| Literature DB >> 26555399 |
Cong Zhou1, Jiali Kang2, Xiaoxia Wang3, Wei Wei4, Wenyan Jiang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is a possibly lethal gynecological malignancy and this study utilized phage display technology to screen and identify peptides that specifically bind to ovarian cancer cells and explored the effects of these peptides on ovarian cancer cells in vitro and in vivo.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26555399 PMCID: PMC4641363 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1891-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Specific enrichment of HO8910 cell-bound phages using an initial input of 1011 pfu
| Round | Inputs (pfu/ml) | Outputs (pfu/ml) | Recovery rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 × 1011 | 0.9 × 105 | 4.5 × 10−6 |
| 2 | 2 × 1011 | 3.4 × 106 | 1.7 × 10−5 |
| 3 | 2 × 1011 | 4.4 × 107 | 2.2 × 10−4 |
| 4 | 2 × 1011 | 2.2 × 108 | 1.1 × 10−3 |
Fig. 1Efficacy of phage clones in binding to HO8910 versus normal ovarian cells. HO8910 cells and OSE were incubated with phage display peptides. Unbound phages were removed by gentle washing and the bound phage clones were assayed by ELISA after incubation with HRP/anti-M13 and then analyzed with a microplate reader at 450 nm. The mean OD values represent activity of phage binding to cells. M13KE and PBS were used as controls. Lanes 1 to 12 depicts positive phage clones biopanned with HO8910 versus OSE cells
Peptide identified for HO8910 cell binding (Amino Acid Sequences, deduced from DNA)
| Clone | Peptide sequence | Incidence |
|---|---|---|
| Phage 1, 3, 7, 16, 19, and 20 | SWQIGGN | 6 |
| Phage 4 | QFHFDAP | 1 |
| Phage 6 | TSPFVVP | 1 |
| Phage 8 | TGNSNTQ | 1 |
| Phage15 | TSHFEVP | 1 |
| Phage 9 and 10 | IGNSNTL | 2 |
Fig. 2Binding of Peptide 1 to the cell surface (×280). Immunofluorescence was used to stain Peptide 1 binding to HO8910 cells. Cells were visualized using a Leica DMRA2 fluorescence microscope. a and b HO8910 cells. c and d OSE cells
Fig. 3Effects of Peptide 1 on the regulation of HO8910 cell viability. Ovarian cancer cells were treated with Peptide 1, negative control peptide, and blank control for up to 7 days and cell viability was assessed using a MTT assay. *P <0 .05
Fig. 4Effects of Peptide 1 on the regulation of ovarian cancer HO8910 cell metastatic phenotypes. a Matrigel invasion assay; b Transwell tumor cell migration assay. The number of invading and migrating tumor cells was determined by counting the cells stained with 0.01 % crystal violet solution in the lower side of Transwell filter. The decrease in the number of invading and migrating cells in Peptide 1-treated tumor cells compared to those of the parental and negative control peptide cells (*P < 0.05). c and d represent quantitative data from a and b
Fig. 5Effect of Peptide 1 treatment on regulation of ovarian cancer cell adhesion capability. Ovarian cancer cells were treated with Peptide 1, negative control peptide, and blank control for five days and then the cells were seeded onto Matrigel-coated cell culture dishes and grown for 1 h. Cells were washed with PBS and the remaining cells were visualized using MTT staining and quantified. *P < 0.05 compared to the negative control peptide-treated cells and blank cells; #P > 0.05 versus blank cells
Fig. 6Effect of Peptide 1 treatment on regulation of ovarian cancer cell growth in nude mice in an intraperitoneal tumorigenicity model. Comparison of abdominal circumferences of three groups of nude mice. a1 Abdominal circumference in Peptide 1 group versus negative control peptide and blank controls (p < 0.05). a2 Abdominal circumference growth curves of Peptide 1, negative control peptide, and blank control mice (*P < 0.05 from this point onwards). b Comparison of tumor growth in three groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 versus the negative control peptide and Blank; #P >0.05 versus the Blank
Effect of peptide 1 on malignant behaviors of ovarian cancer xenografts in nude mice
| Group | TFN | MTF | MR (%) | TV (ml) | TW (g) | IR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank | 7 (7/7) | 103 ± 26.40 | 100 | 1.40 ± 0.64 | 1.77 ± 0.44 | _ |
| Control | 7 (7/7) | 94.86 ± 30.62 | 100 | 1.32 ± 0.75 | 1.67 ± 0.37 | 5.65 |
|
| 7 (5/7) | 28.60 ± 13.16* | 71.4* | 0.24 ± 0.18# | 0.52 ± 0.28* | 70.62 |
TFN tumor formation number, MTF metastatic tumor foci, MR metastatic rate, TV tumor volume, TW tumor weight, IR inhibitory rate; The values of metastatic tumor foci and tumor weight are presented as mean ± SD of n = 7 mice in relevant groups. *P < 0.001 and # p < 0.05 vs. the control and HO8910 groups
TFN, Five weeks post-inoculation, the nude mice were sacrificed, and then tumor formation was calculated for each mouse
MTF, collection of all tumors in each mouse, and then measurements of the number of tumors
MR, the MR of control = the MIF of control/ the MIF of blank; the MR of Peptide 1 = the MIF of Peptide 1 /the MIF of blank;
TW, collect all the tumors from each mouse, and then their weights by scale
IR, IR of control = [1-(the weight of control/the weight of blank)] *100 %
IR of Peptide 1 = [1-(the weight of Peptide 1/the weight of blank)] *100 %
Fig. 7Effect of Peptide 1 treatment on regulation of VEGF expression in nude mice in an intraperitoneal tumorigenicity model (×400). Mouse tumor tissues were dissected and immunostained with anti-VEGF antibody. Stained tissue sections were reviewed and scored (see Methods section). Expression of VEGF in mouse tumor tissues of Peptide 1-treated tumor cells was markedly decreased compared to mouse tumor tissues of the negative control peptide-treated tumor cells and parental HO8910 cells
Fig. 8Effect of Peptide 1 treatment on induction of apoptosis in a nude mouse intraperitoneal tumorigenicity model (×400). Mouse tumor tissues were dissected and immunostained for TUNEL assay. Stained tissue sections were reviewed and scored (see Method section). a Representative images of tumor sections examined by TUNEL assay. b The apoptotic index significantly increased in mouse tumor tissues of Peptide 1 group tumor sections compared to those of the negative control peptide and parental group tumor sections. The data are presented as the average number of apoptotic index ± SD. *P < 0.05 versus the negative control peptide and parental group; #P > 0.05 versus parental group