an
ADC with certain effector capabilities or the capacity to communicate with the immune
system may be appropriate, depending on the intended activity profile. This can be ac-
complished by engineering the Fc region or choosing the right IgG subclass [41].
17.8 Antibody selection
Antigen affinity, target specificity, good retention, low immunogenicity, low cross-
reactivity, and continuous circulation in plasma are among the important characteristics
ofAbsinADCs[42].TheAbcomponentofADCstypicallyhasabindingaffinityof0.1–
1 nM. First-generation ADCs made use of mouse Abs, which produced human antimouse
Abs in patients and led to significant immunogenicity; however, research on bioengineer-
392 Abhishek Singh et al.
https://t.me/med1917
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана