Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | Retrovirology

Fig. 3

From: Engineering and characterising a novel, highly potent bispecific antibody iMab-CAP256 that targets HIV-1

Fig. 3

Differences in potency between bNAbs (individually and in combination) and bibNAbs against 20 geographically diverse HIV-1 pseudoviruses. a IC50 values were calculated for each parental bNAb, bNAb combination and bibNAb. Values in (red) indicate the fold increase in potency of the bibNAb iMab-CAP256 or 10E08-iMab compared to the more potent parental bNAb (either iMab, CAP256 or 10E08). Values (red) for the iMab + CAP256 combination show the fold increase in potency of the iMab-CAP256 relative to the combination. The smaller the IC50 or the darker the red, the more potent the Ab is. CAP256 resistant or iMab resistant viruses were included in the panel to test the neutralisation activity of both the CAP256 and iMab moieties in the bibNAb. b Scatter plots representing the median IC50 titres of parental antibodies (CAP256 and iMab), parental antibody combination (iMab + CAP256) and iMab-CAP256 bibNAb (left panel) or bibNAbs; iMab-CAP256, 10E08-iMab and PG9-iMab (right panel), against the CAP256/iMab dual sensitive pseudoviruses. Statistical differences in neutralization were determined using non-parametric t-test (Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test) with *p < 0.05 and ***p < 0.001 represented. Errors bars indicate the interquartile ranges

Back to article page