Protein Tomography Analysis Shows That CD20 Molecules Bound by Different Type I and Type II Anti-CD20 Antibodies Are Organized in Different Protein Complexes.

Abstract 4782

Ramos cells were labeled with Type I (Rituximab and Ocrelizumab) and Type II (B1/H299 and GA101) anti-CD20 antibodies and then fixed and stained with marker gold labeled 2^ary antibodies. Protein complexes connected to marker gold were analyzed by Protein Tomography^TM at SIDEC and the corresponding 3D-structures visualized (∼100 structures per antibody). Less than 5 % of the refined structures were dimeric. While most (60 – 90%) CD20 molecules were present in tetramers or even higher order defined complexes, a sizeable proportion was also engaged in large protein networks (11 -38%). For the multimeric complexes, we could clearly distinguish between extended (or open) and ring-like (or closed) conformations. Although cells had been labeled with an excess of antibody, as suggested by FACS binding curves, the antibodies bound CD20 monovalently in most refined structures. Bivalent binding was overall more prevalent with Rituximab and Ocrelizumab than with B1 and GA101 (1/3 vs 1/6 structures). The proportion of CD20 molecules present in ringlike complexes was higher for the Type II than for the Type I antibodies. In co-localization experiments, Rituximab-CD20 and GA101-CD20 complexes were also found to only partially colocalize, while a large fraction of the two antibodies were found in separate cell surface compartments. These findings suggest that the different antibodies favor different CD20 conformations that seem to be associated with different protein complexes and might form the basis for initiation of different downstream signaling processes.