| Literature DB >> 27842517 |
Franklin L Nobrega1, Débora Ferreira1, Ivone M Martins1, Maria Suarez-Diez2, Joana Azeredo1, Leon D Kluskens1, Lígia R Rodrigues3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Claudin-low breast carcinoma represents 19% of all breast cancer cases and is characterized by an aggressive progression with metastatic nature and high rates of relapse. Due to a lack of known specific molecular biomarkers for this breast cancer subtype, there are no targeted therapies available, which results in the worst prognosis of all breast cancer subtypes. Hence, the identification of novel biomarkers for this type of breast cancer is highly relevant for an early diagnosis. Additionally, claudin-low breast carcinoma peptide ligands can be used to design powerful drug delivery systems that specifically target this type of breast cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Claudin-low breast cancer; DTFNSFGRVRIE; MDA-MB-231; PRWAVSP; Phage display
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27842517 PMCID: PMC5109716 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2937-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Conventional and modified BRASIL enrichment results based on binding affinity to the breast cancer MDA-MB-231 cell line and a counter selection with the non-tumorigenic MCF-10-2A cell line with the 7-mer and 12-mer libraries
| Method | 7-mer library | 12-mer library | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phage clone | Sequence | Phage clone | Sequence | |
| Conventional | 3.1 (5/27) | PRLNTSP | 6.2 (1/17) | TTFNSFGRVAIE |
| 3.1 (6/27) | PTLDVAP | 6.2 (2/17) | TTFCSFGRVRIE | |
| 3.1 (8/27) | PQLNVSP | 6.2 (3/17) | TTFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 3.1 (9/27) | PGAQVSP | 6.2 (4/17) | TTFNSFGRVHWE | |
| 3.1 (10/27) | PRTNVAP | 6.2 (5/17) | TTFNSFGKVRIE | |
| 3.1 (11/27) | PRKTVSP | 6.2 (7/17) | TTYNSFGRVRIE | |
| 3.1 (12/27) | PAMNVSP | 6.2 (8/17) | TTEYSFGRTSTL | |
| 3.1 (13/27) | PQENASP | 6.2 (9/17) | DTFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 3.1 (19/27) | PSLNVSP | 6.2 (10/17) | TTFNSFGRVRIQ | |
| 3.1 (20/27) | ARLNVAP | 6.2 (12/17) | TTFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 3.1 (21/27) | TMLMVRP | 6.2 (13/17) | TNFNDFKRVRGE | |
| 3.1 (22/27) | ARLNTQP | 6.2 (14/17) | TTFSSFGRVRIG | |
| 3.1 (23/27) | PMMAVAP | 6.2 (15/17) | TTFNSNGRVWIE | |
| 3.1 (26/27) | PRLNVSP | 6.2 (16/17) | TTFNSFGRVRGG | |
| 3.1 (27/27) | PRLNVSP | 6.2 (17/17) | TTFNSFYRVRIE | |
|
|
|
|
| |
| BRASIL | 1.3 (2/52) | PRQNQSP | 5.3 (1/45) | WWFNSFGRVRIE |
| 1.3 (3/52) | QLKNVTP | 5.3 (3/45) | WAFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 1.3 (5/52) | PRLNVAT | 5.3 (5/45) | WWFNKFGKVRIE | |
| 1.3 (6/52) | PRLNVTT | 5.3 (14/45) | WWFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 1.3 (7/52) | PRWAVSP | 5.3 (16/45) | IWFNSFFRVRIE | |
| 1.3 (8/52) | PRLNHSP | 5.3 (19/45) | WWFFSFGRVRIE | |
| 1.3 (10/52) | PQMTAMP | 5.3 (20/45) | GWFNSFGRWSWL | |
| 1.3 (11/52) | MFLNGAP | 5.3 (23/45) | WWFNSFGRVRIE | |
| 1.3 (15/52) | TRLQVSP | 5.3 (43/45) | WWFFSFGRWSWL | |
| 1.3 (19/52) | WRMAHSP | 5.3 (45/45) | WWFNSFGRVRIE | |
|
|
|
|
| |
Bold words represent the consensus (overall %) for the two methods
Fig. 1Binding assays of selected peptides against MDA-MB-231 and MDA-MB-435 cell lines, using an initial phage concentration of 1×1011 PFUs.mL.1. Results are expressed as the ratio between the concentration of phages bound to the cells (output) and the initial phage concentration used (input)
Fig. 2Relative light units (RLUs) obtained for the selected peptides assessed by ELISA against MDA-MB-213 and MDA-MB-435 cell lines, as well as against the control streptavidin, according to the New England BioLabs phage display manual
Fig. 3Multidimensional scaling of the peptides identified in this work against MDA-MB-231 cells and previously reported peptides against breast cancer cells. New7Br: 7-mer peptides obtained in this work using the BRASIL methodology; New7Conv: 7-mer peptides obtained in this work using the conventional methodology; New12Br: 12-mer peptides obtained in this work using the BRASIL methodology; New12Conv: 12-mer peptides obtained in this work using the conventional methodology; remaining peptides are grouped according to the breast cancer type targeted (adenocarcinoma, invasive ductal carcinoma, ductal carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and colorectal carcinoma, and peptides with no available information)
Fig. 4Heatmap representation of the similarities between the 7-mer peptides identified in this work with those previously reported. New7Br: 7-mer peptides obtained in this work using the BRASIL methodology; New7Conv: 7-mer peptides obtained in this work using the conventional methodology; Previous: 7-mer peptides reported in previous studies
Fig. 5Heatmap representation of the similarities between the 12-mer peptides identified in this work with those previously reported. New12Br: 12-mer peptides obtained in this work using the BRASIL methodology; New12Conv: 12-mer peptides obtained in this work using the conventional methodology; Previous: 12-mer peptides reported in previous studies
Data from the best docking model of the phage-display peptides against breast cancer biomarkers: biomarker, type of interaction, number of cluster members and lowest-energy weighted score (E)
| Phage clone | Best docking model | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breast cancer biomarkers | Type of interaction a | Cluster members b | Lowest energy | |
| Conventional | ||||
| 6.2 (8/17) | β-Actin | Hydrophobic-favoured | 661 | −1128.8 |
| 6.2 (9/17) | Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 | Hydrophobic-favoured | 741 | −1046.5 |
| BRASIL | ||||
| 1.3 (7/52) | Metalloprotease inhibitor 1 | Hydrophobic-favoured | 595 | −1127 |
| 5.3 (14/45) | E-cadherin | Electrostatic-favoured | 443 | −1106 |
| 5.3 (19/45) | β-Actin | Hydrophobic-favoured | 600 | −1696.6 |
a Coefficient weights of E formula are adapted for Balanced, Electrostatic-favored, Hydrophobic-favored or van der Waals and Electrostatic interactions
b ClusPro 2.0 ranks models by cluster size. 1000 rotation/translation combinations of lowest score are chosen from 70,000 rotations performed, and are clustered together to find the ligand position with the most “neighbors” in 9 angstroms, becoming a cluster center and the neighbors the members of the cluster. A second cluster center is obtained with the remaining rotations and so on. So the most members on the cluster, the most significant the result
c Weighted score is calculated according to formula E = 0.40Erep + −0.40E att + 600E elec + 1.00E DARS (Balanced), E = 0.40E rep + −0.40E att + 1200E elec + 1.00E DARS (Electrostatic-favored), E = 0.40E rep + −0.40E att + 600E elec + 2.00E DARS (Hydrophobic-favored), or E = 0.40E rep + −0.10E att + 600E elec + 0.00E DARS (Van der Waals and Electrostatic)
Fig. 6Tri-dimensional view of the peptides (red) docked to the respective biomarker (blue). a Peptide 1.3 (7/52) docked to Metalloproteinase Inhibitor 1, b peptide 5.3 (14/45) docked to E- cadherin, c peptide 5.3 (19/45) docked to β-Actin. d peptide 6.2 (8/17) docked to β-Actin, and e peptide 6.2 (9/17) docked to Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. Images were obtained with Chimera version 1.10.2