Organelle-targeted photosensitization represents a promising approach in photodynamic therapy where the design of the active photosensitizer (PS) is very crucial. In this work, we developed a macromolecular PS with multiple copies of mitochondria-targeting groups and ruthenium complexes that displays highest phototoxicity toward several cancerous cell lines. In particular, enhanced anticancer activity was demonstrated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines, where significant impairment of proliferation and clonogenicity occurs. Finally, attractive two-photon absorbing properties further underlined the great significance of this PS for mitochondria targeted PDT applications in deep tissue cancer therapy.
Organelle-targeted photosensitization represents a promising approach in photodynamic therapy where the design of the active photosensitizer (PS) is very crucial. In this work, we developed a macromolecular PS with multiple copies of mitochondria-targeting groups and ruthenium complexes that displays highest phototoxicity toward several cancerous cell lines. In particular, enhanced anticancer activity was demonstrated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines, where significant impairment of proliferation and clonogenicity occurs. Finally, attractive two-photon absorbing properties further underlined the great significance of this PS for mitochondria targeted PDT applications in deep tissue cancer therapy.
Singlet oxygen (1O2), the lowest-lying electronic
excited states of molecular oxygen, has been envisioned as promising
and highly effective cytotoxic agent in photochemical and photobiological
research.[1,2] Photodynamic therapy (PDT) emerges as a
promising tool in organelle-directed, photoactivated and less-invasive
medical technique[3] for bacterial inactivation
and regenerative medicine,[4] where the production
of reactive 1O2 induces cytotoxicity in the
targeted region, leaving the surrounding biological environment undamaged. 1O2 is produced when energy transfer occurs between
the triplet excited state of the photosensitizers (PS) and the ground
state of molecular oxygen.[5] However, the
application of most synthesized PS molecules in biological media is
limited by their low water-solubility resulting in extensive aggregate
formation and consequently reduced quantum yields.[6] In addition, poor selectivity in terms of target tissue
and low extinction coefficients have reduced the efficiency of PDT
in clinical trials.[7] Thus, the preparation
of efficient and water-soluble PS molecules that damage biological
functions solely under irradiation but remain biocompatible in the
dark state would be highly desirable.Recently, ruthenium (Ru)
complexes have attracted considerable
recognition as PDT agents due to their unique photophysical and photochemical
features as well as their DNA intercalation capacity and protein binding
motifs.[3,8,9] In particular,
organo-ruthenium complexes coordinated by polypyridyl ligands exhibited
promising anticancer activity when irradiated with light.[10] Their high population of the triplet metal-to-ligand
charge-transfer state (3MLCT), due to the heavy atom effect,
produces large 1O2 yields, while the solubility
of these complexes can be modified by adjusting the counterions. For
example, the [Ru(bpy)3]2+ derivative TLD1433
recently entered phase I clinical trials as the first Ru-based PS,
due to its potential in effectively producing 1O2.[11] In combination with a targeting peptide
providing high binding affinity for membrane proteins, a Ru-PS has
been achieved with high selectivity for certain cancer cells.[12] However, in order to further advance PDT for
therapy, several limitations of the PS still need to be solved such
as their low cellular uptake efficiency, low extinction coefficients,
and only moderate cellular toxicity. Herein, we present a macromolecular
approach to improve phototoxicity and efficacy of the PS by synergistic
combination of Ru-complexes on a protein carrier scaffold decorated
with subcellular mitochondria targeting groups.Mitochondria,
as indispensable organelles responsible for cell
respiration, emerge as promising pharmacological target in clinical
applications for the detection, inhibition and treatment of various
diseases such as cancer or neurodegenerative diseases, due to their
crucial role in mediating cell apoptosis.[13,14] Until now, only little is known of the balance of reactive oxygen
species in cancer cells and their survival mechanisms that effect
mitochondria function. There have been many attempts to target cancer
cells via signaling pathways.[15] However,
drug strategies targeting the mitochondrial metabolism are scarce
and though present, treatment approaches were not achieved at low
drug concentrations. The conjugation of PS with mitochondria targeting
groups is considered an emerging strategy to enhance cellular toxicity
by localizing the PS at the relevant site.[16]Herein, we investigate efficient growth inhibition in an acute
myeloid leukemia (AML) cell line by a macromolecular PS targeting
mitochondria, which are known as “power house of the cell”
and that are central organelles for tumor growth.[17] AML is an aggressive disease which still leads to death
in up to 8 of 10 patients outside of clinical trials. It is characterized
by aberrant high proliferation and increase in immature blasts and
progenitors due to blockade in cell differentiation. Leukemic cells
initially respond to chemotherapy. However, relapse is common and
in most cases fatal. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop innovative
therapeutic concepts, which target leukemic cells, but spare normal
hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells.We propose a bioinspired
strategy that converts the blood plasma
protein serum albumin (HSA) into an efficient nanotransporter for
phototoxic drug molecules,[18−21] providing synergistic features due to the molecular
design. The resultant nanotransporter denoted cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru exhibited
significantly improved photophysical properties and enhanced 1O2 quantum yields as compared to the bare Ru complex
as well as excellent mitochondria-specific colocalization. Efficient
phototoxicity of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru already at nanomolar concentrations
were achieved, which was attributed to synergistic effects from the
high number of Ru-complexes as well as organelle-targeting features
of the biopolymer. To the best of our knowledge, cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru reported
herein displays the lowest IC50 value for cancerous cell
lines and therefore highest cytotoxicity of a Ru-containing molecule
reported to date in cellular studies. Efficient inhibition of growth
in an AML cell line was observed, with preferential killing of leukemic
cells compared to normal bone marrow cells, suggesting a therapeutic
window for this compound in AML. Furthermore, Two-photon absorption
features of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru underline its great potential as two-photon
activated photosensitizer for in vivo PDT.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis
and Characterization of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
The
synthesis of the cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru is depicted in Scheme . HSA serves as biocompatible and biodegradable
backbone providing many reactive carboxylic acid, amino and hydroxyl
groups originating from the respective amino acid side chains of HSA
that can be further chemically functionalized. First, all accessible
carboxylic acid groups were transformed into primary amino groups
by applying ethylenediamine and 1-ethyl-3-(3-(dimethylamino)propyl)
carbodiimide (EDC) to increase the total number of reactive amino
groups for further conjugations and enhance interactions of the biopolymer
with negatively charged cellular membranes as published previously.[22] After purification through dialysis, globular,
polycationic cHSA was obtained, which facilitates cellular uptake
by Clathrin-mediated endocytosis.[23] To
impart water solubility and reduce nonspecific interactions, poly(ethylene
oxide) (PEO-2000) side chains were introduced by reacting α-methoxy-ω-carboxylic
acid succinimidyl ester polyethylene(oxide) (NHS-PEO) with cHSA and
subsequent washing five times by ultrafiltration with vivaspin 20
(MWCO 30K) centrifuge tubes. According to Maldi-ToF, about 20 PEO
chains were attached to cHSA.[24] To achieve
mitochondria targeting, multiple units of TPP were reacted to the
free amino groups of cHSA-PEO. Briefly, we mixed EDC-NHS activated
(3-carboxypropyl) triphenylphosphonium bromide (TPP) ester with cHSA-PEO
to yield cHSA-PEO-TPP hybrid with approximately 34 TPP units attached.
Finally, the resulting product was washed five times through vivaspin
20 (MWCO 30K) centrifugal concentrator for further usage.
Scheme 1
(a) Synthetic scheme of the
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru transporter based on HSA. Subsequent functionalities
were conjugated at different reactive sites of the HSA backbone. (b)
Schematic illustration of a part of the HSA polypeptide sequence exemplary
with the PEO, TPP groups attached to, e.g., lysine and Ru conjugated
to tyrosine residues.
(a) Synthetic scheme of the
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru transporter based on HSA. Subsequent functionalities
were conjugated at different reactive sites of the HSA backbone. (b)
Schematic illustration of a part of the HSA polypeptide sequence exemplary
with the PEO, TPP groups attached to, e.g., lysine and Ru conjugated
to tyrosine residues.Mannich reactions have
been reported to modify phenol groups of
tyrosine side chains of proteins with high selectivity.[25] Therefore, the aniline-modified Ru-complex denoted
“Ru1” was selected as it allows bioconjugation of these
sterically demanding Ru-complexes following a Mannich-type reaction
in aqueous solution. Compared to many known Ru-complexes, Ru1 reveals
exceptional water solubility of 153 mg/mL making it well-suitable
for protein modifications under mild conditions. HSA provides 18 tyrosine
groups and half are located exposed to the surface according to computer
simulations. A three-component Mannich-type coupling reaction was
carried out applying a mixture of cHSA-PEO-TPP, formaldehyde (HCHO)
and the Ru-complex (Ru1, SI) yielding the desired cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
as yellowish-brown solution in 70% isolated yield. Excessive amounts
of the reactants (e.g., unreacted Ru complex and HCHO) were removed
by ultrafiltration with vivaspin 20 (MWCO 30K) centrifugation tubes
until no free Ru-complex was detected in the elution media anymore.
A control experiment was performed without formaldehyde and no Ru
attachment was observed (Figure SI-1),
indicating low tendency of Ru-complexes for unspecific adsorption
into the hydrophobic pockets of HSA.MALDI-ToF characterization
of the chemically modified globular
proteins was accomplished for each reaction step. The respective MALDI-ToF
mass spectra are depicted in Figure SI-2, indicating that about 10 Ru-complexes were loaded to cHSA-PEO-TPP.
The resulting cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru shows solubility of >65 mg/mL as
well
as high stability at 4 °C for more than eight months (long-term
storage studies are still ongoing). In order to evaluate the hydrodynamic
radius of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in solution and cell culture medium, DLS
studies were accomplished. An average hydrodynamic radius of about
40 nm was obtained (Figure SI-3). Polymer
sizes in this range are considered favorable for accumulation in tumor
tissues via the EPR effect,[26] although
this effect is currently under debate.[27] Zeta-potential of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (Figure a) reveals a positive surface charge facilitating
interactions with negatively charged cellular membranes to induce
endocytosis.
Figure 1
(a) Zeta potential of different bioconjugates. (b) Typical
absorbance
and emission spectra of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, where characteristic peaks
of the Ru complexes are preserved in cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru. (c) Comparison
of the photostability of the Ru1 and cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru based on the
absorbance decay under continuous irradiation over extended time periods.
(d) 1O2 production yield of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and bare Ru complex (Ru1), as obtained from the photobleaching of
the characteristic absorption peak @380 nm of ABDA (100 μM)
during irradiation with 470 nm LED light (∼20 mW/cm2, 5 min) in PBS (1×, pH 7.4) based on the same optical density
in their first absorption peak. (e) Steady state emission spectra
(λex = 460 nm) of Ru1 complex in water (red), Ru1
complex in simulated body fluid (orange), cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in water
(blue), cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in simulated body fluid (green), and Ru(bpy)3 (black) as reference at same optical density. (f) Emission
lifetime experiments upon excitation at 460 nm. For the compounds,
the same color code is used and an artifact region between 1.2 and
1.35 μs has been removed.
(a) Zeta potential of different bioconjugates. (b) Typical
absorbance
and emission spectra of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, where characteristic peaks
of the Ru complexes are preserved in cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru. (c) Comparison
of the photostability of the Ru1 and cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru based on the
absorbance decay under continuous irradiation over extended time periods.
(d) 1O2 production yield of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and bare Ru complex (Ru1), as obtained from the photobleaching of
the characteristic absorption peak @380 nm of ABDA (100 μM)
during irradiation with 470 nm LED light (∼20 mW/cm2, 5 min) in PBS (1×, pH 7.4) based on the same optical density
in their first absorption peak. (e) Steady state emission spectra
(λex = 460 nm) of Ru1 complex in water (red), Ru1
complex in simulated body fluid (orange), cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in water
(blue), cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in simulated body fluid (green), and Ru(bpy)3 (black) as reference at same optical density. (f) Emission
lifetime experiments upon excitation at 460 nm. For the compounds,
the same color code is used and an artifact region between 1.2 and
1.35 μs has been removed.
Photostability and 1O2 Yield of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru exhibited characteristic absorption and emission
maxima at around 460 and 617 nm, respectively (Figure b), similar to the starting complex Ru1,
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru revealed no alteration of the metal-to-ligand charge
transfer band (MLCT) during the reaction. Furthermore, the emission
spectrum of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru was insensitive to the composition of
the solvent, i.e., the emissive excited state did not respond to environmental
changes such as variations of the solvent composition. To evaluate
the photostability of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, photobleaching experiments
were conducted in water.Previous publications have reported
that the photoinstability of Ru(II) polypyridyl complexes including
[Ru(bpy)3]2+ limits their PDT applications[28−30] and functionalized nanoparticles revealed higher photostability
compared to the amine containing Ru(II) polypyridyl complexes.[31]Figure c shows the greatly improved photostability of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
compared to the Ru1, which was recorded under the same conditions.
Even over greatly extended irradiation times (65 h), cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
remained remarkably stable (with only 36% decrease) in comparison
to Ru1. For the latter, significantly decreased absorbance of about
76% was detected after 18 h already (Figure SI-4). The luminescence of both compounds was observed over time and
loss of emission intensity of about 68% and 89% occurred after 300
min for cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru and Ru1, respectively. Obviously, photochemical
stability of the Ru-complex in the biopolymer has significantly increased
compared to Ru1.PDT relies on efficient production of singlet
oxygen in cellular
environments. In order to monitor the generation of 1O2 in a quantitative fashion, we performed 1O2 production efficiency tests at four different LED sources,
e.g., 770 nm, 625 nm, 525 nm and 470 nm as reported by us previously.[12] The singlet oxygen sensor 9,10-anthracenediyl-bi(methylene)dimalonic
acid (ABDA) was applied, which forms an endoperoxide of ABDA in the
presence of 1O2, thus decreasing ABDA absorption
and providing a valuable means of direct monitoring 1O2 production (Figure SI-5). According
to these measurements, 470 nm proved to be most efficient excitation
source (Figure SI-6). cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru and
cHSA-PEO-TPP as control were mixed separately with 100 μM of
ABDA in PBS buffer and then irradiated with a 470 nm LED array (P = 20 ± 2 mW/cm2) for 5 min. As described
in Figure SI-9a, cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru produced 1O2 very efficiently, whereas cHSA- PEO-TPP remained
inactive.Equimolar concentrations of Ru in cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and Ru1 were
used for all further experiments to compare the photophysical and
biological features of Ru in the cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru bioconjugate versus
Ru1. As depicted in Figure d, the 1O2 production for Ru1 and cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
was measured at the same optical density at 460 nm, e.g., at similar
Ru concentrations. About ∼8-fold improved reduction of the
ABDA absorption peak @380 nm has been achieved for a single Ru molecule
attached to the biopolymer compared to a single Ru1 complex (details
included in the Supporting Information).
Again, molar concentrations have been used for comparison. We believe
that the synergistic interaction between closely spaced multiple Ru1
in the lipophilic protein backbone might be the reason for this finding.
Photophysical Properties of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
The photophysical
properties of the model Ru1-complex and cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru were investigated
by steady state emission spectroscopy following a literature reported
procedure.[32,33] The photochemistry of Ru-complexes
is highly sensitive to their respective environments. Emission spectra
of both compounds were identical in water and simulated body fluid
solutions (Figure e). A slightly higher emission quantum yield of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (using
Ru(bpy)3 as standard) was observed upon increasing the
ionic strength of the solution, i.e., by comparing the simulated body
fluid (ΦcHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, body fluid = 6.7%) to water (ΦcHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru,
water = 6.1%). On the contrary, this trend was not observed
for the Ru1 (ΦRu, water = 4.8/ΦRu, body
fluid = 4.5%)). The generally higher fluoresecence quantum yields
of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru and Ru1 indicate that nonradiative deactivation
paths were suppressed in the cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru biopolymer. This might
be attributed to a sterically hindered rotation of the imidazole-phenyl
bond due to conjugation to the bulky HSA protein. In line with this
assignment of blocking nonradiative decay paths, we observed the prolongation
of the triplet excited state lifetime in cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru compared
to Ru1 (Figure f).
Assuming a monoexponential decay to analyze the respective luminescence
kinetics, the lifetime was increased from 300 ns for both solutions
of Ru1 to 625/735 ns for cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in water/simulated body fluid.
Intracellular Optical Microscopy Imaging
We examined
the intracellular localization of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru into a human cervical
cancer cell line, HeLa cells, as model system, by laser scanning confocal
microscopy. Typically, these cells were incubated with low concentrations
of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (500 nM) for about 4 h before images were recorded.
To observe MLCT absorbance from the metal complex inside living cells,
laser excitation at 458 nm was applied. The emission window was adjusted
in the range of 530–710 nm. After staining with various subcellular
organelle dyes (Figure ) with selectivity for membranes (Cell Mask Deep Red Plasma Membrane
Stain), the nucleus (Hoechst 33342 Solution), mitochondria (Mito Lite
Blue FX490, Figure SI-7c), and lysosomes
(Lyso Tracker Green DND-26), we found a clear colocalization of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
in mitochondria (Pearson’s coefficient 0.88), where they were
mostly situated in the cytosol outside the nuclear region (Pearson’s
coefficient 0.07). cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru was transported rapidly across
the membrane and accumulated in the cytosol and no localization in
membranes (Pearson’s coefficient 0.2) or in lysosomes (Pearson’s
coefficient 0.3) was observed.
Figure 2
Confocal microscopy images of HeLa cells
incubated with cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and treated with commercial organelle trackers. Overlay images and
colocalization analysis of cells stained with mitochondria (0.88),
nucleus (0.07), membrane (0.2), and lysosome (0.3) markers indicated
that cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru localized in mitochondria. (a) cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
emission, (b) emission from the organelle trackers, (c) corresponding
bright field images, and (d) overlay of all three images.
Confocal microscopy images of HeLa cells
incubated with cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and treated with commercial organelle trackers. Overlay images and
colocalization analysis of cells stained with mitochondria (0.88),
nucleus (0.07), membrane (0.2), and lysosome (0.3) markers indicated
that cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru localized in mitochondria. (a) cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
emission, (b) emission from the organelle trackers, (c) corresponding
bright field images, and (d) overlay of all three images.
Light induced cellular toxicity evaluation
To evaluate
the cellular uptake efficiency of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in vitro, we incubated
HeLa cells with the biopolymer over different time intervals ranging
from 1–240 min. Flow cytometry measurements revealed that the
fluorescence intensity of treated HeLa cells reached a saturation
level after 200 min of biopolymer incubation (Figure SI-7). Thus, 240 min was selected as the appropriate
incubation time to ascertain maximum cellular uptake. To identify
the optimum concentration of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, HeLa cells were incubated
with 0–2 μM cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru for 240 min after 5 min irradiation
with 470 nm LED light (∼20 mW/cm2). Here, the applied
light dose was comparable to the reported dosage of established photosensitizing
drugs reported.[34] Also, we used commercially
available TOX-8 dye (Sigma-Aldrich), to obtain the number of viable
cells quantitatively by means of spectrophotometric measurement in
all cases of cell viability experiments, according to the manufacturer’s
instructions.[35] A concentration dependent
cytotoxicity was observed in the photo irradiated sample, whereas
cells incubated with of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in the dark revealed almost
no cellular toxicity (Figure a,b) over the entire concentration range. A very low IC50 value of 34.9 ± 2 nM was obtained for cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
under light irradiation. In comparison, Ru1 had an IC50 value of only 7.7 ± 1.3 μM (Figure SI-8) indicating greatly enhanced cellular toxicity of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
by about 220-fold with minimal dark toxicity. Thus, attaching multiple
Ru1 to one protein nanocarrier yielded a nanocarrier with surprisingly
high cytotoxicity with an IC50 well below the value one
would expect considering an just additive effect. Considering that
10 Ru chromophores were attached to cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, a calculated
IC50 value of 0.349 μM could be estimated for each
Ru-chromophore, which is considerably lower compared to Ru1 (IC50 value 7.7 μM) alone. Next, we studied the impact of
mitochondria targeting TPP groups on carrier toxicity. Analogous phototlooxicity
experiments were accomplished with cHSA-PEO-Ru without TPP groups
and about 8-fold lower drug toxicity was obtained (Figure c).
Figure 3
(a,b) Logarithmic fitting
curve for cell viability of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and bare Ru complex, over a broad concentration range with and without
light. (c) Logarithmic fitting curve for cell viability of cHSA-PEO-Ru
complex with light, where mitochondria targeting TPP group were absent.
For all of the above experiments, HeLa cells were exposed to a 470
nm LED lamp (∼20 mW/cm2) for 5 min for light irradiation.
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru reveals low dark toxicity (IC50 = 9 ±
2 μM) but very high phototoxicity (IC50 = 34.9 ±
2 nM) compared to Ru1 (dark IC50 = 203 ± 3 μM;
photoirradiated IC50 = 7.7 ± 1.3 μM). In the
absence of a TPP group, the phototoxic effect of the drug was reduced
by ∼8 times (IC50 = 265 ± 1.2 nM).
(a,b) Logarithmic fitting
curve for cell viability of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
and bare Ru complex, over a broad concentration range with and without
light. (c) Logarithmic fitting curve for cell viability of cHSA-PEO-Ru
complex with light, where mitochondria targeting TPP group were absent.
For all of the above experiments, HeLa cells were exposed to a 470
nm LED lamp (∼20 mW/cm2) for 5 min for light irradiation.
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru reveals low dark toxicity (IC50 = 9 ±
2 μM) but very high phototoxicity (IC50 = 34.9 ±
2 nM) compared to Ru1 (dark IC50 = 203 ± 3 μM;
photoirradiated IC50 = 7.7 ± 1.3 μM). In the
absence of a TPP group, the phototoxic effect of the drug was reduced
by ∼8 times (IC50 = 265 ± 1.2 nM).The phototoxic index (PI) of all compounds was
calculated, which
denotes the ratio of the dark and light-exposed IC50 values.
The protein hybrid cHSA-PEO-TPP without Ru1 was light inactive (Figure SI-9a), whereas Ru1 only revealed a PI
of 27. The PI of cHSA-PEO-Ru without TPP groups increased to 75 and
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru had a significantly higher PI of 250. We believe this
higher value was based on our molecular design, where the multiple
molecular components contribute synergistically to the observed elevated
cellular toxicity.Furthermore, we examined the phototoxicity
of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru toward
various other cancerous cell lines such as CHO, MCF7 and A549. All
tumor cells tested were proficiently damaged with low IC50 values in the nanomolar range, for instance, 135.2 ± 1 nM for
CHO, 114.3 ± 1 nM for MCF7, and 119.1 ± 1 nM for the A549
cell line (Figures SI-10–12). As
additional features, the HSA polypeptide backbone is fully biodegradable
even after chemical modification, which should allow efficient elimination
and reduced accumulation.
Colony Forming Cell (CFC) and Proliferation
Assays
In order to test the efficacy of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru in
a relevant primary
cell assay, we treated an acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cell line,
OCI-AML3, which reflects the biology of primary NPM1 mut - AML, comprising around 35% of all humanAML cases[36] and 60% of AML with normal karyotype.[37] Irradiation of 2 and 5 min induced a significant (p < 0.005) reduction of 44% and 84.4% of colony growth,
respectively, in comparison to the treated but nonirradiated control
arm (dark) as assessed by colony number in the colony forming cell
(CFC) assay (p < 0.005). In addition to the reduction
in colony number, remaining colonies were smaller in size after exposure
to cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (Figure b). Furthermore, we tested cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru for its effect
on proliferation with two different concentrations (75 and 37.5 nM).
A significant decrease of the proliferative capacity was observed
over a period of up to 72 h after exposure to light for 2 and 5 min,
respectively, compared to the dark control (Figure c,d).
Figure 4
(a) Colony forming cell (CFC) assay of
the OCI-AML3 (OA3) AML cell
line (n = 2 in duplicates) showed reduction of colonies
after 2 and 5 min exposure to light (470 nm) compared to the treated
and nonexposed cells (dark). Bars indicate mean ± SEM. Significance
calculated by Mann–Whitney test (*<0.05). (b) Morphology
of the colonies in the control arm and 5 min exposure arm (4×
magnification). (c,d) Proliferation assay of the OA3 cell line (n = 3) incubated with two different concentrations of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
(75 nM) and (37.5 nM) and exposed to light for 2 and 5 min or treated
but not exposed to light. Significance calculated by two-way ANOVA
multiple test comparisons test (*<0.05; ***<0.0001).
(a) Colony forming cell (CFC) assay of
the OCI-AML3 (OA3) AML cell
line (n = 2 in duplicates) showed reduction of colonies
after 2 and 5 min exposure to light (470 nm) compared to the treated
and nonexposed cells (dark). Bars indicate mean ± SEM. Significance
calculated by Mann–Whitney test (*<0.05). (b) Morphology
of the colonies in the control arm and 5 min exposure arm (4×
magnification). (c,d) Proliferation assay of the OA3 cell line (n = 3) incubated with two different concentrations of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
(75 nM) and (37.5 nM) and exposed to light for 2 and 5 min or treated
but not exposed to light. Significance calculated by two-way ANOVA
multiple test comparisons test (*<0.05; ***<0.0001).To determine the differential effect of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
on normal
versus leukemic primary bone marrow (BM) cells, we performed CFC assays
on healthy murine BM cells as well as on a murineAML cell line derived
from BM of a mouse transplanted with a truncated version of the leukemia-specific
AML1-ETO fusion gene (AML1-ETO 9a (AE9a)).[38] We could document a decrease in the colony forming capacity of the
leukemic AE9a cell line by 37% and 88% reduction after 2 and 5 min
exposure to light, respectively, compared to the nonirradiated control
cells (Figure SI-13). In contrast, there
was only a 10% and 28% reduction of colony growth, respectively, when
normal BM cells were treated accordingly (Figure SI-14), indicating that cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru significantly inhibits
the proliferative and clonogenic potential of primary murineAML while
sparing normal bone marrow stem and progenitor cells. Previously,
Sieber and co-workers have successfully demonstrated photodynamic
treatment of bone marrow/leukemic cell (L1210) mixtures with visible
light of 410–500 nm.[39] Even though
significant reduction of the leukemic cell number was shown in vitro,
subsequent in vivo studies in a mouse transplant were less successful.
It was speculated that photoactive protoporphyrin IX (PpIX) had to
be biosynthesized within the leukemic cells and leukemic cells within
the resting phase did not perform this biosynthesis and therefore
escaped this treatment. In our approach, cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru conjugate
exhibits very similar PDT effects, but due to the biopolymer design
no biosynthesis of the photosensitizer is required for bioactivity.
Two-Photon Active Probe
For in vivo PDT, deep-tissue
penetration would be relevant to reach also tumor cells located in
deeper tissue. TP microscopy has evolved as an efficient tissue imaging
and therapeutic platform due to its longer wavelength excitation laser
light, which offers deep tissue penetration, reduced photodamage and
3D and high contrast imaging.[10] We have
measured the two-photon (TP) properties of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru to assess
its suitability as TP probe. cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru revealed almost five
times higher TP action cross section compared to the Ru complex (Figure a). Improved TP features
are of great relevance to trigger localized photochemical reactions
beneath the skin with minimum off-target photodamage. The 5-times
increased value clearly indicates that the design concept of combining
multiple Ru complexes within one nanosized protein transporter allows
achieving enhanced TP directed PDT applications. According to previous
studies, the TPA cross section of 50 GM obtained for cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru
should be sufficient for its application as 2PA PDT drug candidate.[40,41] Recent Ru-complexes providing high TP cross sections are based on
sophisticated ligand designs or highly charged ligand substituents[42,43] that influence cell uptake mechanisms and sub cellular distribution
patterns as shown by Barton and Puckett.[44] In case of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru, a clear three-dimensional (3D) distribution
in the cytosol (red) was demonstrated in Figure b, where the location of the nucleus was
stained with Hoechst dye (3D video, Video SI-V).
Figure 5
(a) Two-photon absorption cross section of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru and
Ru1 measured in water at excitation wavelengths from 700 to 920 nm
using Rhodamin B as reference. (b) Two-photon 3D surface projection z-stack confocal microscopy image of HeLa cells incubated
with cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (red, excited at 810 nm) and nuclear staining
dye Hoechst (blue, excited at 405 nm).
(a) Two-photon absorption cross section of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru and
Ru1 measured in water at excitation wavelengths from 700 to 920 nm
using Rhodamin B as reference. (b) Two-photon 3D surface projection z-stack confocal microscopy image of HeLa cells incubated
with cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru (red, excited at 810 nm) and nuclear staining
dye Hoechst (blue, excited at 405 nm).
Conclusion
We have converted the plasma protein HSA
into a highly phototoxic,
biodegradable macromolecular PS by controlling its solubility, subcellular
targeting pathways, and toxicity. The mitochondria targeted macromolecular
PS reported herein revealed significantly enhanced photophysical and
chemical properties as well as greatly improved 1O2 quantum yields. To the best of our knowledge, the observed
phototoxicity was the highest (indicated by the lowest IC50 value) ever reported for Ru-complexes. We believe that high Ru-loading
capacity, enhanced cellular uptake efficiency, and localization in
mitochondria combined with high photostability and 1O2 generation ability contributed to the greatly enhanced cytotoxicity
of cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru. Moreover, effectively blocked cell proliferation
and clonogenic potential of the myeloid leukemic cell line OCI-AML3
further underlines the strong antileukemic activity. Intriguingly,
preliminary experiments demonstrated less toxicity to normal BM cells,
possibly indicating that this biopolymer preferentially targets leukemic
cells. These results open the attractive opportunity of treating AML
with cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru-like conjugates using a photodynamic purging
step in autologous treatment concepts such as autologous hematopoietic
stem cell grafts.[45,46] The observed TP features of the
cHSA-PEO-TPP-Ru biopolymer further provide important prospects for
PDT in vivo. The presented strategy to merge a multifunctional protein
scaffold and diverse synthetic entities into a versatile nanotransporter
platform with tailor-made and potentially synergistic molecular properties
could be of great relevance for the preparation of more efficient
diagnostic and therapeutic tools in biomedicine.
Authors: Klaus Eisele; Radu A Gropeanu; Christoph M Zehendner; Ali Rouhanipour; Arvind Ramanathan; George Mihov; Kalojan Koynov; Christoph R W Kuhlmann; Subhash G Vasudevan; Heiko J Luhmann; Tanja Weil Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: H Quentmeier; M P Martelli; W G Dirks; N Bolli; A Liso; R A F Macleod; I Nicoletti; R Mannucci; A Pucciarini; B Bigerna; M F Martelli; C Mecucci; H G Drexler; B Falini Journal: Leukemia Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Elizabeth M Boreham; Lucy Jones; Adam N Swinburne; Mireille Blanchard-Desce; Vincent Hugues; Christine Terryn; Fabien Miomandre; Gilles Lemercier; Louise S Natrajan Journal: Dalton Trans Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 4.390
Authors: Nasimudeen R Jabir; Shams Tabrez; Ghulam Md Ashraf; Shazi Shakil; Ghazi A Damanhouri; Mohammad A Kamal Journal: Int J Nanomedicine Date: 2012-08-09
Authors: Bo Yu; Hao Wei; Qianjun He; Carolina A Ferreira; Christopher J Kutyreff; Dalong Ni; Zachary T Rosenkrans; Liang Cheng; Faquan Yu; Jonathan W Engle; Xiaoli Lan; Weibo Cai Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Susan Monro; Katsuya L Colón; Huimin Yin; John Roque; Prathyusha Konda; Shashi Gujar; Randolph P Thummel; Lothar Lilge; Colin G Cameron; Sherri A McFarland Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 60.622
Authors: Avinash Chettri; John A Roque; Kilian R A Schneider; Houston D Cole; Colin G Cameron; Sherri A McFarland; Benjamin Dietzek Journal: ChemPhotoChem Date: 2021-01-19