ケーススタディ 1: 特異性 (XP®モノクローナル抗体)

#3077 Phospho-Met (Tyr1234/1235) (D26) XP® Rabbit mAb の競合比較

現在市販されているリン酸化された受容体型チロシンキナーゼ (RTK) に対する抗体に共通する問題は、関連する活性型RTK と交差して、誤ったシグナルを検出することです。CST の#3077 Phospho-Met (Tyr1234/1235) (D26) XP® Rabbit mAb と競合製品との比較試験では、XMT®で作製した抗体の高い性能が証明されています。

以下には#3077の優れた特異性を証明するCST の社内検証ステップを掲載しています。

  • HCC827 xenograft を使った、CST #3077と競合品の比較では、両製品で特異的な染色が見られます (Figure 1)。
  • ウェスタン分析において、#3077で適切な分子量に単一の特異的バンドを確認しましたが、競合品では確認できませんでした (Figure 2)。
  • IHC試験において、#3077は様々なRTK 阻害剤と刺激剤で処理したパラフィン包埋細胞ペレットで特異性を確認できましたが、競合品では確認できませんでした (Figure 3)。
  • 組織サンプルと細胞ペレットを用いたIHC 試験において、#3077の高い特異性、感度、パフォーマンを確認しました (Figure 4、5)。
  • 活性型Ron タンパク質 (Metキナーゼのファミリータンパク質) との交差反応はウェスタン分析とIHC 試験で検証しました (Figure 6)。

結論として、CST の#3077 Phospho-Met (Tyr1234/1235) (D26) XP® Rabbit mAb は、IHC のような優れたパフォーマンスを必要とするアプリケーションで非常に優れた特異性を示しました。

MKN45 Cells (Met Amplified) MDA-MB-465 cells (EGFR amplified) T47D Cells (Her2+/Her3+)

Figure 3. Immunohistochemical analysis of paraffin-embedded MKN45 cells treated with the Met inhibitor SU11274 showed no staining as compared to the control using both Phospho-Met (Tyr1234/1235) (D26) XP® Rabbit mAb #3077 and the competitor’s antibody. EGF treatment and HRG treatment of MDA-MB-468 and T47D breast carcinoma cell lines, respectively, showed no increase in staining compared to control using #3077. In contrast, the competitor’s antibody detected non-specific staining with both treatments, indicating cross-reactivity with other RTKs.

Cell Signaling Technology #3077 HCC827 xenograft vs Competitor

Figure 1. Immunohistochemical analysis of paraffin-embedded HCC827 xenograft comparing #3077 (left) and a competitor’s product (right) gives the appearance of specific staining for both products.

Extracts treated with growth factors vs Competitor

Figure 2. A single band at 145 kDa was observed by western blotting in HGF-stimulated, but not in unstimulated A431 cells using #3077. Extracts treated with growth factors that activate other RTKs or that overexpress other RTKs or cytoplasmic tyrosine kinases were negative (top). By comparison, the competitor phospho-Met antibody recognizes several nonspecific bands (bottom). Both membranes were developed on the same film with the same exposure time (10 seconds).

Untreated Phosphatase of paraffin-embedded human lung carcinoma vs Phosphatase treatment of paraffin-embedded human lung carcinoma

Figure 4. Immunohistochemical analysis of src-transfected NIH/3T3 cells using Phospho-Src Family (Tyr416) Antibody (left) or #3077 (right). No staining was observed with #3077 indicating that the antibody does not cross-react with Src phosphorylated at Tyr416 by IHC.

Stained using Phospho-Src Family (Tyr416) Antibody vs No staining of Src-transfected NIH/3T3 cells

Figure 5. Phosphatase treatment of paraffin-embedded human lung carcinoma confirms phospho-specificity of #3077.

Indicating no cross-reactivity of #3077 with Ron by western analysis IHC analysis of xenografts from 3T3-Met vs IHC analysis of xenografts from 3T3-Ron

Figure 6A. The purified active Ron kinase can be detected with various phospho-Ron antibodies by western blotting and phospho-tyrosine antibody, but not #3077, indicating no cross-reactivity of #3077 with Ron by western analysis. Exposure time: 60 seconds.

Figure 6B. Immunohistochemical analysis of xenografts from 3T3-Met (left) and 3T3-Ron cells (right) using #3077 demonstrates that #3077 does not cross-react with activated Ron by IHC. Image courtesy of Pfizer, Inc.

Product Pathways

Tools

Applications