BH3 peptides are key mediators of apoptosis and have served as the lead structures for the development of anticancer therapeutics. Previously, we reported the application of a simple cysteine-based side chain cross-linking chemistry to NoxaBH3 peptides that led to the generation of the cross-linked NoxaBH3 peptides with increased cell permeability and higher inhibitory activity against Mcl-1 ( Muppidi, A., Doi, K., Edwardraja, S., Drake, E. J., Gulick, A. M., Wang, H.-G., Lin, Q. ( 2012 ) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 , 14734 ). To deliver cross-linked NoxaBH3 peptides selectively into cancer cells for enhanced efficacy and reduced systemic toxicity, here we report the conjugation of the NoxaBH3 peptides with the extracellular ubiquitin, a recently identified endogenous ligand for CXCR4, a chemokine receptor overexpressed in cancer cells. The resulting ubiquitin-NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates showed increased inhibitory activity against Mcl-1 and selective killing of the CXCR4-expressing cancer cells. The successful delivery of the NoxaBH3 peptides by ubiquitin into cancer cells suggests that the ubiquitin/CXCR4 axis may serve as a general route for the targeted delivery of anticancer agents.
BH3peptides are key mediators of apoptosis and have served as the lead structures for the development of anticancer therapeutics. Previously, we reported the application of a simple cysteine-based side chain cross-linking chemistry to NoxaBH3 peptides that led to the generation of the cross-linkedNoxaBH3 peptides with increased cell permeability and higher inhibitory activity against Mcl-1 ( Muppidi, A., Doi, K., Edwardraja, S., Drake, E. J., Gulick, A. M., Wang, H.-G., Lin, Q. ( 2012 ) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134 , 14734 ). To deliver cross-linkedNoxaBH3 peptides selectively into cancer cells for enhanced efficacy and reduced systemic toxicity, here we report the conjugation of the NoxaBH3 peptides with the extracellular ubiquitin, a recently identified endogenous ligand for CXCR4, a chemokine receptor overexpressed in cancer cells. The resulting ubiquitin-NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates showed increased inhibitory activity against Mcl-1 and selective killing of the CXCR4-expressing cancer cells. The successful delivery of the NoxaBH3 peptides by ubiquitin into cancer cells suggests that the ubiquitin/CXCR4 axis may serve as a general route for the targeted delivery of anticancer agents.
During the past two decades, there has
been increasing interest in developing biologics-based therapeutics,
including therapeutic enzymes, monoclonal antibodies, and peptides.
Among the biologics, peptides have lowest molecular weight and can
be readily optimized to possess drug-like properties.[1] There are currently more than 40 peptide drugs approved
for clinical use, the majority of which bind to the extracellular
targets because of their inefficient cell permeability. To allow peptides
to access the intracellular targets, two approaches have been developed
recently: (1) conjugation to the cell-penetrating peptides such as
HIV-tat, oligoarginine, and Pep-1[2,3] and (2) chemical
modifications to stabilize the secondary structures and optimize the
physicochemical properties.[4−6] While these approaches have improved
the intracellular uptake, the nonspecific uptake of the peptides into
both normal cells and cancer cells reduces their therapeutic windows.[7−9] Thus, it is highly desirable that the peptide drugs are selectively
delivered to tumor cells to maximize their efficacy while reducing
systemic toxicity. To date, strategies for targeted cancer drug delivery
have relied on the differences in cellular compositions between normal
cells and cancer cells. Indeed, the use of RGD peptides,[10] proteins,[11] and antibodies[12] to target the upregulated receptors in tumor
environment for selective drug delivery has gained momentum recently.
In this work, we explored the use of extracellular ubiquitin, a natural
ligand for CXCR4,[13] a chemokine receptor
overexpressed in cancer cells, as a delivery vehicle for peptide-based
anticancer drugs.Extracellular ubiquitin has been known to
have immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties for many years.[14,15] However, the mechanism of these effects was only identified very
recently. Extracellular ubiquitin was found to be a natural ligand
of CXCR4,[13] which plays a major role in
cancer cell chemotaxis and is expressed in many tumors including multiple
myeloma, AML, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer.[16] The expression level of CXCR4 was found to correlate
with the aggressiveness of the cancer.[17] Extracellular ubiquitin, once it has entered cells via CXCR4-mediated
endocytosis, was found to be conjugated with the intracellular proteins,
indicating its endosomal release.[18] On
the basis of these observations, we hypothesize that the ubiquitin/CXCR4
axis may offer a novel route for targeted cytosolic delivery of peptide
drugs into tumor cells. We have recently reported a new side chain
cross-linking chemistry to reinforce helical peptides and increase
their cellular uptake[19] and applied this
chemistry to the design of the cell-permeable cross-linkedNoxaBH3peptides as potent and selective Mcl-1 inhibitors.[20] Herein, we report the preparation of the cross-linkedNoxaBH3
peptide–ubiquitin conjugates, the characterization of their
inhibitory activities against Mcl-1, the study of their uptake mechanism,
and the determination of their cell-killing activities against the
CXCR4-positive cells, and the investigation of their proteolytic stability
in fresh mouse serum. To our knowledge, this study represents the
first example of exploiting the ubiquitin/CXCR4 axis for targeted
delivery of cancer therapeutics.
Experimental Section
General
Methods
6,6′-Bis-bromomethyl-[3,3′]bipyridine
(Bpy) was prepared using the procedure described previously.[19] Rabbit antiubiquitin antibody was purchased
from Thermo Scientific, and rabbit anti-His6 antibody was
purchased from Rockland Immunochemicals. Mouse anti-CXCR4 antibody
was purchased from R&D Systems. LC-MS was performed using a Finnigan
LCQ Advantage IonTrap mass spectrometry coupled with a Surveyor HPLC
system. Protein liquid chromatography was run on a Phenomenex Jupiter
C4 column (5 μm, 300 Å, 2.00 × 50 mm2)
with a flow rate of 250 μL/min and a linear gradient of 5–95%
acetonitrile/H2O containing 0.1% formic acid over 30 min.
Construction of the Ubiquitin-BH3 Peptide Conjugates
The
synthetic, codon-optimized genes encoding the ubiquitin–peptide
conjugates in pUC57 were purchased from GenScript (Piscataway, NJ).
The PU fragments were ligated into the NdeI/XhoI sites in the pET28a vector, while the UP fragment was
ligated into the NcoI/XhoI sites
in the pET28a vector. The resulting plasmids, pET28a-PU, pET28a-UP,
and pET28a-PU-KKmt, were verified by DNA sequencing. For protein expression,
BL21(DE3) cells bearing appropriate expression plasmids were allowed
to grow in 1 L LB medium containing 50 μg/mL kanamycin at 37
°C to OD600 0.6. Then, 0.5 mM isopropyl-β-d-thiogalactopyranoside was added to the culture to induce protein
expression for an additional 6 h. The cells were harvested by centrifugation,
and the cell pellets were resuspended in 20 mL of binding buffer (50
mM Na2HPO4 and 300 mM NaCl, pH 8.0) containing
10 mM imidazole and lysed by passing the cell suspension through a
French press. The lysates were centrifuged at 16,000 rpm for 30 min,
and the supernatants were filtered through a 0.2 μm filter first
before applying them to a column packed with 0.4 mL of Ni-NTA beads
pre-equilibrated with PBS buffer containing 2 mM DTT. The beads were
washed with 20 mL of washing buffer containing 50 mM imidazole, and
the protein conjugates were eluted with 2 mL of elution buffer containing
250 mM imidazole. The protein concentrations were determined by the
Bradford assay.
Cross-Linking Reaction with the Ubiquitin–Peptide
Conjugates
The purified protein was subjected to buffer-exchange
into 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate containing 5 mM EDTA, pH 8.5, using
a 3,000 MW cutoff Amicon Ultra (Fisher Scientific) centrifugal filter
unit and concentrated to 1 mg/mL. The solution was treated with an
equal volume of immobilized TCEP disulfide reducing gel (Thermo Scientific)
for 2 h before incubating with 5 equiv of Bpy in 30% acetonitrile/50
mM ammonium bicarbonate buffer, pH 8.5, for 2 h. Afterward, excess
reagents were removed through buffer exchange to yield the Bpy-cross-linked
ubiquitin–peptide conjugates, which were then used directly
in subsequent studies without further purification.
Fluorescence
Polarization Assay
The FITC-labeled Bim-BH3 peptide (DMRPEIWIAQELRRIGDEFNAYYAR) was used in determining the inhibitory activities
of the conjugates against Mcl-1. In brief, 20 μL of 20 nM GST-tagged
mouseMcl-1-(152–309) in PBS containing 0.005% Tween-20 was
mixed with 5 μL of the protein conjugates at the various concentrations
in PBS containing 25% DMSO and 0.005% Tween-20 in the wells of a 96-well
black polystyrene plate (Corning #3993). Then, 25 μL of 10 nM
FITC-Bim-BH3 in PBS containing 5% DMSO and 0.005% Tween-20 was added
to each well, and the mixtures were thoroughly mixed at 1450 rpm for
3 min with a BioShake IQ Thermo Mixer (QUANTIFOIL Instruments GmbH)
at room temperature. The fluorescence polarization values in millipolarization
(mP) units were measured for 0.2 s at excitation and emission wavelengths
of 480 and 535 nm, respectively, using a PerkinElmer 2030 multilabel
plate reader. IC50 was determined by fitting the data to
a sigmoidal dose–response nonlinear regression model using
SigmaPlot 10.0.1. Ki values were then
calculated using the equation: Ki = [I]50/([L]50/Kd + P0/Kd + 1), where I50 and L50 are the free concentrations of the inhibitor
and ligand, respectively, at 50% inhibition, P0 is the free concentration of protein in the absence of inhibitor,
and Kd is the disassociation constant
of the Bim:GST-Mcl-1 complex and has a value of 12.4 nM
NMR Sample
Preparation and Data Acquisition
Uniformly 15N- and 5% biosynthetically directed fractionally 13C-labeled
PU-KKmt was expressed in BL21(DE3) cells in M9 minimal media using 15NH4Cl (Cambridge Isotope Laboratories) and a mixture
of 95% natural abundance and 5% U-13C-glucose
(Sigma-Aldrich) as a carbon source in the culture medium, and purified
using a Ni-NTA column. The identity of the [5% 13C; U-15N]-labeled protein was confirmed by SDS–PAGE
and LC-MS. The protein was then subjected to the cross-linking reaction
under the same conditions as described earlier to generate [5% 13C; U-15N]-PU-KKmt-Bpy. For NMR
sample preparation, the proteins were dissolved at concentrations
of 200 μM in 10 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 6.0) containing
2 mM DTT, 0.02% sodium azide, and 10% D2O. 2D [15N,1H] heteronuclear single-quantum coherence (HSQC) spectra
were acquired at 25 °C on an Agilent DDR 600 MHz spectrometer
equipped with a 1H{15N,13C} cryogenic
probe. The spectra for PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy were collected, respectively,
with 128 × 1024 complex points along t1 and t2 (t1max = 67 ms and t2max = 136 ms) in 1.5 h,
and 256 × 1024 complex points (t1max = 146 ms and t2max = 136 ms) in 2 h.
For comparison, a 2D [15N,1H]-HSQC spectrum
was recorded for a 1 mM [U-13C,15N]-labeled human ubiquitin sample in the same NMR buffer with 128
× 1024 complex points (t1max = 60
ms and t2max =136 ms) in 0.5 h. The spectra
were processed using the program PROSA (21) and analyzed using the program CARA.[22]
Cellular Uptake Assay
K562, Jurkat, or U937 cells were seeded
in 10-cm dishes at appropriate densities in RPMI 1640 supplemented
with 10% FBS, and incubated at 37 °C in a 5% CO2 incubator
overnight. On the next day, cells were washed with PBS, and the medium
was switched to Opti-MEM. For temperature-dependency studies, Jurkat
cells were incubated with 500 μM PU-KKmt or PU-KKmt-Bpy at 37
or 4 °C for 2 h, treated with trypsin-EDTA for 15 min to remove
surface-bound ubiquitin–peptide conjugates,[23] and lysed with 50 μL of lysis buffer (50 mM HEPES,
50 mM NaCl, 10 mM Na2P4O7, 50 mM
NaF, 1% Triton-X100, 5 mM EDTA, 1 mM sodium orthovandate, and 0.5
μL of Calbiochem protease inhibitor cocktail Set III) for 30
min on ice before proceeding to the Western blot assay. For competition
assays, Jurkat cells in Opti-MEM medium were divided into 4 wells.
One well was incubated with anti-CXCR4 antibody (R&D Systems,
20 μg/mL), and the other three wells were incubated with ubiquitin
at a concentration of 12.5, 25, and 50 μM for 30 min. Afterward,
cells were treated with 500 nM PU-KKmt-Bpy for 2 h. The cells were
washed with PBS (3×) followed by treatment with 50 μL of
trypsin-EDTA (2.5 mg/mL in DMEM) for 15 min at 37 °C. The cells
were washed again with PBS (3×) and lysed with 50 μL of
lysis buffer on ice for 30 min followed by centrifugation. The proteins
in the supernatant were resolved by 4–12% Bis-TrisSDS–PAGE
and transferred to a PDVF membrane. The membrane was blocked with
0.5% casein containing 0.1% Tween for 1 h, cut into two pieces, and
probed separately using anti-His6 antibody (Abgent, 1:2000
dilution) and anti-β-actin antibody (Rockland Immunochemicals,
1:1000 dilution) as primary antibodies, and antimouse IgG-AP as secondary
antibody (1:5000 dilution). The membrane was stained by incubating
with the BCIP/NBT liquid substrate (Sigma-Aldrich), and the band intensities
were quantified with ImageJ.
Cell Viability Assay
The cells in
Opti-MEM medium were seeded into a 96-well plate at a density of 104 per well for K562 cells and 105 per well for U937
and Jurkat cells, treated with ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
peptide conjugates for 24 h, and the percentage of viable cells was
quantified using the CellTiter 96 AQueous One Solution Cell Proliferation
Assay kit (Promega) by following the manufacturer’s recommended
procedure.
Serum Stability Assay
The ubiquitin–peptide
conjugates were added to fresh mouse serum (Equitech-Bio) to a final
concentration of 25 μM. The mixtures were incubated at 37 °C
for 4 h. The 2 μL aliquots were taken at 0, 2, and 4 h, and
diluted into 100 μL of PBST (PBS containing 0.05% Tween-20).
The samples were flash frozen immediately and stored for ELISA. To
a glutathione coated 96-well microtiter plate (Thermo Scientific)
was added GST-Mcl-1 (200 μL/well and 30 μg/mL in PBS),
and the plate was gently shaken at 4 °C overnight. After washing
with PBST, the plate was blocked with 0.5% casein in PBST for 1 h.
After washing with PBST (3×), the mouse serum-treated ubiquitin–peptide
conjugates were added to each well and incubated for 2 h. Afterward,
the wells were washed with PBST (3×), and the bound peptide–ubiquitin
conjugates in each well were detected by incubating with 100 μL
of rabbit antiubiquitin antibody (1:1000 dilution) or rabbit anti-His6 antibody (1:1000 dilution) for 1 h followed by antirabbit
IgG-AP (1:1000 dilution) for 2 h. After washing with PBST (3×),
100 μL DuoLux chemiluminescent and fluorescent alkaline phosphatase
substrate solution (Vector Laboratories) were added, and the chemiluminescence
signals were recorded by exposing the membrane to X-ray film in a
dark room.
Results and Discussion
Preparation of the Ubiquitin-BH3
Peptide Conjugates
In exploiting the ubiquitin/CXCR4 axis
for targeted delivery of the NoxaBH3 peptide-based Mcl-1 inhibitors,
we had the following considerations: (1) the fusion of NoxaBH3 peptide
to ubiquitin should not interfere with ubiquitin binding to CXCR4;
and (2) the conjugation of ubiquitin to NoxaBH3 peptides should not
negatively affect NoxaBH3 binding to Mcl-1. Accordingly, we fused
the NoxaBH3 peptide at either the N- or the C-terminus of ubiquitin
separated by a long flexible linker (GGGGS)3 (Figure 1A) to ensure that the two domains function properly.
Thus, synthetic genes encoding the fusion proteins were inserted into
the pET28a expression vector, and the His-tagged ubiquitin–peptide
conjugates, NoxaBH3 peptide–ubiquitin (PU) and ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
peptide (UP), were purified to homogeneity with Ni-NTA-based affinity
chromatography. SDS–PAGE and mass spectrometry analyses confirmed
the identity and high purity of the conjugates (Figure 1B–C). Since the internalized extracellular ubiquitin
may potentially be susceptible to polyubiquitination and subsequent
proteasome-mediated degradation,[15] we further
mutated ubiquitin lysine-48 and -63, two sites for ubiquitin chain
growth,[24] to arginines to obtain a mutant
conjugate, NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-K48R/K63R (PU-KKmt). Since cross-linking
of the NoxaBH3 peptide with a biaryl derivative has been shown to
greatly increase the inhibitory activity against Mcl-1,[20] we also performed the cross-linking reaction
with the ubiquitin–peptide conjugates. Figure 2A shows the scheme for the cross-linking of the NoxaBH3–ubiquitin
conjugate by Bpy to generate the Bpy-cross-linkedNoxaBH3–ubiquitin
conjugate (PU-Bpy). On the basis of mass spectrometry analysis, the
reaction proceeded cleanly to give rise to PU-Bpy with a yield of
87% (Figure 2B). Similarly, the cross-linking
reactions with UP (Figure 2C) and PU-KKmt gave
the corresponding Bpy-cross-linked products in 80% and 85% yield,
respectively (Table 1).
Figure 1
(A) Schematic structural
representation of the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates
with two different configurations. The mouse NoxaB-(68–93)-C75A
sequence, a selective Mcl-1 inhibitor,[31] was used in the fusion along with (GGGGS)3 as a flexible
linker. (B) Coomassie Blue stained SDS–PAGE gel of the purified
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin (PU) and ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 (UP) conjugates.
(C) Deconvoluted masses of the PU and UP conjugates.
Figure 2
(A) Reaction scheme for the Bpy-mediated cross-linking
of the NoxaBH3–ubiquitin conjugate. Bpy is rendered in a ball-and-stick
model in the Bpy-cross-linked conjugate. (B,C) Deconvoluted masses
of NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-Bpy (PU-Bpy) and analogous ubiquitin–NoxaBH3-Bpy
(UP-Bpy).
Table 1
LC/ESI-MS Characterization
of the Ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 Peptide Conjugates
Percent conversion
was calculated by comparing the ion count of the cross-linked product
to that of the starting material plus product.
Calculated mass for the conjugate with the N-terminal
Met cleaved. NA, not applicable.
(A) Schematic structural
representation of the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates
with two different configurations. The mouse NoxaB-(68–93)-C75A
sequence, a selective Mcl-1 inhibitor,[31] was used in the fusion along with (GGGGS)3 as a flexible
linker. (B) Coomassie Blue stained SDS–PAGE gel of the purified
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin (PU) and ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 (UP) conjugates.
(C) Deconvoluted masses of the PU and UP conjugates.(A) Reaction scheme for the Bpy-mediated cross-linking
of the NoxaBH3–ubiquitin conjugate. Bpy is rendered in a ball-and-stick
model in the Bpy-cross-linked conjugate. (B,C) Deconvoluted masses
of NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-Bpy (PU-Bpy) and analogous ubiquitin–NoxaBH3-Bpy
(UP-Bpy).Mass deconvolution was performed using
ProMass.Percent conversion
was calculated by comparing the ion count of the cross-linked product
to that of the starting material plus product.Calculated mass for the conjugate with the N-terminal
Met cleaved. NA, not applicable.
Inhibitory Activities of the Ubiquitin–Peptide Conjugates
To examine how ubiquitin conjugation affects NoxaBH3 peptide function,
the inhibitory activities of the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 conjugates
were evaluated using a competitive fluorescence polarization assay.
All three unmodified ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 conjugates showed >5-fold
higher activity than the parent NoxaBH3 peptide, with ubiquitin conjugation
at the C-terminus of NoxaBH3 peptide being preferred (Table 2). To our satisfaction, the Bpy-cross-linked ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
peptide conjugates showed dramatic increases in inhibitory activity
against Mcl-1 compared with their noncross-linked counterparts; the Ki values decreased to 0.7 nM for PU-Bpy and
1.8 nM for UP-Bpy, an improvement of 34 and 72-fold, respectively
(Table 2). These results indicate that Bpy-cross-linking
reinforces the helical NoxaBH3 domain in a manner similar to that
of the isolated peptide.[20] Importantly,
the ubiquitin fusion does not interfere with the binding of NoxaBH3
peptide to Mcl-1 as mutations of the ubiquitin surface lysines to
arginines (PU-KKmt) had essentially no effect on the inhibitory activity
(Table 2). To the contrary, ubiquitin fusion
enhances inhibitory activities of the conjugates (compare PU-Bpy,
UP-Bpy, and PU-KKmt-Bpy to NoxaBH3-Bpy in Table 2), presumably due to the higher helicity achieved in the context
of proteins compared with short peptides.
Table 2
Inhibitory
Activities of the NoxaBH3 Peptides and the Ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
Peptide Conjugatesa
name
sequence
Ki (nM)
NoxaBH3
AAQLRRIGDKVNLRQKLLNb
650 ± 130c
NoxaBH3-Bpy
AAC′LRRIGDC′VNLRQKLLNd
25 ± 5.0c
PU
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin
24 ± 3.0
UP
ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
130 ± 56
PU-KKmt
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-K48R/K63R
27 ± 2.0
PU-Bpy
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-Bpy
0.7 ± 0.3
UP-Bpy
ubiquitin–NoxaBH3-Bpy
1.8 ± 0.6
PU-KKmt-Bpy
NoxaBH3–ubiquitin-K48R/K63R-Bpy
0.7 ± 0.2
The competitive
fluorescence polarization assay was performed three times to derive
mean ± SD.
NoxaBH3
peptides were acetylated at the N-termini and amidated at the C-termini.
The values were obtained from
ref (20).
C′ denotes the Bpy-linked l-cysteine.
The competitive
fluorescence polarization assay was performed three times to derive
mean ± SD.NoxaBH3peptides were acetylated at the N-termini and amidated at the C-termini.The values were obtained from
ref (20).C′ denotes the Bpy-linkedl-cysteine.
Effect of Peptide
Fusion on Ubiquitin Structure
The structural determinants
for efficient uptake of extracellular ubiquitin via CXCR4 have been
reported recently.[25] To examine whether
conjugation of NoxaBH3 peptide to ubiquitin induces structural changes
in the regions of Phe-4, Asp-58, and Val-70 that are involved in the
ubiquitin binding to CXCR4, we prepared the [5% 13C; U-15N]-labeled PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy conjugates
and recorded 2D [15N,1H] HSQC spectra.
The HSQC spectra of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy were then compared with
that of the ubiquitin[26] (Figure 3). No significant alterations of polypeptide backbone 15N and 1H chemical shifts were registered upon
cross-linking for residues implicated in ubiquitin binding to CXCR4;
that is, signals arising from Phe-4, Asp-58, and Val-70 were not affected
by the cross-linking (Figure 3). Overall, comparison
of the HSQC spectra shows that peptide fusion as well as cross-linking
did not affect the structure of the folded ubiquitin domain, particularly
the regions implicated in binding to CXCR4.
Figure 3
Overlay of the two 2D
[15N,1H] HSQC spectra recorded at 600 MHz 1H resonance frequency for 200 μM solutions of [5% 13C; U-15N]-labeled PU-KKmt (red)
and PU-KKmt-Bpy (blue). The 15N,1HN assignments for ubiquitin were taken from BMRB entry 15410,[26] adjusted using the spectrum recorded for ubiquitin (see methods), and the corresponding peak positions are indicated
using the one-letter amino acid code. The boxes highlight the overlaid
peaks arising from Phe-4, Asp-58, and Val-70, three key residues critical
for the binding of ubiquitin to the CXCR4 receptor.
Overlay of the two 2D
[15N,1H] HSQC spectra recorded at 600 MHz 1H resonance frequency for 200 μM solutions of [5% 13C; U-15N]-labeled PU-KKmt (red)
and PU-KKmt-Bpy (blue). The 15N,1HN assignments for ubiquitin were taken from BMRB entry 15410,[26] adjusted using the spectrum recorded for ubiquitin (see methods), and the corresponding peak positions are indicated
using the one-letter amino acid code. The boxes highlight the overlaid
peaks arising from Phe-4, Asp-58, and Val-70, three key residues critical
for the binding of ubiquitin to the CXCR4 receptor.
Uptake Mechanism of the Ubiquitin–Peptide
Conjugates
Since CXCR4-mediated endocytosis is energy-dependent
and can be inhibited at low temperatures, we investigated the effect
of switching the incubation temperature from 37 to 4 °C on the
uptake of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy in the CXCR4-positive Jurkat cells.
Because PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy contain a His-tag at their N-termini,
we measured the internalization of the conjugates by Western blot
using an anti-His tag antibody. We observed >4-fold drop in the
uptake for both after lowering the temperature to 4 °C (Figure 4A), indicating that the internalization was energy-dependent
and that Bpy-cross-linking did not enhance uptake at either temperature.
To confirm that the uptake is mediated through CXCR4, we preincubated
Jurkat cells with either anti-CXCR4 antibody or ubiquitin prior to
PU-KKmt-Bpy treatment. We found that the pretreatment with anti-CXCR4
antibody led to an ∼83% drop in the uptake, while the preincubation
with ubiquitin resulted in a concentration-dependent decrease in the
uptake (Figure 4B). These reductions are consistent
with the CXCR4-mediated endocytosis mechanism as both anti-CXCR4 antibody
and ubiquitin can block the ubiquitin binding site of CXCR4 on the
Jurkat cell surface. The use of a large excess of ubiquitin appeared
critical as the preincubation with 12.5 μM ubiquitin did not
inhibit the uptake (Figure 4B). Since the uptake
depends on CXCR4, we evaluated how CXCR4 expression level affects
uptake. We chose three cancer cell lines with the following CXCR4
expression order: Jurkat > U937 > K562[27] and incubated them with 0.5 μM PU-KKmt-Bpy separately for
2 h. The internalization of PU-KKmt-Bpy was quantified by Western
blot using anti-His tag antibody. To our satisfaction, Jurkat cells
showed the highest uptake, while K562 cells showed the lowest (Figure 4C), indicating that indeed the uptake efficiency
correlates with the CXCR4 expression level. Taken together, these
results validated our hypothesis that ubiquitin can serve as a protein
carrier for targeted delivery of anticancer agents such as the cross-linkedpeptides into the CXCR4-expressing cancer cells.
Figure 4
Uptake of ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
peptide conjugates is temperature- and CXCR4-dependent. (A) Western
blot analysis of the uptake of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy into Jurkat
cells at 37 or 4 °C. The relative uptakes were normalized over
β-actin signal and plotted in the histogram. (B) Western blot
analysis of the uptake of PU-KKmt-Bpy (0.5 μM) into Jurkat cells
at 37 °C after pretreating cells with the CXCR4 antibody (25
μg/mL) or ubiquitin at concentrations of 12.5, 25, and 50 μM.
The intensities were quantified by densitometry, normalized over β-actin
levels, and plotted in the histogram. (C) PU-KKmt-Bpy uptake at 37
°C is dependent on CXCR4 expression. K562, Jurkat, and U937 cells
were incubated with 0.5 μM PU-KKmt-Bpy for 2 h before cell
lysis and Western blot analysis.
Uptake of ubiquitin–NoxaBH3
peptide conjugates is temperature- and CXCR4-dependent. (A) Western
blot analysis of the uptake of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy into Jurkat
cells at 37 or 4 °C. The relative uptakes were normalized over
β-actin signal and plotted in the histogram. (B) Western blot
analysis of the uptake of PU-KKmt-Bpy (0.5 μM) into Jurkat cells
at 37 °C after pretreating cells with the CXCR4 antibody (25
μg/mL) or ubiquitin at concentrations of 12.5, 25, and 50 μM.
The intensities were quantified by densitometry, normalized over β-actin
levels, and plotted in the histogram. (C) PU-KKmt-Bpy uptake at 37
°C is dependent on CXCR4 expression. K562, Jurkat, and U937 cells
were incubated with 0.5 μM PU-KKmt-Bpy for 2 h before cell
lysis and Western blot analysis.
Cellular Activities of the Ubiquitin–Peptide Conjugates
To probe whether the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates
can be released into the cytosol after CXCR4-mediated endocytosis
and exhibit cell-killing activity, we evaluated the cellular activities
of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy. Thus, Jurkat, U937, and K562 cells were
treated with PU-KKmt or PU-KKmt-Bpy at concentrations ranging from
100 to 2000 nM for 24 h, and the cell viability was assessed using
the MTS assay. We found that while PU-KKmt showed no significant activities
against all three cell lines, PU-KKmt-Bpy selectively killed nearly
50% Jurkat cells at 2 μM (Figure 5).
Since PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy exhibited similar uptake at 37 °C
(Figure 4A), the discrete activity of PU-KKmt-Bpy
suggests that the higher inhibitory activity of PU-KKmt-Bpy against
Mcl-1 (Ki = 0.7 ± 0.2 nM) afforded
by cross-linking is crucial for its cellular activity. Moreover, the
lack of activities against K562 and U937 cells by PU-KKmt-Bpy emphasizes
the importance of CXCR4 in mediating the uptake of these conjugates.
Figure 5
Cell-killing
activities of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy against K562, U937, and Jurkat
cells. The MTS-based cell viability assays were performed in triplicate,
and the data were plotted as the mean ± SD.
Cell-killing
activities of PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy against K562, U937, and Jurkat
cells. The MTS-based cell viability assays were performed in triplicate,
and the data were plotted as the mean ± SD.
Serum Stability of the Ubiquitin–Peptide Conjugates
Previously, we have shown that biaryl cross-linking greatly increased
serum stability of the NoxaBH3 peptides.[20] To examine whether Bpy cross-linking with the ubiquitin–peptide
conjugates has a similar effect, we incubated PU-KKmt and PU-KKmt-Bpy
with fresh mouse serum and monitored the stability of the conjugates
by ELISA using antiubiquitin or anti-His tag antibodies (Figure 6). Since the conjugate binding to Mcl-1-immobilized
on the plate surface necessitates the intact peptide domain, the use
of antiubiquitin and anti-His tag antibodies allows us to track the
proteolytic stability of the C- and N-terminal regions of the NoxaBH3
peptide, respectively. Figure 6B shows that
Bpy cross-linking had no effect on preventing the cleavage at the
C-terminus of the NoxaBH3 after 2 h of incubation. Figure 6C shows that Bpy cross-linking significantly slowed
down the proteolytic cleavage at the N-terminus of the NoxaBH3 domain.
Taken together, these results indicate that the cross-linking stabilizes
the N-terminal extension of the NoxaBH3 domain, a region closer to
the chemical cross-linker, while exerting little effect on the more
flexible linker region, similar to what was observed with the hydrocarbon-cross-linkedpeptides.[28]
Figure 6
Bpy cross-linking stabilizes
the N-terminus of the NoxaBH3 peptide in the ubiquitin conjugate.
(A) Scheme for the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 peptide constructs and
their potential proteolytic sites. (B) ELISA signals as detected by
antiubiquitin antibodies. (C) ELISA signals as detected by anti-His
tag antibodies. ELISA assays were performed in duplicate, and the
data were plotted as the mean ± SD.
Bpy cross-linking stabilizes
the N-terminus of the NoxaBH3 peptide in the ubiquitin conjugate.
(A) Scheme for the ubiquitin–NoxaBH3 peptide constructs and
their potential proteolytic sites. (B) ELISA signals as detected by
antiubiquitin antibodies. (C) ELISA signals as detected by anti-His
tag antibodies. ELISA assays were performed in duplicate, and the
data were plotted as the mean ± SD.Collectively, our data show that the extracellular ubiquitin
identified recently as an endogenous ligand for CXCR4 can be harnessed
as a conjugation partner for targeted delivery of the anticancer agents.
Specifically, we explored the utility of ubiquitin in enhancing the
intracellular delivery of the side-chain-cross-linkedNoxaBH3 peptides,
which were reported to have potent inhibitory activities against Mcl-1
but modest cellular activities because of the inefficient pinocytosis-based
uptake.[19] Besides increased efficiency
in uptake, the conjugation of ubiquitin also led to significant increases
in inhibitory activity as well as serum stability. This work provides
a rare example of applying chemical cross-linkers directly onto intact
proteins to reinforce their structure[29] and enhance their biological function. Compared with the use of
extensive chemical modifications to optimize membrane permeation of
the side-chain-cross-linkedpeptides,[30] the conjugation of ubiquitin, preferably at its N-terminus, with
the peptide-based inhibitors represents a complementary approach and
is particularly attractive for targeting tumor cells overexpressing
the chemokine receptor CXCR4.
Conclusions
In
summary, we have demonstrated for the first time the use of ubiquitin
as a conjugation partner for targeted delivery of the peptide-based
inhibitors into CXCR4-positive cancer cells. Extending our earlier
work on the distance-matching cross-linkers with peptides, we found
that 6,6′-bis-bromomethyl-[3,3′]bipyridine (Bpy) can
be used to efficiently cross-link the ubiquitin-NoxaBH3 peptide conjugates
containing two cysteines located at i, i+7 positions. The resulting Bpy-cross-linkedubiquitin-peptide conjugates
exhibited higher inhibitory activity against Mcl-1, improved selective
activity in CXCR4-expressing Jurkat cells, and increased proteolytic
stability in peptide regions close to the cross-linking site. Mechanistic
studies revealed that the ubiquitin/CXCR4 axis is crucial for the
selective uptake of the ubiquitin–peptide conjugates. While
this work focuses on targeted delivery of the NoxaBH3-peptide-based
Mcl-1 inhibitors, it should be noted that other anticancer agents
such as paclitaxel can be similarly conjugated to the N-terminus of
ubiquitin for the targeted delivery into cancer cells to increase
their therapeutic windows.
Authors: Jean Philippe Richard; Kamran Melikov; Eric Vives; Corinne Ramos; Birgit Verbeure; Mike J Gait; Leonid V Chernomordik; Bernard Lebleu Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2002-10-30 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: H Daino; I Matsumura; K Takada; J Odajima; H Tanaka; S Ueda; H Shibayama; H Ikeda; M Hibi; T Machii; T Hirano; Y Kanakura Journal: Blood Date: 2000-04-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Yan-Xi Sun; Jingcheng Wang; Charles E Shelburne; Dennis E Lopatin; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Mark A Rubin; Kenneth J Pienta; Russell S Taichman Journal: J Cell Biochem Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 4.429
Authors: Harold H Bach; Yee M Wong; Heather M LaPorte; Richard L Gamelli; Matthias Majetschak Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Yee M Wong; Heather M LaPorte; Lauren J Albee; Todd A Baker; Harold H Bach; P Geoff Vana; Ann E Evans; Richard L Gamelli; Matthias Majetschak Journal: J Burn Care Res Date: 2017 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 1.845
Authors: Abhishek Tripathi; P Geoff Vana; Tanmay S Chavan; Lioubov I Brueggemann; Kenneth L Byron; Nadya I Tarasova; Brian F Volkman; Vadim Gaponenko; Matthias Majetschak Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Florian Job; Florian Settele; Susan Lorey; Chris Rundfeldt; Lars Baumann; Annette G Beck-Sickinger; Ulrich Haupts; Hauke Lilie; Eva Bosse-Doenecke Journal: FEBS Open Bio Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 2.693