Monoclonal antibodies against Haemophilus influenzae lipopolysaccharides: clone MAHI 4 binding to a pentasaccharide containing terminal beta-Gal residues and clone MAHI 10 recognizing terminal phosphorylated saccharide residues

S Borrelli,P E Jansson,A A Lindberg
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/mpat.1996.0064
Abstract:Mouse monoclonal antibodies MAHI 4 and MAHI 10 reactive with Haemophilus influenzae lipopolysaccharide (LPS), were generated by fusing mouse myeloma cells with spleen cells of mice immunized with H. influenzae strain RM.7004-XP-1. The antibody MAHI 4 reacted in whole-cell enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and colony-dot-immunoblotting with 20 of 123 H. influenzae strains and to a few other human Haemophilus spp. and Neisseria spp., but not to any Bordetella pertussis, B. parapertussis, Aeromonas spp. or Moraxella catarrhalis strains tested. This suggests a specific epitope accessible to recognition in just a few strains. This conclusion was supported by the data on binding of MAHI 4 to only three of 18 H. influenzae LPSs tested, but not to any Haemophilus ducreyi or enterobacterial LPSs. The antibody MAHI 10 bound to 80 of 123 strains of H. influenzae and to a few strains of Neisseria spp. and M. catarrhalis as evaluated by EIA and colony-dot-immunoblotting, which suggests an epitope accessible to recognition in 65% of the H. influenzae strains tested. The antibody MAHI 10 reacted with 10 of 18 H. influenzae LPSs as determined by EIA. By using polysaccharides, obtained after both mild acidic hydrolysis, strong alkali treatment, and dephosphorylation, as inhibitors of the antibodies binding to H. influenzae LPS antigens it was shown that phosphate groups were essential for the binding of MAHI 10 to LPS but they did not affect antigenic recognition by MAHI 4. None of the monoclonal antibodies bound to isolated lipid A, but the aggregation caused by the fatty acids of lipid A was essential for optimum epitope recognition. Enzymatic treatment of homologous LPSs with galactose-oxidase led to products which were between 20 to 30 times less effective as inhibitors of the binding of the MAHI 4 than the native LPSs. Taken together the results indicate that MAHI 4 has the following pentasaccharide as the epitope Gal beta 1-->2 Hep alpha 1-->2Hep alpha 1-->3Hep alpha 1--> Kdo(P). These results emphasize the importance of the terminal beta-Gal residue in the definition of the MAHI 4 specificity, and of the terminal phosphorylated saccharide residues of some of the Haemophilus LPSs for the MAHI 10 specificity.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?