Skip to main content
De-novo-VHH-design-against-PD-L1

Case report

De novo VHH design against PD-L1: a 24% hit rate and a nanomolar lead that competes with three approved antibodies

  • 46

    VHH designed and produced from the target structure

  • 24%

    hit rate, 11 confirmed binders out of 46

  • 10-20 nM

    KD for the lead VHH, with no affinity maturation

Contact Us    Talk to our Experts

  • Project type

    Internal validation study, ProteoGenix AI business unit

     

    Target

    PD-L1 (CD274)

     

    Format

    VHH (single-domain)

  • Field

    Immuno-oncology, checkpoint blockage

     

    Reference points

    Avelumab, Atezolizumab, Durvalumab, plus published de novo VHH

  • Key processes

    1. Structure-based epitope selection
    2. AI sequence generation and filtering
    3. Recombinant VHH production
    4. ELISA titration (EC50)
    5. BLI affinity (KD, kon, koff)
    6. BLI epitope binning
    7. Sequence homology analysis

Context

De novo antibody design is judged on one question: does anything that comes out of the computer actually bind? Published success rates say the answer is usually no. In the September 2025 Germinal study from Stanford and the Arc Institute, an epitope-targeted generative framework reached experimental success rates of 4% to 22% across four protein targets, testing 43 to 101 designs per antigen.

ProteoGenix ran its own validation study on PD-L1 to measure where AIxplore® sits against that bar. PD-L1 is a demanding choice on purpose. Its structure is well described, three anti-PD-L1 antibodies are approved and available as reference molecules, and de novo VHH against it have already been published, which means every result can be placed next to an external number rather than reported in isolation.

The study asked three things:

  1. Can the platform produce specific binders from a defined epitope alone, with no immunisation and no library?
  2. Do those binders reach affinities that are useful before any optimisation?
  3. And does the best candidate recognise the functional site that matters clinically, or simply some accessible patch of the antigen?

Challenges

  • 01

    Designing against one predefined epitope, rather than anywhere on the antigen surface

  • 02

    Published de novo hit rates stay low, between 4% and 22% in the Germinal study

  • 03

    Reaching a usable affinity with no wet-lab maturation and no library selection

  • 04

    Proving the lead binds the clinically relevant site, not just the antigen

ProteoGenix approach

 Proteogenix approach

  • 01

    Epitope definition and structural modelling

    The design was aimed at a five-residue epitope on PD-L1: I37, Y39, E41, R96 and M98. The antigen structure and this interface were modelled in 3D to give the generative step a defined target rather than a whole surface.

  • 02

    AI sequence generation and filtering

    AIxplore® generated VHH sequences against that epitope. Candidates were filtered on more than 40 parameters, including developability and affinity, so that the sequences moving to the bench were already screened for more than predicted affinity. Every output was reviewed by our bioinformaticians before selection.

  • 03

    Recombinant production of the full design set

    All 46 selected VHH were expressed and purified, then quality controlled before testing. No candidate was dropped on a computational score alone.

  • 04

    Binding screen and EC50 determination by ELISA

    Each VHH was tested against PD-L1 by ELISA. Eleven bound the antigen, and each of the eleven was titrated to obtain an EC50. Two de novo VHH from the published Germinal study were produced and run in the same assay as an external comparator.

  • 05

    Affinity measurement by BLI

    The best candidate, VHH297, was characterised by biolayer interferometry to obtain KD, kon and koff. Avelumab was run alongside it as a clinical-grade anchor for the measurement.

  • 06

    Epitope binning against approved antibodies

    VHH297 was tested by BLI epitope binning against Avelumab, Atezolizumab and Durvalumab to establish whether it occupies the same region of PD-L1 as the three approved molecules.

  • 07

    Sequence novelty check

    The sequence of VHH297, and of its CDRs, was compared with the known anti-PD-L1 competitors to establish how much of the molecule is genuinely new.

Results

Of the 46 VHH designed and produced, 11 bound PD-L1 in ELISA, a hit rate of 24%. That sits at the top of the 4% to 22% range reported in the Germinal study, on a comparable number of tested designs.

De novo VHH design against PD-L1 figure 1

The two published de novo VHH were produced and tested in the same ELISA. One of the two showed no binding under these conditions. The one that did bind gave an EC50 of 10 µg/mL, against 0.007 µg/mL for the best ProteoGenix candidate, a difference of roughly 1,400-fold in the same assay.

Assay conditions differ from those used in the original publication, so these values describe relative performance in a single head-to-head experiment rather than a reproduction of published data.

BLI on the lead candidate gave a KD between 10 and 20 nM, with kon of 2 x 105 M-1s-1 and koff of 4 x 10-3 s-1. The published de novo reference measured above 500 nM in the same setup. Avelumab, an FDA-approved anti-PD-L1 antibody, was included as a clinical anchor and sits below 0.1 nM.

VHH297 therefore reaches nanomolar affinity as a first-pass design, roughly 25 to 50 times stronger than the published de novo comparator, with the gap to a clinical molecule still to be closed.

That gap is the starting point for AI-driven affinity maturation, which is the step this study deliberately left out.

Epitope binning by BLI showed VHH297 competing with Avelumab, Atezolizumab and Durvalumab. The candidate binds an epitope that is identical to, or strongly overlapping with, the one recognised by three clinically validated anti-PD-L1 antibodies.

Sequence comparison then showed that VHH297 and its CDRs are distinct from those known competitors. The molecule reaches a clinically relevant site through a sequence that does not exist in the published anti-PD-L1 landscape, which is what makes a de novo design useful in a freedom-to-operate discussion.

Key takeaway

From a five-residue epitope and nothing else, AIxplore® produced 11 confirmed PD-L1 binders out of 46 designs, a 24% hit rate at the top of what the current literature reports. The lead candidate, VHH297, binds at 10 to 20 nM without any affinity maturation and competes with Avelumab, Atezolizumab and Durvalumab for the same region of the antigen, through CDR sequences unrelated to any of them.

For a discovery programme, that means a starting binder against a defined site, with no immunisation, no library, and no prior antibody to work from.

Business people shaking hands in the office. Group of business persons in business meeting. Two entrepreneurs on meeting in board room. Corporate business team on meeting in modern office. Female manager discussing new project with her colleagues. Company owner on a meeting with her employee in her office.

Need a quote or more information? Contact us!

    Cart (0 Items)

    Your cart is currently empty.

    View Products