In article <3.0.32.19990521084605.00852100 at imm2.imm.uth.tmc.edu>,
David L. Haviland, Ph.D. <URL:mailto:dhavilan at IMM2.IMM.UTH.TMC.EDU> wrote:
> At 19:19 5/20/99 -0700, F. Hayashi wrote:
> >I'm sure that antibodies CAN be anti-idiotype, but I wonder about the
> >biological significance of it....
> >
> >Is anyone aware of any published research that shows significance of
> >anti-idiotype antibodies?
>> An interesting question... to that end: also, I'd like to extend the
> question to cover "catalytic antibodies"...
>> I've seen only a handful of papers spread out over the last 3-4 years and
> have wondered the same thing.
>> David
Another interesting question.
It's quite clear that antibodies with catalytic activity can be derived
using appropriate immunisation and selection procedures. Thus it also seems
inevitable to me that catalytic antibodies will sometimes occur
spontaneously in response to natural infections. I guess the important
question is 'how frequent' is this? Secondly, would most investigators
detect if their antibody had an enzyme activity?
There are such a large number of molecules which are members of the Ig
superfamily, many with catalytic activity, that it seems obvious that by
varying the sequence of an immunoglobulin you can create an enzyme. Thus
maybe in a polyclonal mixture of immunoglobulin there will always be some
catalytic activities just by chance?
Mike Clark, <URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/>
--
o/ \\ // || ,_ o M.R. Clark, PhD. Division of Immunology
<\__,\\ // __o || / /\, Cambridge University, Dept. Pathology
"> || _`\<,_ // \\ \> | Tennis Court Rd., Cambridge CB2 1QP
` || (_)/ (_) // \\ \_ Tel.+44 1223 333705 Fax.+44 1223 333875
