31
Proteomics and “Orphan” Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors Receptors Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703) 308-6564 [email protected]

Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

  • Upload
    arion

  • View
    34

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors. Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703) 308-6564 [email protected]. What is Proteomics?. Proteomics refers to the systematic analysis of protein profiles of entire cells, tissues, organisms, or species. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Proteomics and “Orphan” Proteomics and “Orphan” ReceptorsReceptors

Yvonne (Bonnie) EylerTechnology Center 1600

Art Unit 1646(703) 308-6564

[email protected]

Page 2: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

What is Proteomics?What is Proteomics?• Proteomics refers to the systematic

analysis of protein profiles of entire cells, tissues, organisms, or species.

• It represents the protein counterpart to the analysis of gene function.

Page 3: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Why is Proteomics Important?Why is Proteomics Important?

• Identification of proteins in normal and disease conditions– Investigating epidemiology and taxonomy of pathogens

– Analysis of drug resistance

• Identification of pathogenic mechanisms– Reveals gene regulation events involved in disease

progression

• Pin-point targets for drug discovery

• Contributes to understanding of gene function

Page 4: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Proteomic MethodologiesProteomic Methodologies

• Analysis of protein expression patterns

• Analysis of protein Sequence Information

• Analysis of protein structure/function relationships

Page 5: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

What is an “orphan” receptor?What is an “orphan” receptor?

• An “orphan” receptor is a receptor with no known biological function.

• An “orphan” receptor is a receptor with no known ligand.

Page 6: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

PatentabilityPatentability

• Patent Statutes– 35 USC 101, Utility– 35 USC 102, Anticipation– 35 USC 103, Obviousness– 35 USC 112, 1st Paragraph, enablement– 35 USC 112, 1st Paragraph, written

description– 35 USC 112, 2nd Paragraph

Page 7: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Expression PatternsExpression Patterns2D Gel2D Gel

Page 8: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

SpecificationSpecification

• The specification discloses 2D gels of proteins present in prostate cancer cell lysates and normal cell lysates.

• A polypeptide located in a spot unique to prostate cancer cells was isolated and sequenced (SEQ ID NO: 1)

• SEQ ID NO: 1 has 45% homology to WOW, a G protein coupled receptor which is up-regulated in prostate cancer which binds ligand B.

• Blocking of WOW/ligand B binding inhibits prostate cancer growth.

Page 9: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

An Example ClaimAn Example Claim

• An isolated polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 1.

Page 10: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Utility ConsiderationUtility Consideration• The asserted utility for SEQ ID NO: 1

is for use in screening assays to identify agents which bind to it. The agents are then to be used to inhibit prostate cancer growth.

• The asserted utility is based on the 45% homology to WOW receptor.

Page 11: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Sequence Homology is Usually Sequence Homology is Usually Insufficient to Establish UtilityInsufficient to Establish Utility

• Receptor function cannot be reliably predicted from DNA or protein sequence homology

• Evolutionarily-related protein families may have both overlapping and distinct features

Page 12: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Example #1 of Homology being Example #1 of Homology being Insufficient Criteria for UtilityInsufficient Criteria for Utility

• Transforming Growth Factor (TGF-beta) Family

– OP-1 induces metanephrogenesis whereas closest related TGF-beta family members—BMP-2 and TGF-beta1—have no effect on metanephrogenesis under identical conditions

Page 13: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Example #2 of Homology Being Example #2 of Homology Being Insufficient Criteria for UtilityInsufficient Criteria for Utility

• Platelet-derived Growth Factor (PDGF) Family

– VEGF, a member of the PDGF family, is mitogenic for vascular endothelial cells but not for vascular smooth muscle cells

– PDGF is mitogenic for vascular smooth muscle cells but not for vascular endothelial cells

Page 14: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Example #3 of Homology Being Example #3 of Homology Being Insufficient Criteria for UtilityInsufficient Criteria for Utility

• Vertebrate growth hormone of 198 amino acids becomes an antagonist (inhibitor of growth) when a single amino acid is changed. Even 99% homology does not allow predictability in this instance.

Page 15: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Utility Considerations for the Utility Considerations for the Claim ExampleClaim Example

• SEQ ID NO: 1 is an “orphan” receptor with no known ligand and no known function.

• The asserted utility is based solely on sequence homology to a G protein coupled receptor.

• G protein coupled receptors are a large and diverse family of receptors with diverse functions and properties, having no well established utility based on family membership.

Page 16: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

ConclusionConclusion• The claimed polypeptide would

not be found to have a specific, substantial, and credible asserted or well established utility.

Page 17: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Specification # 2Specification # 2• The specification still discloses 2D gels of prostate

cancer and normal cell lysates.

• The polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1 is an “orphan” receptor.

• Antibodies were generated to SEQ ID NO: 1

• The antibodies were used in a series of binding assays to demonstrate a clear correlation between presence of high levels of SEQ ID NO: 1 and prostate cancer.

Page 18: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

An Example ClaimAn Example Claim

• An isolated polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 1.

Page 19: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Utility ConsiderationUtility Consideration

• The asserted utility for SEQ ID NO: 1 is for use to diagnose prostate cancer.

Page 20: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Utility ConclusionUtility Conclusion• The asserted utility is specific to

the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.

• The asserted utility is substantial.

• The asserted utility is credible.

Page 21: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Written DescriptionWritten DescriptionConsiderationsConsiderations

Page 22: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

An Example Claim SetAn Example Claim Set• An isolated polypeptide

comprising at least 10 contiguous amino acids of SEQ ID NO: 1.

• An isolated polypeptide having at least 45% identity to the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.

Page 23: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Satisfying Written DescriptionSatisfying Written Description

– Weigh factual considerations in view of level of skill and knowledge in the art• Complete or partial structure• Physical and/or chemical properties• Functional characteristics• Correlation between structure and function• Method of making• Combinations of the above

Page 24: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Written Description AnalysisWritten Description Analysis

• Physical properties of a single polypeptide are disclosed, ie molecular weight and pI by 2D gel electrophoresis and its sequence.

• The physical properties of polypeptides comprising 10 amino acids or of polypeptides having 45% identity to SEQ ID NO: 1 are not disclosed or known in the art.

• No biological function of the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1 is disclosed. The isolated polypeptide is an “orphan” receptor.

• No structural to functional correlation is disclosed between core structural features needed to retain function in the two claimed genus of polypeptides.

Page 25: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

ConclusionConclusion

• Applicant was not in possession of the claimed genus of isolated polypeptides.

Page 26: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

EnablementEnablementConsiderationsConsiderations

Page 27: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Satisfying the Enablement Satisfying the Enablement RequirementRequirement

• Factors to be considered, Factors to be considered, In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ 2d 1400 (Fed. In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ 2d 1400 (Fed. Cir. 1988)Cir. 1988)

• Quantity of experimentation necessary• Amount of direction or guidance presented• Presence or absence of working examples• Nature of the invention• State of the prior art• Relative skill of those in the art• Predictability or unpredictability of the art• Breadth of the claims

Page 28: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Enablement AnalysisEnablement Analysis• No guidance regarding the critical structural features of

the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 1.– Which 10 amino acids are essential to functional and physical

properties?

– Where over the length of the polypeptide may changes be made up to 45% identity and still retain functional and physical properties?

• There is no function for the isolated polypeptide. It is an “orphan” receptor.

• It is not predictable that the scope of the claimed polypeptides could be used to diagnose prostate cancer.

Page 29: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

ConclusionConclusion

• The specification was not enabling for the scope the claimed isolated polypeptides.

Page 30: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

SolutionSolutionClaim:

• An isolated polypeptide comprising SEQ ID NO: 1.

Page 31: Proteomics and “Orphan” Receptors

Proteomics and “Orphan” Proteomics and “Orphan” ReceptorsReceptors

Yvonne (Bonnie) EylerTechnology Center 1600

Art Unit 1646(703) 308-6564

[email protected]