Hanmant K Gaikwad1, Darya Tsvirkun1, Yael Ben-Nun1, Emmanuelle Merquiol1, Rachela Popovtzer2, Galia Blum1. 1. The Institute for Drug Research, The School of Pharmacy, The Faculty of Medicine , The Hebrew University , Jerusalem 9112001 , Israel. 2. Faculty of Engineering and The Institute of Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials , Bar-Ilan University , Ramat Gan 5290002 , Israel.
Abstract
X-ray computed tomography (CT) is a robust, precise, fast, and reliable imaging method that enables excellent spatial resolution and quantification of contrast agents throughout the body. However, CT is largely inadequate for molecular imaging applications due mainly to its low contrast sensitivity that forces the use of large concentrations of contrast agents for detection. To overcome this limitation, we generated a new class of iodinated nanoscale activity-based probes (IN-ABPs) that sufficiently accumulates at the target site by covalently binding cysteine cathepsins that are exceptionally highly expressed in cancer. The IN-ABPs are comprised of a short targeting peptide selective to specific cathepsins, an electrophilic moiety that allows activity-dependent covalent binding, and tags containing dendrimers with up to 48 iodine atoms. IN-ABPs selectively bind and inhibit activity of recombinant and intracellular cathepsin B, L, and S. We compared the in vivo kinetics, biodistribution, and tumor accumulation of IN-ABPs bearing 18 and 48 iodine atoms each, and their control counterparts lacking the targeting moiety. Here we show that although both IN-ABPs bind specifically to cathepsins within the tumor and produce detectable CT contrast, the 48-iodine bearing IN-ABP was found to be optimal with signals over 2.1-fold higher than its nontargeted counterpart. In conclusion, this study shows the synthetic feasibility and potential utility of IN-ABPs as potent contrast agents that enable molecular imaging of tumors using CT.
X-ray computed tomography (CT) is a robust, precise, fast, and reliable imaging method that enables excellent spatial resolution and quantification of contrast agents throughout the body. However, CT is largely inadequate for molecular imaging applications due mainly to its low contrast sensitivity that forces the use of large concentrations of contrast agents for detection. To overcome this limitation, we generated a new class of iodinated nanoscale activity-based probes (IN-ABPs) that sufficiently accumulates at the target site by covalently binding cysteine cathepsins that are exceptionally highly expressed in cancer. The IN-ABPs are comprised of a short targeting peptide selective to specific cathepsins, an electrophilic moiety that allows activity-dependent covalent binding, and tags containing dendrimers with up to 48 iodine atoms. IN-ABPs selectively bind and inhibit activity of recombinant and intracellular cathepsin B, L, and S. We compared the in vivo kinetics, biodistribution, and tumor accumulation of IN-ABPs bearing 18 and 48 iodine atoms each, and their control counterparts lacking the targeting moiety. Here we show that although both IN-ABPs bind specifically to cathepsins within the tumor and produce detectable CT contrast, the 48-iodine bearing IN-ABP was found to be optimal with signals over 2.1-fold higher than its nontargeted counterpart. In conclusion, this study shows the synthetic feasibility and potential utility of IN-ABPs as potent contrast agents that enable molecular imaging of tumors using CT.
Computed tomography (CT) is
an imaging technique widely used in a variety of research and clinical
studies utilizing X-rays to create cross-section images of the body.[1−5] CT’s high resolution, high efficiency, wide availability,
and cost effectiveness makes it one of the most frequently used noninvasive
clinical imaging modalities. CT imaging enables detailed three-dimensional
(3D) visualization with excellent spatial resolution of internal body
structures and is routinely used for diagnosis of diseases, treatment
assessment, and prediction of therapy.[6,7] It requires
the presence of elements with high atomic weight and radiographic
density higher than those of the surrounding biological tissue, thus
iodine is often used to increase contrast.Contrast agents are
an essential part of radiology and are routinely
applied in modern medicine, reported to have been used in 53% of all
CT scans performed in the U.S. in 2011.[8] Conventional, clinically used iodinated CT contrast agents, both
ionic or nonionic, predominantly have a low molecular weight and accumulate
nonspecifically in organs or tissues.[9,10] Nevertheless,
CT contrast requires high concentrations of contrast agents and the
chemical properties of iodinated CT agents lead to a very rapid clearance
from the body, limiting imaging to a time scale of minutes or even
seconds for the majority of diagnostic applications.[11]Nanoparticles have many advantages over conventional
contrast agents,
such as specific molecular targeting capability, prolonged blood circulation
time, and controlled clearance pathways, thus allowing for molecular
imaging and medical diagnostics.[12,13] Nanoparticles
incorporated with iodine, gold, and bismuth hold high electron density
and therefore have been proposed as CT contrast agents, showing low
rates of renal clearance and increased vascular residence time.[14−16] In addition, nanoparticles and other macromoleculars, within the
nanoscale range, accumulate preferentially in solid tumors due to
the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect.[17,18] To enrich the number of contrasting atoms, we focused on polymeric
dendrimers, planar hyperbranched nanostructures that can form spherical
nanostructures; they possess chemical handles on which to graft therapeutics
and contrast agents with great loading efficiency.[19] As such, dendrimers have been reported as carriers of contrast
agents for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),[20] electron paramagnetic resonance,[21] and
iodinated dendritic nanoparticles of CT.[22] Indeed, nanoparticles and macromolecular agents are suitable for
vascular imaging by CT because they exhibit longer half-lives as blood
pool reagents.[17,18] The majority of research for
enhancing CT contrast on iodinated compounds such as nanosupentions,[23] nanocapsules,[24] nanoemulsions,[25] and liposomes[26] report
macrophage targeting. Furthermore, covalent incorporation of iodine
containing moieties to a macromolecular structure leads to high water
solubility and good biocompatibility as potential blood pool contrast
agents.[15,22,27,28]The development of iodine-based CT probes for
early disease detection
is a highly attractive goal, however, the low sensitivity of CT scanners
and minimum detectable signals make this a challenging task.[10] Nevertheless, numerous groups have relied on
highly expressed biological targets to direct nanoparticles, densely
loaded with contrast molecules, to enable CT molecular imaging.[29] For example, targeted contrast agents based
on bismuth sulfide and gold nanoparticles targeted to high density
lipoproteins that are specific for macrophages have been reported.[30,31] Winter et al. reported on a nanoemulsion of iodinated oils modified
with an antifibrin antibody attached to its surface,[29,32] Hyafil et al. reported on iodinated polymeric nanoparticles targeted
to macrophages in atherosclerotic plaque,[15] and Montet’s group reported iodine-contrast media-loaded
liposomes targeted to the E-selectin specific peptides.[33] Additionally, Hill et al. developed a low density
lipoprotein-like nanoparticle loaded with iodinated triglycerides
targeted to HepG2cancer cells.[34] While
diverse approaches leading to iodinated nanoparticles CT contrast
media have been optimized, so far none of the compounds have been
approved for clinical application.[15,32−36] The several iodine blood-pool agents clinically used for enhancing
CT contrast suggest that other highly iodinated compounds could be
well tolerated.We took a unique approach of directing iodine
CT contrast agents
to cancerous tissue by targeting specific enzymatic activity rather
than protein abundance using the activity-based-probes (ABP) methodology.
A typical ABP includes a recognition element that drives selectivity
to its protease, a contrast agent, and a “warhead”,
usually an electrophile that enables an activity driven covalent linkage
between the target and the contrast moiety.[37−39] We targeted
our probes to a subset of cysteine cathepsin proteases that are highly
overexpressed and active in several pathologies characterized with
high macrophage content such as cancer and atherosclerosis. With the
extremely high abundance of our target cysteine cathepsins and the
covalent nature of the probes we were able to overcome the challenges
associated with the low sensitivity of CT imaging and generate iodine-based
molecular imaging probes that enable cancer detection.In an
attempt to generate CT contrast agents for molecular imaging
of cancer, we generated libraries of iodinated nanoscale activity-based
probes (IN-ABPs) targeted to cathepsin proteases highly elevated in
cancer.[40−43] In general, the targeting moiety, based on the published ABPGB111-NH2,[37] is highly selective to cathepsin
B, L, and S. The short peptide portion of the probe (carbobenzoxy-phenylalanine-lysine)
served as the recognition element to the cathepsins and the acyloxymethyl
ketone as a warhead, enabling covalent linkage of the probe to its
target. GB111-NH2 was tagged with various iodine-containing
aromatic rings termed iodine tags (Scheme ). To generate the iodine tags and enable
attachment to the ABP core (GB111-NH2) we modified two
commercial compounds; 2,3,5-triiodobenzoic acid (TBA) and iopanoic
acid (IPA). The carboxylic acid of TBA was directly converted to succinimidyl
ester (SE) while the IPA’s free amine was first acetylated
and only then its carboxylic acid was converted to SE. The activated
iodine tags were then simply attached to the free amine of GB111-NH2Scheme S1.
Scheme 1
Basic Library Design
of Iodinated Nanoscale Activity Based Probes
(IN-ABPs)
(a) Structure of G1 IN-ABP: PAMAM core labelled with six iodine tags, a Cy5 moiety,
and a targeting moiety GB111-NH. (b) The general structure of PAMAM
G3 IN-ABPs include 16 iodine tags, a targeting moiety (GB111-NH),
14 capping groups, and a Cy5 moiety.
Basic Library Design
of Iodinated Nanoscale Activity Based Probes
(IN-ABPs)
(a) Structure of G1 IN-ABP: PAMAM core labelled with six iodine tags, a Cy5 moiety,
and a targeting moiety GB111-NH. (b) The general structure of PAMAM
G3 IN-ABPs include 16 iodine tags, a targeting moiety (GB111-NH),
14 capping groups, and a Cy5 moiety.To determine
whether the attachment of the large iodine tags interferes
with the probe binding to its target, we first generated IN-ABPs with
only one or three tags using both TBA (1) and IPA (3) based tags. GB111-NH2 was either attached directly
to a single tag resulting in 4a and 4b,
(Scheme a) or reacted
with succinic anhydride to enable PAMAM generation 0 (G0) binding
through a succinic acid linker. The tags were then coupled via amide
bond to form the three tagged compounds (7a, 7b) (Scheme b). These
probes were then evaluated biochemically for their ability to bind
and inhibit recombinant human cathepsins by a competitive inhibition
assay.
Scheme 2
Synthesis of Iodine-Tagged ABPs (4a,b, 7a,b)
(a) Synthesis of single iodine
tagged activity based probe. (b) Three iodide-tagged ABP (7a,b) were synthesized starting from GB111-NH2, which was reacted with succinic anhydride followed by coupling
with ethylenediamine core PAMAM-Go and then reacted with SE of either
2,3,5-triiodobenzoic acid or iopanoic acid described in Scheme S1.
Synthesis of Iodine-Tagged ABPs (4a,b, 7a,b)
(a) Synthesis of single iodine
tagged activity based probe. (b) Three iodide-tagged ABP (7a,b) were synthesized starting from GB111-NH2, which was reacted with succinic anhydride followed by coupling
with ethylenediamine core PAMAM-Go and then reacted with SE of either
2,3,5-triiodobenzoic acid or iopanoic acid described in Scheme S1.Recombinant
humancathepsin B or L were incubated with an increasing
concentration of the IN-ABPs, after which the residual cathepsin activity
was detected by a Cy5 fluorescently labeled cathepsin ABPGB123.[44] The free IN-ABPs were separated from the enzyme-probe
complexes by SDS PAGE then detection of the probe-enzyme complex was
carried out using a fluorescent scan of the gel. The single and three
iodine tagged probes (4a, 4b, 7a, 7b) all showed cathepsin B and L inhibition with minor
differences between the compounds, Figure a,b, indicated that the iodine tags do not
interfere with binding of the probes to the protease.
Figure 1
Biochemical evaluations
of Iodine-tagged ABPs (4a,b, 7a,b) by a competition assay.
(a,b) Inhibition of recombinant cathepsin B and L, as described in Supporting Information. The reduction in intensity
of the fluorescent band indicates inhibition of cathepsin activity.
(c) Inhibition of endogenous cathepsin activity within intact NIH-3T3
cells, as described in Experimental Section. The iodine-tagged ABPs were found to be cell permeable and able
to inhibit cathepsin activity.
Biochemical evaluations
of Iodine-tagged ABPs (4a,b, 7a,b) by a competition assay.
(a,b) Inhibition of recombinant cathepsin B and L, as described in Supporting Information. The reduction in intensity
of the fluorescent band indicates inhibition of cathepsin activity.
(c) Inhibition of endogenous cathepsin activity within intact NIH-3T3
cells, as described in Experimental Section. The iodine-tagged ABPs were found to be cell permeable and able
to inhibit cathepsin activity.Next, in order to evaluate the probe’s cell permeability
and capability of labeling cellular cathepsins, we performed a competitive
inhibition assay in intact NIH-3T3 cells. Probes were incubated with
intact cells for 24 h then residual cathepsin activity was labeled
by GB123. Cell lysates were separated on SDS PAGE, followed by scanning
of the gel for fluorescence to detect residual cathepsin activity, Figure c. The inhibition
of cellular cathepsins was clear and consistent with IPA tagged probes
(4b and 7b). Interestingly, these probes
exhibited better inhibition than the TBA probes (4a and 7a) most likely due to better cell permeability. We therefore
generated our next probes with the IPAiodine tags only.We
moved to generating multiple tagged IN-ABPs with up to 48 iodine
atoms (16 tags) based on PAMAM G1 and G3 cores. For the PAMAM G1 compounds,
the PAMAM- core was reacted with a SE of IPA tag (3)
in basic conditions, the mixture was then purified yielding six, seven,
and eight iodine-tagged dendrimers (11, 12, 13, respectively), Scheme a. In parallel, GB111-NH2 was
extended with glutaric acid and converted into a SE with NHS (9), Scheme S2. The six iodine-tagged
ABP was generated by reacting 11 with GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9) to give compound 14 (HG81), which was then reacted with Cy5-SE
in basic conditions to give a Cy5-labeled six-iodine-tagged ABP 15 (HG92), Scheme b. A negative control compound containing 7 iodine
tags without GB111-NH2, 16 (HG31) was synthesized by Cy5 attachment to compound 12, Scheme c. Compounds lacking
Cy5 were also generated similarly, for example, the seven iodine-tagged
ABP, 17 (HG78), by reacting compound 12 with
GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9), Scheme S3a. An ABP with two targeting peptides
(18) was also generated by reacting 11 with
two GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9), Scheme S3b.
Scheme 3
Synthesis of IN-ABPs
(a) Synthesis of six, seven
and eight iodine-tagged contrast agents. The iodine tag IPA-SE (3) was attached to PAMAM-G1 generating 11, 12, 13 holding 6, 7, and 8 iodine tags respectively,
each complex was purified with indicated yields. (b) Synthesis of
Cy5 labelled IN-ABP (six tagged, 15) was achieved by
coupling the six iodine-tagged PAMAM 11 with GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9), then reacting with Cy5-SE.
(c) Synthesis of seven tagged control 16 was accomplished
by reacting the seven iodine tagged PAMAM 12 with Cy5-SE.
A detailed procedure is described in Supporting Information.
Synthesis of IN-ABPs
(a) Synthesis of six, seven
and eight iodine-tagged contrast agents. The iodine tag IPA-SE (3) was attached to PAMAM-G1 generating 11, 12, 13 holding 6, 7, and 8 iodine tags respectively,
each complex was purified with indicated yields. (b) Synthesis of
Cy5 labelled IN-ABP (six tagged, 15) was achieved by
coupling the six iodine-tagged PAMAM 11 with GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9), then reacting with Cy5-SE.
(c) Synthesis of seven tagged control 16 was accomplished
by reacting the seven iodine tagged PAMAM 12 with Cy5-SE.
A detailed procedure is described in Supporting Information.The design of targeted
contrast reagent based on the dendrimer
PAMAM G3 ((NH2)32) included a maximal usage
of only 16 iodine tags due to solubility limitations. Since reports
have found that highly cationic PAMAM dendrimers distort cellular
membranes,[45,46] the remaining amines were either
capped by an acetyl group or with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) group,
or left free. The synthetic route of the PAMAM G3 ABPs was similar
to PAMAM G1 ABPs; the free amines of PAMAM G3 were first reacted with
IPA tag 3 forming 19 (HG87),
then with GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9), resulting in 20 (HG82). HG82 was labeled with Cy5 which was then either acetylated or PEGylated
to yield 27 (HG90) and 28 (HG93), respectively, Scheme . We aimed to control the stoichiometric ratio of the
groups by adding precise molar ratios of GB111-NH2 and
Cy5 onto each ABP, leading to an average of a single group on each
probe. As negative controls, conjugates of PAMAM-G3 dendrimers with
Cy5, acetylated or PEGylated but without GB111-NH, were synthesized
resulting in 29, (HG99), and 30 (HG32), Scheme . Similar compounds lacking Cy5 were generated as described
in Scheme S4. The synthesis, purification,
and characterization of all IN-ABPs were performed using standard
methods. 1H NMR was used to determine the average number
of conjugates. For example, 16 IPA tags were found relying
on the characteristic peaks at δ (ppm) 8.35 which belong to
the phenyl proton (16 H’s) of the IPA aromatic ring. Similarly,
GB111-NH, acetyl and PEG conjugates were determined as described in
the experimental section. The number of conjugated Cy5 dyes per dendrimer
was found to be one on average by spectrophotometry. A list of cathepsin
IN-ABPs and controls synthesized with the number of iodine tags, atoms,
and capping moieties is shown in Table .
Scheme 4
Synthesis of IN-ABPs
Synthesis of multiple tagged
IN-ABPs labelled with Cy5 based on PAMAM G3 dendrimer core capped
with acetyl or PEG groups. PAMAM G3 was first linked to 16 iodine
tags by reacting with the IPA-SE (3) then a single GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9) moiety was attached followed
by reacting with Cy5-SE. The remaining free amines were then capped
with acetyl, PEG, or left free, generating 21, 22, and 20, respectively. Control compounds lacking
the GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9) moiety
were also generated with acetyl, PEG or with free amines, compound 23, 24, and 19 respectively.
Table 1
List of the PAMAM Dendrimer Core Multiple
Tagged IN-ABPs
IN-ABP
PAMAM gen.
no. of iodine
tagsa
no. of iodine
atomsa
no. of GB111NH-a
no. of free NH2a
no. of acetyla
no.
of PEG-4 (333)a
no. of PEG-12 (750)a
no. of Cy5b
molecular
weightc
4a
1
3
1
1055.00
4b
1
3
1
1168.08
7a
G0
3
9
1
2616.82
7b
G0
3
9
1
2956.08
HG23 (13)
G1
8
24
6187.42
HG81 (14)
G1
6
18
1
1
5653.11
HG92 (15)
G1
6
18
1
1
6305.34
HG31 (16)
G1
7
21
1
6230.83
HG78 (17)
G1
7
21
1
6247.91
HG81a (18)
G1
6
18
2
6308.4
HG87 (19)
G3
16
48
16
∼16426
HG82 (20)
G3
16.2
48
1.3
15
∼17415
HG90 (21)
G3
16.31
48
1.43
14
1.05
∼18826
HG93 (22)
G3
16.23
48
1.78
14
0.94
∼27243
HG99 (23)
G3
16.19
48
15
0.89
∼17737
HG32 (24)
G3
16.09
48
15
1.04
∼26668
HG86 (25)
G3
16.19
48
1.46
14
∼18104
HG95 (26)
G3
16.32
48
1.76
14
∼20846
HG96 (27)
G3
16.33
48
1.84
14
∼26743
HG33 (28)
G3
16
48
16
∼17098
HG94 (29)
G3
16.17
48
16
∼20878
HG97 (30)
G3
16
48
16
∼26585
Determined by 1H NMR
spectrometry.
Number of
Cy5 tags determined by
using UV spectrophotometry.
Average molecular weight calculated.
Synthesis of multiple tagged
IN-ABPs labelled with Cy5 based on PAMAM G3 dendrimer core capped
with acetyl or PEG groups. PAMAM G3 was first linked to 16 iodine
tags by reacting with the IPA-SE (3) then a single GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9) moiety was attached followed
by reacting with Cy5-SE. The remaining free amines were then capped
with acetyl, PEG, or left free, generating 21, 22, and 20, respectively. Control compounds lacking
the GB111NHCO(CH2)3CO-SE (9) moiety
were also generated with acetyl, PEG or with free amines, compound 23, 24, and 19 respectively.Determined by 1H NMR
spectrometry.Number of
Cy5 tags determined by
using UV spectrophotometry.Average molecular weight calculated.We further analyzed all the iodinated dendrimers by
zeta potential
and a correlation was found between the changes in zeta potential
of the dendrimers with a number of surface groups attached. For example,
zeta potential of IPA and GB111-NH conjugated PAMAM HG82 was 34 ± 3 because of the partially positively charged NH2 surface groups, then a zeta potential decreased was detected
after acetylation or PEGylation (HG86 and HG95, respectively). Table S1 shows the measured
particle sizes and zeta potentials for all compounds generated. Most
size distribution values were found to be higher than expected most
likely due to water coating or aggregation of particles in the solution.
TEM images of the selected G3 compounds are presented in Figure S1.We turned to evaluate the inhibitory
potency of the G1 IN-ABPs
by competition assays of recombinant cathepsin B and L as well as
of endogenous cathepsins within intact NIH-3T3 cells. Cathepsin inhibition
was performed as described in Figure by a competition assay. The G0 and G1 IN-ABPs, HG78, HG81, and HG81a, all inhibited
cathepsin activity both in vitro and in intact cells with adequate
potency in a dose response manner, Figure S2. Importantly, the inhibition potency of the G1 IN-ABPs was comparable
to the single tag and tritag compounds shown in Figure S2. Furthermore, having two targeting moieties, GB111
attached to the same probe did not increase the potency (HG81a).Finally, we evaluated potency toward cathepsins of the G3
probes, HG82, HG86, HG95, and HG96. All G3 compounds showed potent inhibition in a dose
response manner
of both recombinant cathepsin B and L as well as cellular cathepsins.
These surprising results indicated that despite the large size of
the compounds, there was no impairment of cell permeability or binding
interaction with the cathepsin targets. Furthermore, HG82 with 15 free amines was slightly less potent than the acetylated
and PEGylated G3 analogs in the cellular assay. To ensure that the
binding was dependent on protease activity, control nanoscale compounds
lacking the reactive moiety (HG87, HG94,
and HG97) were tested with no detectable inhibition (Figure a and Figure S2d,e).
Figure 2
Cathepsin binding of IN-ABPs assessed
by competition assay and
direct labeling. (a) Inhibition of endogenous cathepsin activity within
intact NIH-3T3 cells, as described in Experimental Section. Decrease in band intensity indicates efficient cathepsin
binding. (b,c) Direct labeling of recombinant cathepsin B and L by
G1 and G3 Cy5 labeled IN-ABPs (HG92 and HG90). Indicated concentration of probes were incubated with enzymes
with or without cathepsin inhibitor (GB111-NH2)[36] pretreatment. Samples were run on gel that was
scanned for fluorescence. Increase in band intensity indicates efficient
cathepsin binding. (d) Intact NIH-3T3 cells with or without inhibitor
pretreatment were treated with HG92, HG90 for 24 h in growth media, cells were lysed and separated by gel
that was scanned for fluorescence. Clear selective binding of endogenous
cathepsins are seen. Molecular weight shift of cathepsin-probe complex
is marked with *.
Cathepsin binding of IN-ABPs assessed
by competition assay and
direct labeling. (a) Inhibition of endogenous cathepsin activity within
intact NIH-3T3 cells, as described in Experimental Section. Decrease in band intensity indicates efficient cathepsin
binding. (b,c) Direct labeling of recombinant cathepsin B and L by
G1 and G3 Cy5 labeled IN-ABPs (HG92 and HG90). Indicated concentration of probes were incubated with enzymes
with or without cathepsin inhibitor (GB111-NH2)[36] pretreatment. Samples were run on gel that was
scanned for fluorescence. Increase in band intensity indicates efficient
cathepsin binding. (d) Intact NIH-3T3 cells with or without inhibitor
pretreatment were treated with HG92, HG90 for 24 h in growth media, cells were lysed and separated by gel
that was scanned for fluorescence. Clear selective binding of endogenous
cathepsins are seen. Molecular weight shift of cathepsin-probe complex
is marked with *.Encouraged by the potency
and cell permeability of the G1 and G3
IN-ABPs, we moved to compare the G1 and G3 specificity to cathepsin
proteases in intact cells. We generated two Cy5 labeled IN-ABPs, a
G1 probe 15 (HG92) and an acetylated G3
probe 21 (HG90) together with two corresponding
controls, 16 (HG31) and 23 (HG99), respectively. First, we examined direct labeling of
the Cy5 labeled IN-ABP to recombinant human cathepsins B and L by
incubation with increasing concentrations of probes, and then by visualizing
the IN-ABP-enzyme complex using a fluorescent scan of the SDS PAGE
gel. Both HG92 and HG90 were found to bind
cathepsin B and L in an activity-dependent manner as this binding
was inhibited by pretreatment with the cathepsin inhibitor GB111-NH2. The smaller size of HG92 was more potent than HG90, and resulted in cleaner detectable bands probably due
to the smearing of the large HG90 on the gel (Figure b,c). We evaluated
cell permeability and selectivity toward cellular cathepsins by a
direct labeling assay in which the Cy5-labeled IN-ABPs were added
to the growth media of intact NIH-3T3 cells for 24 h, then cell lysates
were analyzed by in-gel fluorescence. Encouragingly, both Cy5-labeled
IN-ABPs tested showed high cell permeability and selective cathepsin
binding with a detectable molecular weight shift of the probe-cathepsin
complex as expected from the large weight of the probes (marked with
asterisk, Figure d).
We further generated a PEGylated Cy5 G3 IN-ABP 22 (HG93) that bound recombinant cathepsins very weakly making
it difficult to detect the cathepsin binding in intact cells because
of the probes’ resolution on gel, thus HG93 was
neglected (Figure S3). All together our
in vitro testing revealed suitable selectivity and potency of both HG92 and HG90 IN-ABPs to progress to in vivo
imaging studies.Prior to in vivo testing we assessed cellular
cytotoxicity of the
PAMAM dendrimeric compounds by a methylene blue cell viability assay.
We found that the IN-ABPs, HG90 and HG92 were not toxic, thus, these compounds were selected for in vivo
studies. Nevertheless, two compounds with multiple free amines, HG87 and HG82, and two of the acetylated compounds, HG99 and HG86, caused 15–35% reduced viability
in the highest concentration of 10 μM after 48 h. Altogether,
most of the compounds had negligible toxicity to the cells in the
concentration range tested (Figure S4).We then set out to investigate the CT imaging capabilities of the
probes in tumor-bearing mice. We selected the two Cy5 IN-ABPs, G1
and G3, HG92 and HG90, together with their
respective controls HG31 and HG99 lacking
the targeting moiety. Prior to the CT analysis we explored the pharmacokinetics
of the IN-ABP exploiting their fluorescent signal by noninvasive optical
imaging to better time the CT scans. Following intravenous IN-ABP
injections to tumor bearing mice, the fluorescent compounds rapidly
circulated throughout the animal and high fluorescent signals could
be seen in virtually all tissues, including the tumors (Figure a,b). The G1 IN-ABP, HG92, produced a clear tumor-specific signal that could be
detected 4 h post injection, on average, as a result of sufficient
tumor accumulation and partial clearance of the nonbound probe. This
specific tumor signal increased over time and reached a maximum at
6–8 h post injection. Because of the covalent nature of the
targeted IN-ABP a significant amount was retained in the tumor even
24 h post injection. As expected, the nontargeted contrast agent analog, HG31, only slightly accumulated in the tumor, most likely
due to the EPR effect, as could be seen by the tumor fluorescence
quantification (Figure a). Additionally, the G3 IN-ABP, HG90, showed similar
kinetics to HG92 with a specific signal detected at 5
h post injection. Moreover, the nontargeted G3 contrast agent, HG99 showed monoexponential decay (Figure b). On the basis of these results, the optimal
time for the CT scans was determined to be 5 and 24 h following administration
of the probes.
Figure 3
Noninvasive optical imaging of mice tumors. (a) Noninvasive
fluorescent
images of mice injected with Cy5-labeled G1 IN-ABP HG92 (top) and control HG31 (bottom). Left panel, tumor
bearing mice were prescanned for fluorescence, and at indicated times
post iv injection of compounds. Tumor fluorescence marked with white
circles. Right panel, average signal to background fluorescence within
tumors plotted over time. (b) Noninvasive fluorescent images and quantification
from HG90, Cy5-labeled G3 IN-ABP, and control HG99 in tumors was acquired similarly. Tumor fluorescence is seen within
the black circles. Fluorescent images were acquired with an in vivo
imaging system (IVIS) equipped with a 630/690 nm excitation/emission
filters, fluorescent scale bar is depicted on right of images in units
of (p/sec/cm2/sr)/(μW/cm2).
Noninvasive optical imaging of micetumors. (a) Noninvasive
fluorescent
images of mice injected with Cy5-labeled G1 IN-ABPHG92 (top) and control HG31 (bottom). Left panel, tumor
bearing mice were prescanned for fluorescence, and at indicated times
post iv injection of compounds. Tumor fluorescence marked with white
circles. Right panel, average signal to background fluorescence within
tumors plotted over time. (b) Noninvasive fluorescent images and quantification
from HG90, Cy5-labeled G3 IN-ABP, and control HG99 in tumors was acquired similarly. Tumor fluorescence is seen within
the black circles. Fluorescent images were acquired with an in vivo
imaging system (IVIS) equipped with a 630/690 nm excitation/emission
filters, fluorescent scale bar is depicted on right of images in units
of (p/sec/cm2/sr)/(μW/cm2).The use of iodine compounds as
X-ray CT contrast agents is challenging
since both tissue and iodine attenuates the CT beam similarly, thus
clinically, extremely high amounts of iodine are administered to gain
contrast.[7] Here we set out to determine
whether the CT scanner is capable of detecting tumor protease activity
in vivo using relative low doses of our IN-ABPs. Additionally, we
tested whether the covalent nature of the IN-ABPs was advantageous
over the nontargeted controls. In our setting, tumor-bearing mice
were scanned by CT prior to compound injection and again 5 and 24
h post administration as suggested by the optical imaging experiments.
The CT iodine signal was optimized relative to soft tissue by adjusting
the setup from a 0.2 mm aluminum filter, a tube voltage of 40 kVp
and 500 mA to 60 kVp and 350 mAs with a 0.5 mm aluminum filter. This
setting enables detection of small amounts of iodine in tissue since
a higher fraction and total number of photons with energies between
33 keV and ∼45 keV, just above iodine’s K-edge (33.2
keV), reach the detector. The scanner equipped with 64 detectors was
used for all scans to detect the iodine signal, enabling detection
of a faint signal from the tumors even 5 h post injection of the IN-ABPs,
using only 0.5 mg/mouse equivalent iodine (∼20 mg/kg). Nevertheless,
at the 5 h scan the iodine was still distributed throughout the body
making it difficult to distinguish the tumor from the body, Figure S5. Representative images of CT scans
obtained 24h post IN-ABP injection (G3-HG90 and G1-HG92) revealed detectable accumulation in the tumor, liver,
and stomach. While the tumor was clearly detected in the IN-ABP-injected
mice it was barely detected in nontargeted G1-HG31 and G3-HG99 treated mice, Figure a,b. The signal in the tumor was due to retention of
the probes because of both high cathepsin activity and the EPR effect.
Liver signals most likely resulted from the physiological high cathepsin
activity together with the compound’s retention due to the
liver detoxification function. The stomach signal, however, resulted
from the combined high cathepsin activity and signals from the chow
that was also detected in the preinjection scans. While other organs
were visible by CT, the IN-ABPs accumulation in the tumor enabled
its clear detection.
Figure 4
In vivo X-ray computed tomography. (a,b) Representative
sagittal
images of tumor-bearing mice that were scanned for CT contrast by
a micro CT prior to and 24 h post iv injection of IN-ABP HG92, HG90 and respective controls HG31, HG99. Tumors placed
on the back of the mice are marked by colored circles. Gold color
marks contrast from iodine, gray color marks contrast from bone. (c,d)
Differential CT tumor contrast in HU (above background at t = 0), left, and normalized to each tumor mass [80–160
mg], right, of IN-ABP HG92, HG90 and respective
control HG31, and HG99. Red bars represent
targeted IN-ABPs, blue bars represent control compounds.
In vivo X-ray computed tomography. (a,b) Representative
sagittal
images of tumor-bearing mice that were scanned for CT contrast by
a micro CT prior to and 24 h post iv injection of IN-ABPHG92, HG90 and respective controls HG31, HG99. Tumors placed
on the back of the mice are marked by colored circles. Gold color
marks contrast from iodine, gray color marks contrast from bone. (c,d)
Differential CT tumor contrast in HU (above background at t = 0), left, and normalized to each tumor mass [80–160
mg], right, of IN-ABPHG92, HG90 and respective
control HG31, and HG99. Red bars represent
targeted IN-ABPs, blue bars represent control compounds.Quantitative analysis of the tumor CT contrast
was presented as
the increase in Hounsfield Units (HU) above baseline (Differential
HU), Figure c,d left,
and relative to tumor mass, Differential HU/Tumor mass, Figure c,d on the right. These presentations
indicate that tumor accumulation of the targeted IN-ABP, G3-HG90 and G1-HG92, are higher than their nontargeted analogs, G3-HG99 and G1-HG31. Nevertheless, the difference
in HU of targeted versus control compounds became significant only
in the 24 h G3-HG90 scans where sufficient accumulation
of the heavily iodinated probe occurred. In the G1-HG92 scans, more probe accumulated than its control though the difference
was not significant most likely because of the lower iodine content
of the probe, Figure c,d. We assume that more G1-HG92 accumulates in the
tumor than G3-HG90, however, the larger number of iodine
atoms in G3-HG90 results in similar CT contrasts of these
IN-ABPs.Tumors from injected animals were also analyzed by
fluorescent
microscopy. Significantly enhanced Cy5 fluorescence was detected in
tumors from targeted IN-ABP injected mice, G3-HG90 and G1-HG92, versus their controls, G3-HG99 and G1-HG31. This increase in fluorescence is a reflection of
the high levels of IN-ABP bound to the excessive amount of activity
cysteine cathepsin in the tumors (Figure ). These data demonstrate an excellent correlation
with the CT in vivo data.
Figure 5
Tumors from animals 24 h post injection with
indicated compounds
were frozen in OCT, sectioned, and stained with DAPI. Representative
fluorescent scans acquired with a confocal microscope are presented,
red- Cy5 from IN-ABPs, blue- DAPI. High Cy5 fluorescence was detected
only in tumors from targeted IN-ABPs HG92 and HG90.
Tumors from animals 24 h post injection with
indicated compounds
were frozen in OCT, sectioned, and stained with DAPI. Representative
fluorescent scans acquired with a confocal microscope are presented,
red- Cy5 from IN-ABPs, blue- DAPI. High Cy5 fluorescence was detected
only in tumors from targeted IN-ABPs HG92 and HG90.While the covalent nature of the
IN-ABP led to prolonged retention
of the IN-ABPs within tissues that resulted in detected CT signals,
it also enabled biochemical analysis of in vivo labeled tissue. We
analyzed the tumor tissues as well as livers, kidneys, and spleens
from IN-ABP (HG92) and nontargeted (HG31) treated mice. Tissue lysates were prepared and separated by SDS-PAGE
that was scanned for Cy5 fluorescence. Pronounced labeling of tissue
cathepsins was detected from the IN-ABP-cathepsin enzyme complex revealing
differences in cathepsin B, L, and S activities within the different
organs as seen by the indicative cathepsin bands between 22 and 35
kDa. As expected, no cathepsin labeling was detected in the nontargeted
compound-treated mice, Figure S6.The data shown here are consistent with the increasing ability
of IN-ABP to label tumors that express elevated levels of cathepsin
activity; this theme may be extended for new classes of targeted X-ray
contrast agents targeted to different proteases. A disadvantage of
the IN-ABP methodology is the lack of signal amplification, together
with the low sensitivity of CT scanners, making signal detection challenging.
Nevertheless, the very high levels of cathepsins within tumors enable
sufficient accumulation of the targeted contrast agent, which is sufficient
for tumor detection by CT.In conclusion, we developed a new
class of ABPs attached to iodinated
polymeric dendrimers for detection of solid tumors using X-ray CT.
Initially, we synthesized and characterized a library of IN-ABPs and
tested them in vitro. We then studied the in vivo pharmacokinetics
by optical imaging that set the basis for the in vivo kinetic CT imaging
experiment. Specific accumulation of the IN-ABPs enabled molecular
CT imaging due to their covalent nature, showing the increase in specific
signals detecting cathepsin activity. Additionally, the signal detection
was done using dramatically low iodine concentrations of approximately
20 mgI/kg, as compared to clinically used iodine containing reagents
that are used at approximately 300 mgI/kg.[47] The technique brought here describes a methodology that after further
development may have extensive clinical diagnosis applications for
detecting cancer and other pathologies with elevated cathepsin activity
such as vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques with commonly used CT instruments.
Authors: Patrick M Winter; Himanshu P Shukla; Shelton D Caruthers; Michael J Scott; Ralph W Fuhrhop; J David Robertson; Patrick J Gaffney; Samuel A Wickline; Gregory M Lanza Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Yanjun Fu; Danute E Nitecki; David Maltby; Gerhard H Simon; Kirill Berejnoi; Hans-Juergen Raatschen; Benjamin M Yeh; David M Shames; Robert C Brasch Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.774
Authors: Galia Blum; Stefanie R Mullins; Kinneret Keren; Marko Fonovic; Christopher Jedeszko; Mark J Rice; Bonnie F Sloane; Matthew Bogyo Journal: Nat Chem Biol Date: 2005-08-14 Impact factor: 15.040
Authors: Melissa L Hill; Ian R Corbin; Ronald B Levitin; Weiguo Cao; James G Mainprize; Martin J Yaffe; Gang Zheng Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2010-08-17 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Dipanjan Pan; Todd A Williams; Angana Senpan; John S Allen; Mike J Scott; Patrick J Gaffney; Samuel A Wickline; Gregory M Lanza Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2009-10-28 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Gang Ren; Galia Blum; Martijn Verdoes; Hongguang Liu; Salahuddin Syed; Laura E Edgington; Olivier Gheysens; Zheng Miao; Han Jiang; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Matthew Bogyo; Zhen Cheng Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jessica C Hsu; Lenitza M Nieves; Oshra Betzer; Tamar Sadan; Peter B Noël; Rachela Popovtzer; David P Cormode Journal: Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol Date: 2020-05-22
Authors: Mehdi Azizi; Hassan Dianat-Moghadam; Roya Salehi; Masoud Farshbaf; Disha Iyengar; Samaresh Sau; Arun K Iyer; Hadi Valizadeh; Mohammad Mehrmohammadi; Michael R Hamblin Journal: Adv Funct Mater Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 18.808
Authors: Shatadru Chakravarty; Jeremy M L Hix; Kaitlyn A Wiewiora; Maximilian C Volk; Elizabeth Kenyon; Dorela D Shuboni-Mulligan; Barbara Blanco-Fernandez; Matti Kiupel; Jennifer Thomas; Lorenzo F Sempere; Erik M Shapiro Journal: Nanoscale Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 7.790
Authors: Salim Si-Mohamed; Daniel Bar-Ness; Monica Sigovan; Valérie Tatard-Leitman; David P Cormode; Pratap C Naha; Philippe Coulon; Lucie Rascle; Ewald Roessl; Michal Rokni; Ami Altman; Yoad Yagil; Loic Boussel; Philippe Douek Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2018-10-17