Cyclic heptapeptide cyclo(FΦRRRRQ) (cFΦR4, where Φ is l-2-naphthylalanine) was recently found to be efficiently internalized by mammalian cells. In this study, its mechanism of internalization was investigated by perturbing various endocytic events through the introduction of pharmacologic agents and genetic mutations. The results show that cFΦR4 binds directly to membrane phospholipids, is internalized into human cancer cells through endocytosis, and escapes from early endosomes into the cytoplasm. Its cargo capacity was examined with a wide variety of molecules, including small-molecule dyes, linear and cyclic peptides of various charged states, and proteins. Depending on the nature of the cargos, they may be delivered by endocyclic (insertion of cargo into the cFΦR4 ring), exocyclic (attachment of cargo to the Gln side chain), or bicyclic approaches (fusion of cFΦR4 and cyclic cargo rings). The overall delivery efficiency (i.e., delivery of cargo into the cytoplasm and nucleus) of cFΦR4 was 4-12-fold higher than those of nonaarginine, HIV Tat-derived peptide, or penetratin. The higher delivery efficiency, coupled with superior serum stability, minimal toxicity, and synthetic accessibility, renders cFΦR4 a useful transporter for intracellular cargo delivery and a suitable system for investigating the mechanism of endosomal escape.
Cyclic heptapeptidecyclo(FΦRRRRQ) (cFΦR4, where Φ is l-2-naphthylalanine) was recently found to be efficiently internalized by mammalian cells. In this study, its mechanism of internalization was investigated by perturbing various endocytic events through the introduction of pharmacologic agents and genetic mutations. The results show that cFΦR4 binds directly to membrane phospholipids, is internalized into humancancer cells through endocytosis, and escapes from early endosomes into the cytoplasm. Its cargo capacity was examined with a wide variety of molecules, including small-molecule dyes, linear and cyclic peptides of various charged states, and proteins. Depending on the nature of the cargos, they may be delivered by endocyclic (insertion of cargo into the cFΦR4 ring), exocyclic (attachment of cargo to the Gln side chain), or bicyclic approaches (fusion of cFΦR4 and cyclic cargo rings). The overall delivery efficiency (i.e., delivery of cargo into the cytoplasm and nucleus) of cFΦR4 was 4-12-fold higher than those of nonaarginine, HIV Tat-derived peptide, or penetratin. The higher delivery efficiency, coupled with superior serum stability, minimal toxicity, and synthetic accessibility, renders cFΦR4 a useful transporter for intracellular cargo delivery and a suitable system for investigating the mechanism of endosomal escape.
The plasma
membrane presents
a major challenge in drug discovery, especially for biologics such
as peptides, proteins, and nucleic acids. One potential strategy for
subverting the membrane barrier and delivering the biologics into
cells is to attach them to “cell-penetrating peptides”
(CPPs). Since the initial observation that HIV trans-activator of transcription, Tat, internalizes into mammalian cells
and activates viral replication in the late 1980s,[1,2] a
large number of CPPs consisting of 6–20 residues have been
reported.[3−8] CPPs have been used to deliver small-molecule drugs,[9,10] DNA,[11,12] RNA,[13−16] proteins,[17−19] and nanoparticles[20−22] into mammalian cells and tissues through either covalent attachment
or electrostatic association. Many CPPs display minimal toxicity and
immunogenicity at physiologically relevant concentrations,[23,24] and the incorporation of specific unnatural amino acids[25] and other chemical moieties[26,27] has been found to increase the stability and extent of cytosolic
delivery.Despite three decades of investigation, the fundamental
basis for
CPP activity remains elusive. Two distinct and non-mutually exclusive
mechanisms have been proposed for the CPPs whose primary sequences
are characterized by multiple arginine residues. In the first mechanism
(direct membrane translocation), the arginine guanidiniumgroups interact
with phospholipids of the plasma membrane to generate neutral ion
pairs that passively diffuse across the membrane[28,29] or promote the formation of transient pores that permit the CPPs
to traverse the lipid bilayer.[30,31] In the second mechanism,
CPPs associate with cell surface glycoproteins and membrane phospholipids,
internalize into cells through endocytosis,[32−36] and subsequently exit from endosomes into the cytoplasm.
Taken together, a majority of data show that at low CPP concentrations,
cellular uptake occurs mostly through endocytosis, whereas direct
membrane translocation becomes prevalent at concentrations above 10
μM.[37] However, the mechanism(s) of
entry and the efficiency of uptake may vary with CPP identity, cargo,
cell type, and other factors.[38,39]CPPs that enter
cells via endocytosis must exit from endocytic
vesicles to reach the cytosol. Unfortunately, the endosomal membrane
has proven to be a significant barrier toward cytoplasmic delivery
by these CPPs; often a negligible fraction of the peptides escapes
into the cell interior.[40−42] For example, even in the presence
of the fusogenic hemagglutinin peptideHA2, which has been demonstrated
to enhance endosomal cargo release, >99% of a Tat–Cre fusion
protein remains entrapped in macropinosomes 24 h after initial uptake.[35] Recently, two new types of CPPs with improved
endosomal escape efficiencies have been discovered. Appelbaum et al.
showed that folded miniature proteins containing a discrete pentaarginine
motif were able to effectively overcome endosomal entrapment and reach
the cytosol of mammalian cells.[42] This
motif consists of five arginines across three turns of an α-helix,
and proteins containing this motif were released from early (Rab5+) endosomes into the cell interior. We and others found that
cyclization of certain arginine-rich CPPs enhances their cellular
uptake.[43−46] Small amphipathic cyclic peptides such as cyclo(FΦRRRRQ) (cFΦR4, where Φ is l-2-naphthylalanine) are internalized
by mammalian cells in an energy-dependent manner and enter the cytoplasm
and nucleus with efficiencies 2–5-fold higher than that of
nonaarginine (R9).[43] Moreover,
membrane impermeable cargos such as phosphopeptides can be inserted
into the cFΦR4 ring, resulting in their delivery
into the cytoplasm of target cells. However, insertion of a cargo
into the cyclic peptide ring, which we term the “endocyclic”
delivery method (Figure 1A), is limited to
relatively short peptides (no more than seven amino acids), as large
rings, for yet unknown reasons, display poor internalization efficiency.[43]
Figure 1
Structures showing cargo attachment during endocyclic (A), exocyclic
(B), and bicyclic (C) delivery of cargos (colored red) by cFΦR4.
To gain insight into the cFΦR4 mechanism of action
and potentially design cyclic CPPs of still higher efficiency, in
this study we investigated the internalization mechanism of cFΦR4 through the use of artificial membranes and pharmacologic
agents as well as genetic mutations that perturb various endocytic
events. Our data show that cFΦR4 binds directly to
the plasma membrane phospholipids and enters cells through endocytosis.
Like the miniature proteins displaying the pentaarginine motif,[42] cFΦR4 escapes from the early
endosomes into the cytosol. We also examined the ability of cFΦR4 to deliver a wide range of cargo molecules, including linear
peptides of varying charges, cyclic peptides, and large proteins,
into the cytoplasm of mammalian cells by exocyclic [attachment of
cargo to the Gln side chain (Figure 1B)] or
bicyclic [fusion of the cFΦR4 and cyclic cargo rings
(Figure 1C)] delivery methods. We found that
cFΦR4 is remarkably tolerant to the size and nature
of cargos and efficiently transported all of the cargos tested into
the cytoplasm and nucleus of mammalian cells. In addition, cFΦR4 exhibits superior stability against proteolysis over linear
CPPs but minimal cytotoxicity. cFΦR4 therefore provides
a practically useful transporter for cytosolic cargo delivery as well
as a system for investigating the mechanism of early endosomal cargo
release.Structures showing cargo attachment during endocyclic (A), exocyclic
(B), and bicyclic (C) delivery of cargos (colored red) by cFΦR4.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Reagents
for peptide synthesis were purchased
from Advanced ChemTech (Louisville, KY), NovaBiochem (La Jolla, CA),
or Anaspec (San Jose, CA). 2,2′-Dipyridyl disulfide, Lissaminerhodamine B sulfonyl chloride, fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC),
dexamethasone (Dex), coenzyme A trilithium salt, FITC-labeled dextran
(dextranFITC), and human serum were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
(St. Louis, MO). Cell culture media, fetal bovine serum (FBS), penicillin/streptomycin,
0.25% trypsin-ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, Hoescht 33342, Alexa488-labeled
dextran (dextranAlexa488), Dulbecco’s phosphate-buffered
saline (DPBS) (2.67 mM potassium chloride, 1.47 mM potassium phosphate
monobasic, 137 mM sodium chloride, and 8.06 mM sodium phosphate dibasic),
and Lipofectamine 2000 were purchased from Invitrogen (Carlsbad, CA).
PD-10 desalting columns were purchased from GE-Healthcare (Piscataway,
NJ). Nuclear staining dye DRAQ5 was purchased from Thermo Scientific
(Rockford, IL), while the cell proliferation kit [3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium
bromide (MTT)] was purchased from Roche (Indianapolis, IN). The anti-phosphotyrosine
(pY) antibody (clone 4G10) was purchased from Millipore (Temecula,
CA).
Peptide Synthesis and Labeling
The details of peptide
synthesis are described in the Supporting Information. Peptide labeling with FITC was performed by dissolving the purified
peptide (∼1 mg) in 300 μL of 1:1:1 (v/v) dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO)/dimethylformamide (DMF)/150 mM sodium bicarbonate (pH 8.5)
mixture and mixing that solution with 10 μL of FITC in DMSO
(100 mg/mL). After 20 min at room temperature, the reaction mixture
was subjected to reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC) on a C18 column to isolate the FITC-labeled peptide.
To generate rhodamine- and Dex-labeled peptides (Figure S1 of the Supporting Information), an Nε-4-methoxytrityl-l-lysine was added to
the C-terminus. After solid-phase peptide synthesis, the lysine side
chain was selectively deprotected using 1% (v/v) trifluoroacetic acid
in CH2Cl2. The resin was incubated with Lissaminerhodamine B sulfonyl chloride and DIPEA (5 equiv each) in DMF overnight.
The peptides were fully deprotected as described in the Supporting Information, triturated with diethyl
ether, and purified by HPLC. The Dex-labeled peptide was produced
by incubating the resin with a mixture of dexamethasone-21-thiopropionic
acid, HBTU, and DIPEA (5, 5, and 10 equiv, respectively) in DMF for
3 h.[42] The peptide was then deprotected,
triturated, and purified by HPLC. Bicyclic peptides, phosphocoumaryl
aminopropionic acid (pCAP), and pCAP-containing peptides (PCPs) were
synthesized as previously described.[47−49] The authenticity of
each peptide was confirmed by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization
time-of-flight mass spectrometry.
Preparation of cFΦR4–Protein Conjugates
Peptide cFΦR4 containing a C-terminal cysteine
[cFΦR4-SH, ∼10 μmol (Figure S2 of the Supporting Information)] was dissolved in 1 mL
of degassed DPBS and mixed with 2,2′-dipyridyl disulfide (5
equiv) dissolved in acetone (0.5 mL). After 2 h at room temperature,
the reaction product cFΦR4-SS-Py was purified by
reversed-phase HPLC. The product was incubated with coenzyme A (2
equiv) in DPBS for 2 h. The resulting cFΦR4-SS-CoA
adduct was purified again by reversed-phase HPLC. Green fluorescent
protein (GFP) containing an N-terminal ybbR tag (VLDSLEFIASKL)
and a C-terminal six-histidine tag was expressed in Escherichia
coli and purified as previously described.[50] Next, ybbR-GFP (30 μM), cFΦR4-SS-CoA
(30 μM), and phosphopantetheinyl transferase Sfp (0.5 μM)
were mixed in 50 mM HEPES (pH 7.4) and 10 mM MgCl2 (total
volume of 1.5 mL) and incubated at 37 °C for 15 min. The labeled
protein, cFΦR4-S-S-GFP (Figure S2 of the Supporting Information), was separated from unreacted
cFΦR4-SS-CoA by passing the reaction mixture through
a PD-10 desalting column. GFP conjugated to Tat (Tat-S-S-GFP) and
cFΦR4-conjugated PTP1B (cFΦR4-PTP1B)
were prepared in a similar fashion (Figure S3 of the Supporting Information).
Cell Culture and Transfection
HEK293, HeLa, MCF-7,
NIH 3T3, and A549 cells were maintained in medium consisting of Dulbecco’s
modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM), 10% FBS, and 1% penicillin/streptomycin.
H1650 and H1299 cells were grown in RPMI-1640 supplemented with 10%
FBS and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. Cells were cultured in a humidified
incubator at 37 °C with 5% CO2. For the transfection
of HeLa cells, cells were seeded onto a 96-well plate at a density
of 10000 cells/well. Following attachment, cells were transfected
with plasmids encoding the Rab5-green fluorescent protein fusion (Rab5-GFP,
a gift from P. Di Camilli), Rab7-GFP (Addgene plasmid 28047, Q. Zhong),
the glucocorticoid receptor (C638G)-GFP fusion (GR-GFP),[51] DsRed-Rab5 WT (Addgene plasmid 13050, R. Pagano),
or DsRed-Rab5Q79L (Addgene plasmid 29688, E. DeRobertis)
following manufacturer’s protocols for Lipofectamine 2000.
Confocal Microscopy
To examine the colocalization between
rhodamine-labeled cyclic peptide (cFΦR4Rho) and Rab5+ or Rab7+ endosomes, HeLa cells
transfected with Rab5-GFP or Rab7-GFP were plated (200 μL, 104 cells/well, 96-well glass bottom MatriPlates) the day prior
to the experiment. On the day of the experiment, HeLa cells were treated
with 1 μM cFΦR4Rho in DMEM supplemented
with 300 nM Hoescht 33342 for 30 min. After that, the cells were washed
with HKR buffer [10 mM HEPES (pH 7.4), 140 mM NaCl, 2 mM KCl, 1 mM
CaCl2, and 1 mM MgCl2] and imaged using a PerkinElmer
LiveView spinning disk confocal microscope.For the GR translocation
assay, HeLa cells transfected with GR-GFP were plated as described
above.[51] The cells were treated for 30
min with DMEM containing 1 μM Dex or Dex-peptide conjugate and
300 nM Hoescht 33342 and imaged using a Zeiss Axiovert 200M epifluorescence
microscope outfitted with a Ziess Axiocam mRM camera and an EXFO-Excite
series 120 Hg arc lamp. The translocation ratio (the ratio of mean
GFP intensity in the nuclear and surrounding regions) for individual
cells was measured as described in the Supporting
Information. To examine the effect of endocytosis inhibitors,
transfected HeLa cells were pretreated for 30 min with clear DMEM
containing the inhibitors before incubation with Dex or Dex-peptide
conjugates. To test whether Rab5 activity is required for endosomal
escape, HeLa cells were transfected with GR-GFP and DsRed-Rab5 WT
or DsRed-Rab5Q79L before being treated with Dex or the
Dex-peptide conjugate and imaged as described above.[42]To examine the internalization of rhodamine-labeled
peptides, 5
× 104 HEK293 cells were plated in a 35 mm glass-bottom
microwell dish (MatTek). On the day of the experiment, the cells were
incubated with the peptide solution (5 μM) and 0.5 mg/mL dextranFITC at 37 °C for 2 h. The cells were gently washed with
DPBS twice and imaged on a Visitech Infinity 3 Hawk 2D-array live
cell imaging confocal microscope. To detect the internalization of
pCAP-containing peptides, HEK293 cells were similarly plated and incubated
with the peptide solution (5 μM) at 37 °C for 60 min. After
removal of the medium, the cells were gently washed with DPBS containing
sodium pervanadate (1 mM) twice and incubated for 10 min in DPBS containing
5 μM nuclear staining dye DRAQ5. The resulting cells were washed
with DPBS twice and imaged on a spinning disk confocal microscope
(UltraView Vox CSUX1 system). To monitor GFP internalization, 5 ×
104 HEK293 cells were seeded in a 35 mm glass-bottom microwell
dish and cultured overnight. Cells were treated with CPP-S-S-GFP (1
μM) at 37 °C for 2 h. After removal of the medium, the
cells were incubated in DPBS containing 5 μM DRAQ5 for 10 min.
The cells were washed with DPBS twice and imaged on a Visitech Infinity
3 Hawk 2D-array live cell imaging confocal microscope.
Flow Cytometry
To quantify the delivery efficiencies
of pCAP-containing peptides, HeLa cells were cultured in six-well
plates (5 × 105 cells per well) for 24 h. On the day
of the experiment, the cells were incubated with 10 μM pCAP-containing
peptide in clear DMEM with 1% FBS at 37 °C for 2 h. The cells
were washed with DPBS containing 1 mM sodium pervanadate, detached
from plate with 0.25% trypsin, suspended in DPBS containing 1% bovine
serum albumin, and analyzed on a BD FACS Aria flow cytometer with
excitation at 355 nm. Data were analyzed with Flowjo (Tree Star) The
experimental procedure for estimating the effect of the cyclic peptide
on endocytosis is described in the Supporting
Information.
Immunoblotting
NIH 3T3 cells were
cultured in full
growth medium to reach 80% confluence. The cells were starved in serum
free medium for 3 h and treated with different concentrations of cFΦR4-PTP1B or untagged PTP1B for 2 h, followed by a 30 min incubation
in medium supplemented with 1 mM sodium pervanadate. The solutions
were removed and the cells washed twice with cold DPBS. The cells
were detached and lysed in 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 1%
NP-40, 10 mM sodium pyrophosphate, 5 mM iodoacetic acid, 10 mM NaF,
1 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 2 mM sodium pervanadate, 0.1
mg/mL phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride, 1 mM benzamidine, and 0.1 mg/mL
trypsin inhibitor. After being incubated on ice for 30 min, the cell
lysate was centrifuged at 15000 rpm for 25 min in a microcentrifuge.
The total cellular proteins were separated by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis (SDS–PAGE) and transferred electrophoretically
to a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane, which was immunoblotted using
anti-pY antibody 4G10.
Results and Discussion
cFΦR4 Enters
Cells via Endocytosis
We previously observed that cFΦR4 fails to enter
cells at 4 °C or in the presence of sodium azide, suggesting
that energy-dependent endocytic processes mediate its cell entry.[43] However, other cyclic CPPs have been reported
to enter cells by direct membrane translocation.[44,45] To further test the role of endocytosis and intracellular trafficking
during the cellular uptake of cFΦR4, we examined
the extent of colocalization between cFΦR4Rho (Table 1, compound 1) and GFP-tagged
Rab proteins that have been demonstrated to localize to vesicles of
the endocytic system. Rab5 is a small Rab family GTPase that is primarily
localized to early endosomal membranes, whereas Rab7 is predominantly
localized to the membranes of late endosomes.[52,53] HeLa cells overexpressing GFP-Rab5 or GFP-Rab7 were incubated with
1 μM cFΦR4Rho for 30 min and examined
by spinning-disk confocal microscopy (Figure 2A). A large fraction of rhodamine B fluorescence overlapped with
that of Rab5-GFP (RGFP,rhodamine = 0.703)
and Rab7-GFP (RGFP,rhodamine = 0.591),
indicating that cFΦR4Rho is present in
both early (Rab5+) and late (Rab7+) endosomes.
cFΦR4 enters cells through endocytosis, localizes
to Rab5+ and Rab7+ endosomes, and releases from
early endosomes into cytoplasm. (A) Colocalization between Rab5-GFP
(left) or Rab7-GFP (right) and cFΦR4Rho (red) HeLa cells stained with Hoescht 33342 (blue). (B) Translocation
of GR-GFP after treatment with 1 μM Dex or cFΦR4Dex in the presence and absence of 80 μM Dynasore
(Dyna), 50 μM N-ethyl-isopropyl-amiloride (EIPA),
5 mM methyl-β-cyclodextrin (MBCD), 200 nM wortmannin (Wort),
or 200 nM bafilomycin (Baf). (C) Translocation of GR-GFP after treatment
with 1 μM Dex or cFΦR4Dex upon overexpression
of WT Rab5 or Rab5(Q79L). *p ≤ 0.01; **p ≤ 0.001; ns, not significant (two-tailed t test).
Abbreviations: Φ, l-2-naphthylalanine; J, l-2,3-diaminopropionic acid; Rho,
rhodamine B; Dex, dexamethasone; FITC, fluorescein isothiocyanate;
miniPEG, 8-amino-3,6-dioxaoctanoic acid; pCAP, phosphocoumaryl aminopropionic
acid; Tm, trimesoyl.cFΦR4 enters cells through endocytosis, localizes
to Rab5+ and Rab7+ endosomes, and releases from
early endosomes into cytoplasm. (A) Colocalization between Rab5-GFP
(left) or Rab7-GFP (right) and cFΦR4Rho (red) HeLa cells stained with Hoescht 33342 (blue). (B) Translocation
of GR-GFP after treatment with 1 μM Dex or cFΦR4Dex in the presence and absence of 80 μM Dynasore
(Dyna), 50 μM N-ethyl-isopropyl-amiloride (EIPA),
5 mM methyl-β-cyclodextrin (MBCD), 200 nM wortmannin (Wort),
or 200 nM bafilomycin (Baf). (C) Translocation of GR-GFP after treatment
with 1 μM Dex or cFΦR4Dex upon overexpression
of WT Rab5 or Rab5(Q79L). *p ≤ 0.01; **p ≤ 0.001; ns, not significant (two-tailed t test).To further delineate
the endocytic events required for the cytosolic
delivery of cFΦR4, we made use of a novel GR-GFP
translocation assay[42,51,54] and examined the effects of various endocytic inhibitors on the
cytosolic delivery of Dex-labeled peptides cFΦR4Dex and TatDex (Figure S1 of the Supporting Information and Table 1,
compounds 2 and 3). In resting cells, GR
(glucocorticoid receptor) is maintained in the cytoplasm through interactions
with host chaperones.[55] Upon cytoplasmic
delivery of Dex or Dex-peptide conjugates, association with the GR
activates translocation from the cytoplasm into the nucleus.[56] Thus, the ratio of GR-GFP fluorescence intensity
in the nucleus to that in the cytoplasm, or the translocation ratio
(TR), provides a semiquantitation of the cytosolic Dex or Dex-peptide
concentration. It should be noted that this assay is ideal for comparing
the cytosolic concentrations of a Dex derivative under different conditions
(e.g., in the absence and presence of an endocytosis inhibitor); for
different Dex derivatives (e.g., cFΦR4Dex and TatDex), the TR may also be affected by their solubility,
metabolic stability, and/or binding affinity for GR.[42,51] Incubation of HeLa cells expressing a GR-GFP fusion protein with
1 μM cFΦR4Dex increased the TR from
1.17 ± 0.23 in untreated cells to 3.50 ± 0.66, confirming
that a significant amount of cFΦR4Dex reached
the cytoplasm. Treatment of HeLa cells before and during cFΦR4Dex incubation with the cell-permeable dynamin
inhibitor Dynasore (Dyna), the cortical actin remodeling inhibitor N-ethyl-isopropyl-amiloride (EIPA), or the cholesterol-sequestering
agent methyl-β-cyclodextrin (MBCD) decreased the cFΦR4Dex TR to 2.35 ± 0.75, 1.86 ± 0.46, and
1.56 ± 0.39, respectively (Figure 2B and
Figure S4 of the Supporting Information).[57−59] These results strongly support our previous hypothesis
that cFΦR4 enters cells predominantly through endocytosis,[43] and the inhibition pattern suggests the involvement
of multiple endocytic mechanisms during the uptake of cFΦR4.
cFΦR4 Escapes from Early Endosomes into the
Cytoplasm
The presence of intense, diffuse fluorescence throughout
the cytoplasm and nucleus of cells treated with fluorescently labeled
cFΦR4 indicates that cFΦR4 efficiently
escapes from the endosome (ref (43) and vide infra). In an attempt to understand
why cFΦR4 possesses this unusual property among CPPs,
we again made use of the GR-GFP translocation assay to examine the
effect of downstream endocytic perturbations on the cytoplasmic delivery
of cFΦR4Dex. Pretreatment of HeLa cells
with the endosomal vesicular ATPase inhibitor bafilomycin (Baf)[60] prior to the addition of cFΦR4Dex decreased the TR to 2.66 ± 0.62, suggesting that
endosomal acidification facilitates the release of cFΦR4Dex into the cytoplasm. Blocking the maturation
of Rab5+ vesicles by pretreating cells with the phosphatidylinositol
3-kinase inhibitor wortmannin (Wort)[61] had
an only minor effect on the TR (from 3.50 ± 0.66 to 3.15 ±
0.55), supporting the idea that cFΦR4Dex is released from early Rab5+ endosomes. To further test
whether endosomal maturation is required for cytosolic delivery, we
overexpressed GTPase-inactive Rab5 mutant, Rab5(Q79L), which halts
endosomal maturation at the Rab5+ stage.[62] Rab5(Q79L) overexpression significantly reduced the TR
for TatDex, which has previously been shown to be released
from late endosomes[42] but had no effect
on either free Dex or cFΦR4Dex (Figure 2C and Figure S5 of the Supporting
Information), confirming that cFΦR4 is released
from early endosomes into the cytoplasm. Interestingly, miniature
proteins containing a pentaarginine motif on an α-helix, another
system shown to efficiently escape from the endosome, are also released
from the early endosome.[42] R9 was previously shown to exit the endocytic pathway after the miniature
proteins but prior to Tat.[42] It appears
that compared to other cationic CPPs, cFΦR4 is less
dependent on endosomal acidification for release and thus able to
exit from the less acidic early endosomes.
cFΦR4 Binds
to Membrane Phospholipids
It was previously observed that
incubation of 1 μM FITC-labeled
cyclic peptide cFΦR4FITC (Table 1, compound 4) with vesicles containing
negatively charged phospholipids [90% phosphatidylcholine (PC) and
10% phosphatidylglycerol (PG)] resulted in quenching of the peptide
fluorescence, consistent with direct binding of cFΦR4 to phospholipids.[43] To test the potential
role of membrane binding during endocytic uptake of CPPs, we prepared
SUVs that mimic the outer membrane of mammalian cells (45% PC, 20%
phosphatidylethanolamine, 20% sphingomyelin, and 15% cholesterol)
and tested them for binding to FITC-labeled cFΦR4, R9, and Tat (each at 100 nM) by a fluorescence polarization
(FP) assay. cFΦR4 bound to the neutral SUVs with
an EC50 value (lipid concentration at which half of cFΦR4FITC is bound) of 2.1 ± 0.1 mM (Figure 3A). R9 showed much weaker binding to
the artificial membrane (EC50 > 10 mM), whereas Tat
did
not bind at all. We next tested the CPPs for binding to heparan sulfate,
which was previously proposed to be the primary binding target of
cationic CPPs.[36,63−67] As expected, R9 and Tat both bound to
heparan sulfate with high affinity, having EC50 values
of 144 and 304 nM, respectively (Figure 3B).
Under the same condition, cFΦR4 showed no detectable
binding to heparan sulfate. Our results are in agreement with the
previous observations that nonamphipathic cationic CPPs (e.g., Tat
and R9) bind tightly with cell surface proteoglycans (e.g.,
heparan sulfate) but only weakly with membrane lipids.[67] The insufficient number of positive charges
of cFΦR4 is likely responsible for its lack of strong
electrostatic interaction with heparan sulfate. On the other hand,
the amphipathic nature and the more rigid cyclic structure of cFΦR4 should facilitate its binding to neutral lipid membranes.
These data, together with the inhibition pattern by various endocytic
inhibitors described above, suggest that cFΦR4 binds
directly to the plasma membrane phospholipids and is internalized
by all of the endocytic mechanisms in a piggyback manner.
Figure 3
Binding of
FITC-labeled cFΦR4, R9,
and Tat to SUV (A) and heparan sulfate (B).
Binding of
FITC-labeled cFΦR4, R9,
and Tat to SUV (A) and heparan sulfate (B).
Intracellular Delivery of Peptidyl Cargos
Because endocyclic
delivery by cFΦR4 is limited to a heptapeptide or
smaller cargos,[43] in this study we tested
the ability of cFΦR4 to deliver cargos of varying
sizes and physicochemical properties attached to the Gln side chain
(Figure 1B, exocyclic delivery). We first covalently
attached positively charged (RRRRR), neutral (AAAAA), hydrophobic
(FFFF), and negatively charged [DE(pCAP)LI] peptides to cFΦR4 (Table 1, compounds 5–8, respectively). The first three peptides were labeled with rhodamine
B at a C-terminal lysine side chain (Figure S1 of the Supporting Information), and their internalization
into HEK293 cells was examined by live cell confocal microscopy. Cells
incubated for 2 h with 5 μM peptide cFΦR4-A5 (Figure 4A) or cFΦR4-R5 (Figure 4B) showed evidence
of both punctate and diffuse fluorescence, with the latter distributed
almost uniformly throughout the cell. In contrast, the fluid-phase
endocytic marker dextranFITC displayed predominantly punctate
fluorescence, indicative of endosomal localization. The diffuse rhodamine
fluorescence suggests that a fraction of the peptides reached the
cytosol and nucleus of the cells. Co-incubation of cells with cFΦR4 (1 μM) and dextranAlexa488 increased the
level of internalization of the endocytic marker by 15% (Figure S6
of the Supporting Information), suggesting
that cFΦR4 activates endocytosis in cultured cells.
cFΦR4-F4 could not be tested because of
its poor aqueous solubility.
Figure 4
Representative live cell confocal images of
HEK293 cells treated
for 2 h with rhodamine B-labeled peptides and fluid-phase uptake marker
dextranFITC. (A) Cells treated with 5 μM cFΦR4-A5 and dextranFITC in the same Z section. (B) Same as panel A but with 5 μM cFΦR4-R5.
Representative live cell confocal images of
HEK293 cells treated
for 2 h with rhodamine B-labeled peptides and fluid-phase uptake marker
dextranFITC. (A) Cells treated with 5 μM cFΦR4-A5 and dextranFITC in the same Z section. (B) Same as panel A but with 5 μM cFΦR4-R5.Peptide cFΦR4-DE(pCAP)LI [cFΦR4-PCP (Figure S1 of the Supporting Information)] was designed to test the ability of cFΦR4 to
deliver negatively charged cargos as well as to compare the cytoplasmic
delivery efficiency of cFΦR4 with those of other
widely used CPPs such as R9, Tat, and penetratin (Antp).
Thus, untagged PCP [Ac-DE(pCap)LI-NH2] and PCP conjugated
to R9 (R9-PCP), Tat (Tat-PCP), and Antp (Antp-PCP)
(Table 1, compounds 9–12, respectively) were also prepared. Note that cFΦR4-PCP carries a net charge of zero at physiological pH. pCAP is nonfluorescent
but, upon entering the cell interior, should be rapidly dephosphorylated
by endogenous protein tyrosine phosphatases (PTPs) to produce a fluorescent
product, coumaryl aminopropionic acid (CAP, excitation at 355 nm and
emission at 450 nm).[48,49] When assayed against a PTP panel in vitro, all four CPP-PCP conjugates were efficiently dephosphorylated
(Table S1 of the Supporting Information). This assay detects only the CPP cargo inside the cytoplasm and
nucleus, where the catalytic domains of all known mammalianPTPs are
localized.[68] Further, CAP is fluorescent
only in its deprotonated state (pKa =
7.8); even if some dephosphorylation occurs inside the endosome (pH
6.5–4.5) or lysosome (pH 4.5), it would contribute little to
the total fluorescence (Figure S7 of the Supporting
Information). Treatment of HEK293 cells with 5 μM cFΦR4-PCP for 60 min resulted in diffuse blue fluorescence throughout
the cell, suggesting that cFΦR4-PCP reached the cell
interior, whereas the untagged PCP failed to enter cells under the
same condition (Figure 5A). When HEK293 cells
were pretreated with the PTP inhibitor sodium pervanadate for 1 h
prior to incubation with cFΦR4-PCP (5 μM),
the CAP fluorescence in the cells diminished to background levels.
HEK293 cells treated with R9-PCP, Antp-PCP, or Tat-PCP
under identical conditions showed weak fluorescence, consistent with
the poor ability of these peptides to access the cell interior (Figure 5A). To quantify the relative intracellular PCP delivery
efficiency, HeLa cells were treated with each peptide and analyzed
by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (Figure 5B). cFΦR4-PCP was most efficiently internalized
by the HeLa cells, with a mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of 3510
arbitrary units (AU), whereas R9-PCP, Antp-PCP, Tat-PCP,
and untagged PCP produced MFI values of 960, 400, 290, and 30 AU,
respectively (Figure 5C). Again, when cells
were treated with cFΦR4-PCP in the presence of sodium
pervanadate, the amount of CAP fluorescence was reduced to near background
levels (70 AU). Thus, cFΦR4 is capable of delivering
peptidyl cargos of varying physicochemical properties into the cytoplasm
with efficiencies 3.7–12-fold higher than those of R9, Antp, and Tat.
Figure 5
Internalization of pCAP-containing peptides into cultured
cells:
(I) untagged PCP, (II) cFΦR4-PCP, (III) cFΦR4-PCP and Na3VO4, (IV) R9-PCP,
(V) Tat-PCP, and (VI) Antp-PCP. (A) Representative live cell confocal
images of HEK293 cells treated with 5 μM peptides. The top panel
shows the nuclear stain with DRAQ5 and the bottom panel CAP fluorescence
in the same Z section. (B) Flow cytometry of HeLa
cells treated with 0 or 10 μM peptides. (C) CAP fluorescence
from panel B after subtraction of background fluorescence (untreated
cells).
Internalization of pCAP-containing peptides into cultured
cells:
(I) untagged PCP, (II) cFΦR4-PCP, (III) cFΦR4-PCP and Na3VO4, (IV) R9-PCP,
(V) Tat-PCP, and (VI) Antp-PCP. (A) Representative live cell confocal
images of HEK293 cells treated with 5 μM peptides. The top panel
shows the nuclear stain with DRAQ5 and the bottom panel CAP fluorescence
in the same Z section. (B) Flow cytometry of HeLa
cells treated with 0 or 10 μM peptides. (C) CAP fluorescence
from panel B after subtraction of background fluorescence (untreated
cells).
Intracellular Delivery
of Cyclic Peptides
In recent
years, there has been much interest in cyclic peptides as therapeutic
agents and biomedical research tools.[69,70] For example,
cyclic peptides are effective for inhibition of protein–protein
interactions,[47,71−73] which are challenging
targets for conventional small molecules. A major obstacle in developing
cyclic peptide therapeutics is that they are generally impermeable
to the cell membrane.[74−76] Our attempt to deliver cyclic peptides by cFΦR4 by the endocyclic method had only limited success; an increase
in cargo size from one to seven residues led to progressively poorer
cellular uptake, likely because the larger, more flexible rings bind
more poorly to the cell membrane.[43] To
overcome this limitation, we explored a bicyclic peptide system, in
which one ring contains a CPP motif (e.g., FΦR4)
while the other ring consists of peptide sequences specific for the
desired targets (Figure 1C). The bicyclic system
should in principle be able to accommodate cargos of any size, because
the cargo does not change the structure of the CPP ring and should
have less impact on its delivery efficiency. The additional rigidity
of a bicyclic structure should also improve its metabolic stability
as well as the target binding affinity and specificity. The bicyclic
peptides were readily synthesized by forming three amide bonds between
a trimesoyl scaffold and three amino groups on the corresponding linear
peptide [i.e., the N-terminal amine, the side chain of a C-terminal
diaminopropionic acid (Dap), and the side chain of a lysine (or ornithine,
Dap) imbedded between the CPP and target binding motifs].[47] To test the validity of this approach, we chose
FΦR4 in the C-terminal ring as the CPP moiety and
peptides of different lengths and charges (AAAAA, AAAAAAA, RARAR,
and DADAD) as cargo (Table 1, compounds 13–16, respectively). For comparison, we also prepared
two monocyclic peptides containing FΦR4 as a transporter
and peptides A5 and A7 as cargos (Table 1, compounds 17 and 18,
respectively). All of the peptides were labeled at a C-terminal lysine
side chain with rhodamine B (Figure S1 of the Supporting Information), and their internalization into HEK293
cells was examined by live cell confocal microscopy. Treatment of
cells with 5 μM peptide for 2 h resulted in efficient internalization
of all six peptides (Figure 6), although FACS
analysis indicated that the uptake of bicyclo(FΦR4-A5)Rho was ∼3-fold more efficient than
that of the corresponding monocyclic peptide (compound 17). The intracellular distribution of the internalized peptides was
quite different between the bicyclic and monocyclic peptides. While
the four bicyclic peptides showed evidence of their presence both
in the cytoplasm and nucleus (as indicated by the diffuse rhodamine
fluorescence) and in the endosomes (as indicated by the fluorescence
puncta), the monocyclic peptides exhibited predominantly punctate
fluorescence that overlapped with that of the endocytic marker dextranFITC. In all cases, the endocytic marker displayed only punctate
fluorescence, indicating that the endosomes were intact in the cells
treated with the peptides. These results indicate that the increased
structural rigidity of the bicyclic peptides facilitates both the
initial uptake by endocytosis and endosomal release, presumably because
of their improved binding to the plasma and endosomal membranes. The
bicyclic system may provide a general strategy for intracellular delivery
of cyclic and bicyclic peptides.
Figure 6
Representative live cell confocal microscopic
images of HEK293
cells treated for 2 h with rhodamine B-labeled peptides (5 μM
each) and fluid-phase endocytosis marker dextranFITC (0.5
mg/mL). The red fluorescence of rhodamine B and the green fluorescence
of dextranFITC from the same Z section
and their merged image are shown in each panel. The enlarged images
of a typical cell(s) are shown in each case to show the intracellular
distribution of the internalized peptides: (A) cells treated with
bicyclo(FΦR4-A5)Rho, (B) cells
treated with monocyclo(FΦR4-A5)Rho, (C) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-A7)Rho, (D) cells treated with monocyclo(FΦR4-A7)Rho, (E) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-RARAR)Rho, and (F) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-DADAD)Rho.
Representative live cell confocal microscopic
images of HEK293
cells treated for 2 h with rhodamine B-labeled peptides (5 μM
each) and fluid-phase endocytosis marker dextranFITC (0.5
mg/mL). The red fluorescence of rhodamine B and the green fluorescence
of dextranFITC from the same Z section
and their merged image are shown in each panel. The enlarged images
of a typical cell(s) are shown in each case to show the intracellular
distribution of the internalized peptides: (A) cells treated with
bicyclo(FΦR4-A5)Rho, (B) cells
treated with monocyclo(FΦR4-A5)Rho, (C) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-A7)Rho, (D) cells treated with monocyclo(FΦR4-A7)Rho, (E) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-RARAR)Rho, and (F) cells treated with bicyclo(FΦR4-DADAD)Rho.
Intracellular Delivery of Protein Cargos
To test whether
cFΦR4 is capable of transporting full-length proteins
into mammalian cells, we chose GFP because of its intrinsic fluorescence
and attached cFΦR4 to its N-terminus through a disulfide
bond (Figure 7A and Figure S2 of the Supporting Information). The disulfide exchange
reaction is highly specific, efficient, and reversible; upon entering
the cytoplasm, the CPP-S-S-protein conjugate is expected to be rapidly
reduced to release the native protein. Although cFΦR4 can be directly attached to a native or engineered surface cysteine
residue(s) on a cargo protein, we employed a GFP variant containing
a 12-amino acid ybbR tag at its N-terminus (which was already available
in our laboratory) and used phosphopantetheinyl transferase Sfp to
enzymatically attach cFΦR4 to the ybbR tag.[50] This permitted the attachment of a single cFΦR4 unit to GFP in a site-specific manner. For comparison, we
also generated a Tat-S-S-GFP conjugate in the same manner. Incubation
of HEK293 cells in the presence of 1 μM cFΦR4-S-S-GFP resulted in time-dependent accumulation of green fluorescence
inside the cells (Figure 7B). The fluorescence
signal was diffuse and present throughout the entire cell volume,
but with higher concentrations in the nucleus. Some of the cells contained
small spots of intense green fluorescence (indicated by arrows in
Figure 7B), which may represent endosomally
sequestered cFΦR4-S-S-GFP or aggregated GFP inside
the cell. As expected, untagged GFP was unable to enter cells, whereas
Tat-S-S-GFP entered cells less efficiently than cFΦR4-S-S-GFP (Figure 7B); FACS analysis of HeLa
cells treated with 1 μM protein revealed a 5.5-fold higher total
intracellular fluorescence for the latter. Moreover, cells treated
with Tat-S-S-GFP showed predominantly punctate fluorescence in the
cell periphery with no detectable fluorescence in the nuclear region,
suggesting that Tat-S-S-GFP is mostly entrapped in the endosomes,
in agreement with previous reports.[35] Thus,
with a protein as cargo, cFΦR4 also has an efficiency
substantially higher than that of Tat with regard to both initial
uptake and endosomal escape. Attempts to test R9-S-S-GFP
with cells failed because of precipitation of the conjugate.
Figure 7
(A) Structures
of CPP-S-S-GFP conjugates. (B) Live cell confocal
images of HEK293 cells after treatment for 2 h with 1 μM GFP
(I), Tat-S-S-GFP (II), or cFΦR4-S-S-GFP (III) and
nuclear stain DRAQ5. All images were recorded in the same Z section.
(A) Structures
of CPP-S-S-GFP conjugates. (B) Live cell confocal
images of HEK293 cells after treatment for 2 h with 1 μM GFP
(I), Tat-S-S-GFP (II), or cFΦR4-S-S-GFP (III) and
nuclear stain DRAQ5. All images were recorded in the same Z section.To demonstrate the generality of cFΦR4 for
protein
delivery, we chose next to deliver a functional enzyme, the catalytic
domain of PTP1B (amino acids 1–321), into the cell interior.
To show that a noncleavable linkage is also compatible with our delivery
method, we conjugated cFΦR4 to ybbR-tagged PTP1B
via a thioether bond (cFΦR4-PTP1B) (Figure S3 of
the Supporting Information). An in vitro assay using p-nitrophenyl phosphate
as a substrate showed that addition of the cFΦR4 tag
does not affect the catalytic activity of PTP1B (Table S2 of the Supporting Information). NIH 3T3 cells were incubated
for 2 h in the presence of untagged PTP1B or cFΦR4-PTP1B, and their global pY protein levels were analyzed by anti-pY
Western blotting (Figure 8A). Treatment of
the cells with cFΦR4-PTP1B, but not untagged PTP1B,
resulted in a concentration-dependent decrease in pY levels of most,
but not all, proteins. The total cellular protein levels, as detected
by Coomassie blue staining, were unchanged (Figure 8B), indicating that the observed decrease in pY levels was
due to dephosphorylation of the pY proteins by cFΦR4-PTP1B and/or secondary effects caused by the introduction of cFΦR4-PTP1B (e.g., inactivation of cellular protein tyrosine kinases).
Interestingly, different proteins exhibited varying dephosphorylation
kinetics. Several proteins in the 150–200 kDa range were completely
dephosphorylated upon the addition of 62 nM cFΦR4-PTP1B, whereas proteins of ∼80 kDa remained phosphorylated
at 500 nM cFΦR4-PTP1B. The changes in the pY pattern
are consistent with the broad substrate specificity of PTP1B[77] and very similar to that caused by overexpression
of PTP1B inside the cytosol of mammalian cells.[78] Our results indicate that cFΦR4 is indeed
able to deliver PTP1B into the interior of NIH 3T3 cells in the catalytically
active form and to sufficient levels to dramatically perturb the cell
signaling process. cFΦR4 thus provides a powerful
tool for introducing other functional proteins, especially proteins
that cannot be genetically expressed (e.g., toxic and chemically modified
proteins), into mammalian cells for studying their cellular functions.
Figure 8
(A) Western
blot analysis of the global pY protein levels of NIH
3T3 cells after treatment with 0–500 nM PTP1B or cFΦR4-PTP1B (IB, anti-pY antibody 4G10). (B) The same samples as
in panel A were analyzed by SDS–PAGE and Coomassie blue staining.
M denotes molecular weight markers.
(A) Western
blot analysis of the global pY protein levels of NIH
3T3 cells after treatment with 0–500 nM PTP1B or cFΦR4-PTP1B (IB, anti-pY antibody 4G10). (B) The same samples as
in panel A were analyzed by SDS–PAGE and Coomassie blue staining.
M denotes molecular weight markers.
Stability and Cytotoxicity of cFΦR4
The
relative stability of cFΦR4, R9,
Tat, and Antp (Table 1, compounds 19–22, respectively) against proteolytic degradation was determined by
incubating the CPPs in 25% human serum at 37 °C and following
the disappearance of the full-length peptides by reversed-phase HPLC.
The cationic tryptophan-containing peptide, Antp, was least stable
among the four CPPs; it was degraded at a half-life of <20 min
and was completely digested after 2 h (Figure 9A). R9 and Tat were slightly more stable than Antp, having
half-lives of ∼30 min. In contrast, cFΦR4 was
remarkably stable against serum proteases. There was <10% degradation
after incubation for 6 h; after incubation for 24 h in the serum,
>70% of cFΦR4 remained intact. Numerous other
studies
have also demonstrated that cyclization of peptidesgreatly increases
their proteolytic stabilities.[79] The potential
cytotoxicity of cFΦR4 was assessed by MTT assays
with five different human cell lines (HEK293, MCF-7, A549, H1650,
and H1299). After incubation for 24 or 48 h with up to 50 μM
cFΦR4, there was no significant growth inhibition
for any of the cell lines (Figure 9B and Figure
S8 of the Supporting Information). After
72 h, a slight growth inhibition (up to 20%) was observed at 50 μM
(Figure S8 of the Supporting Information). Thus, cFΦR4 is relatively nontoxic to mammalian
cells.
Figure 9
(A) Comparison of the serum stability of cFΦR4,
Tat, R9, and Antp. (B) Cytotoxicity of cFΦR4. The indicated cell lines were treated with DMSO (control)
or 5 or 50 μM cFΦR4 for 24 h, and the percentage
of live cells was determined by the MTT assay.
(A) Comparison of the serum stability of cFΦR4,
Tat, R9, and Antp. (B) Cytotoxicity of cFΦR4. The indicated cell lines were treated with DMSO (control)
or 5 or 50 μM cFΦR4 for 24 h, and the percentage
of live cells was determined by the MTT assay.
Conclusion
In this study, we demonstrate that cFΦR4 is effective
for the exocyclic delivery of small-molecule, peptide, and protein
cargos into the cytoplasm and nucleus of mammalian cells. By using
a pCAP-containing peptide as the cargo or reporter, we show that cFΦR4 is 3.7–12-fold more efficient than R9,
Tat, and Antp for cytoplasmic cargo delivery, making cFΦR4 one of the most active CPPs known to date. Although modification
of polybasic CPPs such as addition of hydrophobic acyl groups has
previously been reported to enhance cellular uptake by a similar magnitude,[27] to the best of our knowledge, these previous
studies have not established whether the enhanced uptake translates
into a similar increase in the cytoplasmic CPP concentration (our
attempt to directly compare cFΦR4 and the acylated
CPPs was not successful, because the latter caused extensive cell
death during our experiments). The pCAP-based reporter system described
in this work should provide a simple, robust method for quantitatively
assessing the cytoplasmic delivery efficiency of other CPPs. Several
lines of evidence indicate that cFΦR4 enters cells
through multiple endocytic mechanisms, including its failure to enter
cells at 4 °C or in the presence of sodium azide, partial overlap
between the fluorescence puncta of cFΦR4Rho and the fluid-phase endocytic marker dextranFITC, colocalization
of cFΦR4Rho and endosomal proteins Rab5
and Rab7, and a decreased level of cFΦR4Dex uptake upon administration of endocytic inhibitors. The minimal
effect of the PI3K inhibitor wortmannin and the Rab5Q79L mutation
on the cytoplasmic delivery of cFΦR4, in addition
to the strong colocalization observed between cFΦR4 and Rab5+ endosomes, suggest that cFΦR4 escapes from early endosomes (Figure 10).
In comparison, Tat has been demonstrated to enter cells through endocytosis
and be released from late endosomes, while R9 escapes endosomes
prior to Rab7 recruitment.[42] Early endosomal
release offers significant advantages, especially for peptide and
protein cargos, because it minimizes cargo degradation by late endosomal
and lysosomal proteases and denaturation caused by acidification during
endosomal maturation. Indeed, both GFP and PTP1B delivered into the
cytoplasm by cFΦR4 were in their folded, active forms,
as evidenced by the green fluorescence and the ability to dephosphorylate
intracellular pY proteins, respectively. Additionally, because of
its more rigid structure, cFΦR4 is significantly
more stable against proteolytic degradation than linear peptides,
and because of its smaller size, cFΦR4 is less expensive
to synthesize and potentially less likely to interfere with the cargo
function. These properties make cFΦR4 a useful transporter
for cytosolic delivery of small molecules to protein cargos. Direct
protein delivery provides a useful research tool, e.g., for studying
the cellular function of a protein, as it offers improved temporal
control over DNA transfection and subsequent gene expression and allows
delivery of chemically modified proteins and proteins whose overexpression
causes toxicity. The ability of cFΦR4 to escape from
early endosomes and its simple structure may also provide an excellent
system for elucidating the mechanism of endosomal escape and the factors
that influence the escape efficiency.
Figure 10
Diagram showing the
points along the endocytic pathway where cFΦR4, R9, and Tat escape into the cytoplasm and where
specific inhibitors are proposed to function.
Diagram showing the
points along the endocytic pathway where cFΦR4, R9, and Tat escape into the cytoplasm and where
specific inhibitors are proposed to function.
Authors: Jun Yin; Paul D Straight; Shaun M McLoughlin; Zhe Zhou; Alison J Lin; David E Golan; Neil L Kelleher; Roberto Kolter; Christopher T Walsh Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-10-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Leonard T Nguyen; Johnny K Chau; Nicole A Perry; Leonie de Boer; Sebastian A J Zaat; Hans J Vogel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-09-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bruno P Meloni; Laura M Brookes; Vince W Clark; Jane L Cross; Adam B Edwards; Ryan S Anderton; Richard M Hopkins; Katrin Hoffmann; Neville W Knuckey Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Jin Wen; Hui Liao; Kye Stachowski; Jordan P Hempfling; Ziqing Qian; Chunhua Yuan; Mark P Foster; Dehua Pei Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Patrick G Dougherty; Manjula Karpurapu; Amritendu Koley; Jessica K Lukowski; Ziqing Qian; Teja Srinivas Nirujogi; Luiza Rusu; Sangwoon Chung; Amanda B Hummon; Hao W Li; John W Christman; Dehua Pei Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2020-10-19 Impact factor: 7.446