| Literature DB >> 29097747 |
Aurélie Rondon1,2, Nancy Ty1, Jean-Baptiste Bequignat1, Mercedes Quintana1, Arnaud Briat1, Tiffany Witkowski1, Bernadette Bouchon1, Claude Boucheix3, Elisabeth Miot-Noirault1, Jean-Pierre Pouget2, Jean-Michel Chezal1, Isabelle Navarro-Teulon2, Emmanuel Moreau1, Françoise Degoul4.
Abstract
Bioorthogonal chemistry represents a challenging approach in pretargeted radioimmunotherapy (PRIT). We focus here on mAb modifications by grafting an increase amount of trans-cyclooctene (TCO) derivatives (0 to 30 equivalents with respect to mAb) bearing different polyethylene glycol (PEG) linkers between mAb and TCO (i.e. PEG0 (1), PEG4 (2) and PEG12 (3)) and assessing their functionality. We used colorectal xenograft (HT29/Ts29.2) and peritoneal carcinomatosis (A431-CEA-Luc/35A7) as tumor cells/mAbs models and fluorescent tetrazines (TZ). MALDI-TOF MS shows that grafting with 2,3 increases significantly the number of TCO per mAb compared with no PEG. In vitro immunofluorescence showed that Ts29.2 and 35A7 labeling intensity is correlated with the number of TCO when using 1,3 while signals reach a maximum at 10 equivalents when using 2. Under 10 equivalents conditions, the capacity of resulting mAbs-1-3 for antigen recognition is similar when reported per grafted TCO and comparable to mAbs without TCO. In vivo, on both models, pretargeting with mAbs-2,3 followed by TZ injection induced a fluorescent signal two times lower than with mAbs-1. These findings suggest that while PEG linkers allow a better accessibility for TCO grafting, it might decrease the number of reactive TCO. In conclusion, mAb-1 represents the best candidate for PRIT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29097747 PMCID: PMC5668303 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-15051-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Pretargeting components. (a) Ts29.2 and 35A7 mAbs conjugates 1–3. (b) Structures of TCO1b 1 and TCO-NHS esters derivatives 2–3.
Figure 2Relation between the number of TCO grafted on Ts29.2 mAbs and their functionality. Number of TCO grafted was determined by MALDI-TOF MS and is expressed as mean values [min-max], n = 3 independent experiments. Yields correspond to the mAbs recovery after grafting process. All IF imaging were made with the same settings. White numbers are mean fluorescence intensity quantified on the corresponding IF imaging. Scale bar: 50 µm.
Figure 3(a–b) Functionality of mAbs-1–3 towards their cognate antigens. Number of TSPAN8 (a) or CEA (b) antigens detected by Ts29.2 or 35A7 mAbs conjugates 1–3. All samples were made in triplicates in three independent experiments. Statistical analyses were made using 2-paired Student T-test. P-value < 0.05 was considered significant.
Figure 4(a) Reliability of Ts29.2-1-3 to recognize their target and assessment of their interaction with TZ-Cy3 using confocal microscopy. HT29 cells were first incubated with 10 µg/mL of Ts29.2 processed without TCO addition (TCO 0), Ts29.2-1 (PEG0), Ts29.2-2 (PEG4) or Ts29.2-3 (PEG12) and then with both 1/500 AbII-FITC(495-519 nm) and 0.02 mM TZ-Cy3(550-570 nm). Control condition corresponds to incubation without Ts29.2. Green signal corresponds to AbII-FITC labeling and red signal to TZ-Cy3 labeling. Green and red images were merged to show signal co-localization. Scale bar: 30 µm. (b–d) Quantification of mean fluorescence intensity per TCO for mAb-1-3. (b) Immunofluorescence of HT29 or A431-CEA-Luc cells incubated with mAbs-1-3 and TZ-Cy3(550–570 nm). Merged images of red: TZ-Cy3 cell membrane signal and blue: nucleus stained with DAPI. Same settings were applied for all images. Scale bar: 50 µm. Each well was imaged 3 times at random locations; all Z sections every 2 µm per field were imaged. (c–d) Graphs of fluorescent signal intensity obtained after ROI quantification by ImageJ software on HT29 (c) (n = 3 different experiments), or A431-CEA-Luc (d) (n = 4 different experiments). ROI were 3D-automatically computerized on the entire image and were then reported per TCO. Statistical analysis was made using two-paired Student T-test. *P < 0.05: PEG0 vs PEG4 and PEG12, **P < 0.01: PEG0 vs PEG4 and PEG4 vs PEG12, ***P < 0.0002: PEG0 vs PEG12.
Figure 5(a–b) Assessment of mAbs-1-3 capacity to interact with TZ-5-FAM using flow cytometry. Values are mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) ± SEM reported per the number of TCO grafted on each mAb (n = 3 independent experiments). Statistical analysis was made using two paired Student T-test. P < 0.05 was considered significant. *P < 0.05: PEG0 vs PEG4 and PEG12 and PEG4 vs PEG12; **P < 0.01: PEG0 vs PEG4 and PEG12.
Figure 6In vivo assessments of Ts29.2-1-3 on HT29 xenograft model. Figures represent in vivo imaging 48 h post TZ-Cy5 or mAb-TCO/TZ-Cy5 injections. Red arrows show the location of the tumor. (a) Direct targeting with Ts29.2 without TCO (Control) or Ts29.2-1-3 after preliminary incubation 30 min with TZ-Cy5 in tube. (b) Pretargeting with Ts29.2 without TCO (Control) or Ts29.2-1-3, TZ-Cy5 was injected 24 h after mAbs. (c) Graph of ROI average radiance reported per the number of TCO of each mAb. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 3). Statistical analysis was made using one-way ANOVA. *P < 0.01: PEG0 PT vs PEG4 PT; **P < 0.005: PEG0 PT vs PEG12 PT. (d) Representative ex vivo imaging of tumors between other tissues. The scheme shows the repartition of the organs in the Petri box. Lymph nodes were sampled in the axillary region. Muscle corresponds to the left gastrocnemius.
Figure 7(a) Bioluminescence imaging of PC tumor xenografts. PC induced by IP xenografts with 1.106 A431-CEA-Luc cells. Imaging was made 10 min post IP injection of 300 µL of luciferin (15 mg/mL). Representative mouse imaging from day 1 post cell engraft to sacrifice. (b–d) 35A7-1-3 pretargeting on PC tumors. (b) Pretargeting with 35A7-1-3. Figure represents fluorescent in vivo imaging 24 h post IP injection of TZ-Cy5. Imaging for 48 h and 72 h after IP injection of TZ-Cy5 are in supplementary data S8. (c) In vivo ROI average radiance of the entire peritoneal cavity, reported to the number of TCO of each modified mAb. Statistics were made using one-way ANOVA. *P < 0.05: PEG0 vs PEG4 and PEG12. (d) Ex vivo bioluminescent and fluorescent imaging of PC tumors. White numbers represent the 9 main peritoneal regions, as reported by Klaver et al.[36].