| Literature DB >> 28459059 |
Pi-Chou Hsieh1, Hui-Ting Lin2, Wen-Yih Chen3, Jeffrey J P Tsai1, Wen-Pin Hu1,4.
Abstract
Herein, we report a method of combining bioinformatics and biosensing technologies to select aptamers against prostate specific antigen (PSA). The main objective of this study is to select DNA aptamers with higher binding affinity for PSA by using the proposed method. Based on the five known sequences of PSA-binding aptamers, we adopted the functions of reproduction and crossover in the genetic algorithm to produce next-generation sequences for the computational and experimental analysis. RNAfold web server was utilized to analyze the secondary structures, and the 3-dimensional molecular models of aptamer sequences were generated by using RNAComposer web server. ZRANK scoring function was used to rerank the docking predictions from ZDOCK. The biosensors, the quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) and a surface plasmon resonance (SPR) instrument, were used to verify the binding ability of selected aptamer for PSA. By carrying out the simulations and experiments after two generations, we obtain one aptamer that can have the highest binding affinity with PSA, which generates almost 2-fold and 3-fold greater measured signals than the responses produced by the best known DNA sequence in the QCM and SPR experiments, respectively.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28459059 PMCID: PMC5387809 DOI: 10.1155/2017/5041683
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Flow chart of the study.
First-generation sequences and results from the analysis and calculations.
| Name | Sequence (5′-3′) | Minimum free energy (kcal/mol) | Dot-bracket format | ZDOCK score | ZRANK score | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSAG11 |
| −5.6 | ..........((((((....))).)))..... | 17.34 | −81.44 | 1 |
| PSAG12 |
| −0.2 | .......((((.........))))........ | 49.27 | −60.91 | |
| PSAG13 |
| −3.1 | .......(((((((........)))))))... | 40.03 | −60.33 | |
| PSAG14 |
| −0.2 | ................((........)).... | 43.93 | −70.08 | |
| PSAG15 |
| −3.3 | ....((.((((....)))).)).......... | 38.78 | −72.4 | 7 |
| PSAG16 |
| 0 | ................................ | N.A. | N.A. | |
| PSAG17 |
| −4.8 | .......((.(((((.......)))))))... | 39.73 | −71.49 | 8 |
| PSAG18 |
| −3.5 | .......(((((.........)))))...... | 40.05 | −67.55 | |
| PSAG19 |
| −0.8 | ....((((((......)))).))......... | 48.16 | −68.89 | |
| PSAG110 |
| −3.3 | ................(((.....)))..... | 45.01 | −68.88 | |
| PSAG111 |
| −1.3 | ..........(((.......)))......... | 48.6 | −64.73 | |
| PSAG112 |
| −1.4 | ............((((....))))........ | 42.58 | −76.89 | 5 |
| PSAG113 |
| −3 | ..........(((.(((....))).))).... | 39.77 | −67.01 | |
| PSAG114 |
| −10.8 | .....((((((((....)))).))))...... | 43.45 | −78.91 | 2 |
| PSAG115 |
| −2.7 | ..........((((((...))))))....... | 44.36 | −61.84 | |
| PSAG116 |
| 0 | ................................ | N.A. | N.A. | |
| PSAG117 |
| −2.4 | ............((((.((.....)))))).. | 47.52 | −74.57 | 6 |
| PSAG118 |
| −1.1 | .......(((.....))).............. | 46.13 | −76.9 | 4 |
| PSAG119 |
| −2.4 | ............((((.((.....)))))).. | 40.41 | −77.84 | 3 |
| PSAG120 |
| 0 | ................................ | N.A. | N.A. |
Selected first-generation sequences and their binding reactions with the PSA, as measured by the QCM.
| Name | Average and standard deviation values of frequency changes | Ranked results in experiments | Ranked results in simulations |
|---|---|---|---|
| PSAG11 | 19.2 ± 1.7 | 8 | 1 |
| PSAG15 | 108.2 ± 14 | 1 | 7 |
| PSAG17 | 37.3 ± 1.9 | 6 | 8 |
| PSAG112 | 71.7 ± 1.3 | 4 | 5 |
| PSAG114 | 63 ± 5.4 | 5 | 2 |
| PSAG117 | 82.9 ± 5.8 | 3 | 6 |
| PSAG118 | 24.9 ± 3.9 | 7 | 4 |
| PSAG119 | 91.3 ± 9.7 | 2 | 3 |
Second-generation sequences and analysis and calculation results.
| Name | Sequence (5′-3′) | Minimum free energy (kcal/mol) | Dot-bracket format | ZDOCK score | ZRANK score | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSAG21 |
| −3.3 | .......((.(((((....)))))..)).... | 43.44 | −68.68 | |
| PSAG22 |
| −4.9 | ..............(((((....))))).... | 45.77 | −69.16 | |
| PSAG23 |
| −1 | .......((((((....))))))......... | 41.61 | −56.12 | |
| PSAG24 |
| −6.7 | ......(((.((((....)))).)))...... | 17.54 | −70.91 | 3 |
| PSAG25 |
| −4.3 | .......((((....)))).(((...)))... | 45.69 | −55.04 | |
| PSAG26 |
| −2.6 | ............(((.(((....))))))... | 44.63 | −60.12 | |
| PSAG27 |
| 0 | ................................ | N.A. | N.A. | |
| PSAG28 |
| −4.1 | ............(((..((...))..)))… | 42.64 | −86 | 1 |
| PSAG29 |
| −1.7 | ............((.((......)).)).... | 44.51 | −65.83 | |
| PSAG210 |
| −5.4 | ............((((.((...)).))))... | 42.61 | −68.5 | |
| PSAG211 |
| 0 | ................................ | N.A. | N.A. | |
| PSAG212 |
| −2.4 | ............((((.((.....)))))).. | 40.41 | −77.84 | 2 |
Figure 2The QCM experiments for the second-generation aptamer sequences. Frequency variations produced by the binding reactions between second-generation sequences and PSA in the QCM experiments.
Selected second-generation sequences and their binding reactions with the PSA in QCM measurements.
| Name of aptamer | Average and standard deviation values of frequency changes (Hz) | Ranked results in experiments |
|---|---|---|
| PSAG24 | 131.3 ± 4.9 | 2 |
| PSAG28 | 166.2 ± 6.7 | 1 |
| PSAG212 | 59.5 ± 5.8 | 4 |
| ΔPSap4#5 | 76.1 ± 2.1 | 3 |
A sequence introduced in a study by Savory et al. [14] that showed high affinity with PSA.
Figure 3The data of SPR experiments for the second-generation aptamer sequences. Binding reactions between different nucleic acid aptamer sequences and PSA measured by using the surface plasmon resonance biosensor.
Figure 4SPR sensorgrams. Representative SPR curves for these four kinds of aptamer-PSA interactions.
Kinetic parameters of aptamer-PSA interactions by fitting SPR sensorgrams.
| Name of aptamer |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| PSAG24 | 3.37 ± 0.62 | 12.34 ± 0.58 | 0.27 ± 0.04 |
| PSAG28 | 6.62 ± 0.77 | 6.7 ± 0.37 | 0.99 ± 0.06 |
| PSAG212 | 3.11 ± 0.5 | 11.23 ± 0.8 | 0.28 ± 0.03 |
| ΔPSap4#5 | 4.2 ± 0.62 | 7.08 ± 0.23 | 0.59 ± 0.07 |