High concentrations of supplemented growth factors can cause oversaturation and adverse effects in in vitro and in vivo studies, though these supraphysiological concentrations are often required due to the low stability of growth factors. Here we demonstrate the stabilization of TGF-β1 and BMP4 using supramolecular polymers. Inspired by heparan sulfate, sulfonated peptides were presented on a supramolecular polymer to allow for noncovalent binding to growth factors in solution. After mixing with excipient molecules, both TGF-β1 and BMP4 were shown to have a prolonged half-life compared to the growth factors free in solution. Moreover, high cellular response was measured by a luciferase assay, indicating that TGF-β1 remained highly active upon binding to the supramolecular assembly. The results demonstrate that significant lower concentrations of growth factors can be used when supramolecular polymers bearing growth factor binding moieties are implemented. This approach can also be exploited in hydrogel systems to control growth factor release.
High concentrations of supplemented growth factors can cause oversaturation and adverse effects in in vitro and in vivo studies, though these supraphysiological concentrations are often required due to the low stability of growth factors. Here we demonstrate the stabilization of TGF-β1 and BMP4 using supramolecular polymers. Inspired by heparan sulfate, sulfonated peptides were presented on a supramolecular polymer to allow for noncovalent binding to growth factors in solution. After mixing with excipient molecules, both TGF-β1 and BMP4 were shown to have a prolonged half-life compared to the growth factors free in solution. Moreover, high cellular response was measured by a luciferase assay, indicating that TGF-β1 remained highly active upon binding to the supramolecular assembly. The results demonstrate that significant lower concentrations of growth factors can be used when supramolecular polymers bearing growth factor binding moieties are implemented. This approach can also be exploited in hydrogel systems to control growth factor release.
Growth factors are
involved in many cellular processes such as
cell survival, proliferation, differentiation, and migration.[1,2] In the extracellular matrix (ECM), sulfated glycosaminoglycans (GAGs)
present on proteoglycans are known to bind various heparan sulfate/heparin-binding
growth factors that mediate cellular delivery and subsequent intracellular
signaling.[3] The negatively charged sulfates
and carboxylic acids present on, for example, heparan sulfate interact
via electrostatic interactions with positively charged regions, which
are rich in lysine and arginine, within the growth factor.[4] Depending on the growth factor, hydrogen bonding
and hydrophobic effects can have a significant contribution as well.[5] Immobilization of growth factors to heparan sulfate
results in protection from degradation and inactivation. Moreover,
the local high concentration as a result of this binding allows for
multivalent interactions, contributing to spatiotemporal presentation.
In contrast, for in vitro and in vivo studies, growth factors are typically administrated in supraphysiological
concentrations due to a lack of controlled delivery, slow diffusion,
and low stability over time, leading to suboptimal conditions and
possibly adverse effects.[6] In addition,
growth factors are usually diluted in high concentrations of bovine
serum albumin (BSA) to enhance the half-life. However, BSA binds to
several other components as well and is known to influence both metabolic
and biosynthetic processes in cells.[7] Therefore,
there is an increasing need to develop scaffolds capable of binding
growth factors, maintaining their activity, and presenting the growth
factors to the cell in a spatiotemporal manner.To improve the
efficiency of growth factor presentation compared
to soluble supplementation, growth factors can be immobilized by either
physical entrapment in a hydrogel system[8] or by noncovalent[9] or covalent[10] conjugation.[11] To
elucidate the role of participating functional groups in protein binding
and to investigate the sustained release of growth factors, heparin-based
systems,[12] polymers,[13] monosaccharides,[14] synthetic
peptides,[15,16] multicomponent assemblies,[17] and molecules[18] have been developed
that have different degrees of sulfates and sulfonates. Moreover,
synthetic peptides that specifically target certain growth factors
are also established.[19] Although successful
conjugation strategies have been developed to covalently attach growth
factors to polymers,[10] care must be taken
considering the fact that conformational changes and inactivation
are likely to occur. Another consideration to take into account is
that growth factor receptor presentation might be hampered when the
binding is too strong or encapsulation too efficient. Therefore, tuning
the number of noncovalent interactions might be beneficial to enhance
both growth factor stabilization and cell receptor binding.Supramolecular polymers are proposed to serve as excellent ECM
mimics since their self-assembly of monomers, which is driven by noncovalent
interactions, gives rise to fibrous structures with an inherent dynamic
nature closely resembling ECM properties.[20] Because of their tunability, functional monomers can be simply coassembled
with scaffolding monomers to arrive at multicomponent functional biomaterials.
Supramolecular polymers based on peptide amphiphiles have previously
been shown to bind the growth factor TGF-β1 by a short peptide
sequence (HSNGLPL)[21] and several other
growth factors by a sulfated monosaccharide.[14] Inspired by heparan sulfate, which is able to bind different growth
factors by distinct binding affinities,[5] the short synthetic tetrapeptide discovered by Maynard and Hubbell[22] also serves as an attractive candidate. This
peptide displays the three functional groups of heparan sulfate and
heparin, that is, sulfates, carboxylates, and hydroxyl groups, and
can be easily synthesized and incorporated into artificial systems.
Moreover, they showed the importance of a carboxylate between the
two sulfated tyrosines compared to a solely negatively charged peptide
on the binding to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). In addition,
Kim and Kiick investigated the influence of more sulfated tyrosines
included in this peptide and confirmed that this shorter peptide has
the highest binding affinity to VEGF and heparin binding peptides
due to a reduced steric hindrance or repulsion upon binding.[23]Rather than investigating the sustained
release of growth factors
from hydrogels, we here sought to elucidate the stabilization effects
of excipient molecules in the diluted state using self-assembled ureidopyrimidinone
(UPy) based supramolecular polymers. The self-complementary UPy self-assembles
into fibrillar 1D fibers by first dimerization due to quadruple hydrogen
bonding and subsequent lateral stacking guided by both hydrophobic
effects and hydrogen bonding between the urea groups.[24] To equip the supramolecular polymers with growth factor
binding sites, UPypolymers were coassembled with a sulfonated peptide
to prolong the stability of transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1)
and bone morphogenic protein-4 (BMP4). The stability of both growth
factors was assessed at 37 °C with different scaffolds (i.e.,
excipients) in solution. Upon incorporation of sulfonated peptides
in a supramolecular fiber, noncovalent protein interactions enhance
growth factor stability over physical adsorption. As a proof-of-principle,
cell experiments were carried out with TGF-β1 sensitive cells
to assess whether the stabilized TGF-β1 was still able to induce
a cellular response, that is, the conversion of active TGF-β1
into luciferase.
Experimental Section
Materials
Chemicals and reagents were purchased from Sigma and Novabiochem
and used as received unless otherwise indicated. (S)-Fmoc-phenylalanine-4-sulfonic
acid was purchased from PepTech Corporation. Peptides and conjugates
were purified on a C18 automated column with a gradient of 5 to 100%
acetonitrile in water using a Buchi Reveleris system. Recombinant
human TGF-β1 (HEK293 derived) was purchased from Peprotech and
Recombinant humanBMP-4 (carrier free) from R&D systems. Enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assays (ELISA) were performed using human TGF-β1
Quantikine ELISA kits or humanBMP-4 Quantikine ELISA kits from R&D
systems. Luciferase assay kit was purchased from Promega. Phosphate
buffered saline (PBS) tablets were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (pH
7.20–7.60). Trypsin-EDTA solution was purchased from Sigma
(0.5 g/L porcine trypsin and 0.2 g/L EDTA in Hank’s Balanced
Salt Solution with phenol red).
Methods
Analytical
Techniques
Reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography–mass
spectrometry (RP-HPLC–MS) was performed using a Shimadzu instrument.
The amount of active TGF-β1 bound to the ELISA kit was assessed
by measuring the absorbance at 450 nm, with a wavelength correction
set to 570 nm, using a microplate reader from Safire II. Ultraviolet–visible
(UV–vis) spectrophotometry was performed on a Jasco V-650 instrument.
The relative amount of luciferase expressed by cells was evaluated
by measuring the luminescence intensity using a microplate reader
from Synergy HT.
Reconstitution
of TGF-β1 and BMP4
TGF-β1 and BMP4 were reconstituted
according to manufacturer’s protocol. Briefly, TGF-β1
was dissolved in 10 mM citric acid, whereas BMP4 was dissolved in
4 mM HCl. After 30 min, the growth factors were aliquoted in 0.1%
BSA in PBS, or PBS (BSA free) at a 5 μg/mL concentration and
stored at −20 °C before usage.
Synthesis
of Sulfated Tyrosine for SP1
Fmoc-Tyr(tBu)–OH (4.35
mmol) was deprotected in a cleavage cocktail containing TFA, TIS,
and water (95:2.5:2.5) for 2 h at room temperature. Subsequently,
the TFA was partly evaporated, precipitated in cold hexane/ether (1:1),
incubated for 15 min at −20 °C, and centrifuged for 10
min at 20k RPM. The supernatant was removed and the pellet was redissolved
in water/acetonitrile, and after lyophilization a white solid was
obtained in 91.1% yield (1.60 g). LC–MS: Mwcalc = 403.43 g/mol, m/zobs = 404.08 [M + H]+. Subsequently, Fmoc-Tyr(OH)–OH
(6.63 mmol) was dissolved in DMF and stirred under argon atmosphere
for 10 min before sulfur trioxide pyridine complex (19.88 mmol, 3
equiv) was added. The reaction was stirred for 2 h under argon atmosphere,
followed by cooling to 0 °C and the slow addition of cold saturated
sodium bicarbonate (100 mL, 0 °C) under vigorously stirring the
solution. Subsequently, tetrabutylammonium hydrogensulfate (9.94 mmol,
1.5 equiv) was added and the pH was lowered to pH 5/6 by the slow
addition of cold 0.1 M citric acid (150 mL, 0 °C). The solution
was extracted three times with chloroform, and the organic layer was
evaporated. The product was redissolved in water/acetonitrile pH 8
(by addition of 1 M NaOH) and lyophilized twice to obtain a white
solid in 82.9% yield (4.0 g). LC–MS: Mwcalc = 482.48 g/mol (Fmoc-Y(SO3)–OH), Mwcalc = 242.47 g/mol (N+Bu4), m/zobs = 242.42 [NBu4]+, 482.58 [Fmoc-Y(SO3)–OH]−.
Synthesis
of Sulfated Serine for SP2
Fmoc-Ser(tBu)–OH (13.08
mmol) was deprotected in a cleavage cocktail containing TFA, TIS and
water (95:2.5:2.5) for 4 h at room temperature. Subsequently, the
TFA was evaporated and the residue was redissolved in water/acetonitrile
and lyophilized. A yellow oil was obtained in 116% yield (4.96 g)
with traces of solvents. LC–MS: Mwcalc = 327.33 g/mol, m/zobs = 328.00 [M + H]+. Subsequently, Fmoc-Ser(OH)–OH
(9.17 mmol) was dissolved in DMF and stirred under argon atmosphere
for 15 min before sulfur trioxide pyridine complex (27.50 mmol, 3
equiv) was added. The reaction was stirred for 3 h under argon atmosphere,
followed by cooling to 0 °C and the slow addition of cold saturated
sodium bicarbonate (60 mL, 0 °C) under vigorously stirring the
solution. Subsequently, tetrabutylammonium hydrogensulfate (13.75
mmol, 1.5 equiv) was added and the pH was lowered to pH 5/6 by the
slow addition of cold 0.1 M citric acid (10 mL, 0 °C). The solution
was extracted three times with chloroform, and the organic layer was
evaporated. The product was redissolved in water/acetonitrile pH 8
(by addition of 1 M NaOH) and lyophilized twice to obtain an oil in
109% yield (6.5 g) with traces of solvent. LC–MS: Mwcalc = 406.39 g/mol (Fmoc-S(SO3)–OH),
Mwcalc = 242.47 g/mol (N+Bu4), m/zobs = 242.33
[NBu4]+, 406.33 [Fmoc-Y(SO3)–OH]−.
Synthesis
of Peptide Derivatives UF, SP1, SP2, and SP3
GSYDYG (UF),
GSY(OSO3–)DY(OSO3–)G (SP1), GSS(OSO3–)DS(OSO3–)G (SP2), and GSF(SO3H)DF(SO3H)G (SP3) peptides were manually prepared using solid phase peptide
synthesis (SPPS), Fmoc chemistry, and Rink amide MBHA resin. The 250
μmol resin was allowed to swell in NMP for 1 h. Subsequently,
the resin was washed with NMP (6×) and deprotected twice with
a 20% piperidine solution in NMP for 5 min. The impurities were washed
away with NMP (6×) and a cocktail of the desired amino acid was
prepared of 200 mM amino acid, 1600 mM DIPEA, and 0.4 M HBTU in NMP
(2:1:1, 5:2.5:2.5 mL). The cocktail was added to the resin and coupled
for 30 min at room temperature. This cycle of washing-deprotection-washing-coupling
was repeated for every amino acid. After the last amino acid was coupled,
the remaining Fmoc protecting group was removed and the resin was
washed extensively with NMP and DCM, followed by drying. Cleavage
of the resin and amino acid protecting groups was performed in TFA/H2O/TIS (94:2.5:2.5) for 2 h on ice (except for SP3 and UF,
which was 4 h at room temperature). Subsequently, the peptides were
precipitated in 20% cold hexane/diethyl ether, incubated for 15 min
at −20 °C, and centrifuged for 10 min at 20k RPM. The
supernatant was removed and the pellet was redissolved in water and
lyophilized. The peptides (except UF) were purified using RP column
chromatography using a gradient of 5–100% acetonitrile in water
yielding the peptides in about 10% yield (98% yield for UF). SP1 and
SP2 were defined as having about 1.5 sulfates present based on LC–MS
interpretation. LC–MS: MWcalc UF = 659.65 g/mol, m/zobs UF = 660.42 [M + H]+, MWcalc SP1 = 817.65 g/mol, m/zobs SP1 = 818.25 [M-H]−, 408.75 [M-2H]−, and 738.33 [M-SO3]−, MWcalc SP2 = 665.56 g/mol, m/zobs SP2 = 666.33 [M-H]−, and 586.50 [M-SO3]−, MWcalc SP3 = 787.77 g/mol, m/zobs SP3 = 786.67 [M-H]−, and 393.00 [M-2H]2–.
Synthesis
of Supramolecular Peptide Conjugate UPy-SP3
The UPy-COOH
precursor molecule was synthesized as previously reported.[25] The peptide resin (31.0 μmole) was allowed
to swell for 1 h in DMF. Meanwhile, the reaction mixture containing
UPy-COOH (60 mg, 52.7 μmol, 1.7 equiv), HATU (43.4 μmol,
1.4 equiv), DIPEA (93.0 μmol, 3 equiv), and 4 mL of DMF was
preactivated for 30 min. Subsequently, the preactivated reaction mixture
was added to the peptide resin and agitated overnight at room temperature.
Afterward, the resin was washed with DMF (6×) and DCM (6×)
and cleaved from the resin using a cocktail mixture containing TFA/TIS/H2O
(94:2.5:2.5) for 4 h at room temperature. The UPy-peptide was precipitated
in cold 50% hexane/ether, incubated for 15 min at −20 °C
and centrifuged for 10 min at 20k RPM. The supernatant was removed,
the pellet was redissolved in 10% acetonitrile/water and the solvent
was lyophilized. Purification with RP column chromatography using
a gradient of 5–100% acetonitrile in water yielded in pure
UPy-SP3 (10.1 mg, 17.1% yield). LC–MS: MWcalc = 1908.14 g/mol, m/zobs = 954.4 [M-2H]2–.
ELISA
Experiments
Samples were dissolved in PBS in the right concentration.
Because of the undefined state of both SP1 and SP2, a molecular weight
of 738.70 (1OSO3–) and 626.03 g/mol (1.5OSO3–) was used, respectively. The UPy samples
were prepared by heating the solid dissolved in PBS to 72 °C
for 1 h, and UPy-SP3 was incorporated by an additional incubation
step of 15 min at 45 °C. Annealing overnight at room temperature
resulted in self-assembled polymers with UV patterns similar to reference
spectra.[26] A stock of every condition was
prepared by the addition of TGF-β1 (0.8 μL for 1 mL to
obtain a 4 ng/mL stock, or 0.5 μL for 1 mL to obtain a 2.5 ng/mL
stock). For each condition, 100 μL was pipetted into a 96-well
plate (in duplicate or triplicate for each time point), incubated
at 37 °C with 5% CO2, removed at indicated time points,
and stored at −20 °C until the ELISA experiment was conducted.
The ELISA experiments were performed following the manufacturer’s
protocol. Briefly, standard or sample was incubated for 2 h, washed
four times with wash buffer, incubated with growth factor specific
conjugate for 2 h, washed four times with wash buffer, and incubated
for 30 min with substrate solution. Then the reaction was quenched
with stop solution. The optical density was measured at 450 nm with
a wavelength correction set to 570 nm.
Cell
Culture
Humanfibrosarcoma cells (HT1080, kindly provided
by Marie-José Goumans), transfected with (CAGA)9 MLP-luc using FuGENE6,[27] were cultured
in DMEM (Gibco) supplemented with 1% penicillin/streptomycin (Lonza),
10% fetal bovine serum (Bovogen), and 1% nonessential amino acids.
Cells were routinely cultured at 37 °C and 5% CO2.
Medium was changed every 2–3 days and passaged at 80–90%
confluency. This cell line expresses luciferase upon exposure to extracellular
TGF-β1, which is regulated via Smad3/Smad4 signaling and binding
to the CAGA box located in the plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1)
gene.
Luciferase
Assay
HT1080 cells were seeded at a density of 50 000
cell/cm2 in a 12-well plate and allowed to adhere overnight
at 37 °C and 5% CO2. The excipient molecules were
dissolved in DMEM (containing 1% pen/strep) in the correct concentration.
The UPy samples were prepared by heating the solution to 72 °C
for 1 h, and UPy-SP3 was incorporated by an additional incubation
step of 15 min at 45 °C. Annealing overnight at room temperature
resulted in self-assembled polymers with similar UV patterns. The
next day, medium was replaced by serum-free DMEM supplemented with
1% pen/strep and incubated for 7 h. A stock of every condition was
prepared by the addition of TGF-β1 (0.8 μL for 1 mL to
obtain a 4 ng/mL stock, or 0.5 μL for 1 mL to obtain a 2.5 ng/mL
stock). Four hours before cell seeding, 1.2 mL of the stock solutions
was pipetted (in triplicate) in a plain 12 wells plate and incubated
at 37 °C with 5% CO2 to yield into the 4 h preincubated
samples. Subsequently, either 1 mL fresh stock was added onto the
cells or 1 mL of the 4 h preincubated samples (in triplicate). Cells
were then incubated an additional 19 h, lysed, and the luciferase
expression was measured (in duplicate of the triplicate) according
to the manufacturer’s protocol (Promega). Relative luciferase
intensities were normalized for the DNA content using the CyQUANT
cell proliferation assay (Invitrogen).
Results
and Discussion
Selection
of Peptide Derivative
The stability of the growth factor
TGF-β1 was studied over time, and heparin peptide mimics were
selected to assess their binding. TGF-β1 is known to modulate
behavior of many cell types including immune cells. Furthermore, altered
signaling is associated with several disorders such as cancer and
fibrosis.[28,29] TGF-β1 is synthesized as an inactive
precursor, which is activated upon cleavage from the ECM by proteases
followed by acidic conditions to remove the latent TGF-β binding
protein.[30] We assessed the stability of
activated TGF-β1 over time at 37 °C with an enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) revealing full degradation within 5 h
(Figure A, PBS condition,
half-life of about 0.4 h). Then four peptide derivatives, based on
the tetrapeptide of Maynard and Hubbell (here named SP1),[20] were synthesized and assessed for their ability
to stabilize TGF-β1 (Figure ). In this small library, unfunctionalized peptide
(UF) was included to investigate the absence of the sulfate groups.
Sulfated peptide 2 (SP2) lacks aromatic rings hence hydrophobic effects
as compared to sulfated peptide 1 (SP1), and finally, since sulfate
groups are labile, a more stable sulfonated peptide (SP3) was included.
Figure 1
Peptide
derivatives were assessed on their stabilization behavior
on TGF-β1. (A) Optical density of TGF-β1 after incubation
with different peptide derivatives as measured with an ELISA assay.
Sulfonated peptide SP3 showed the highest stabilizing effect (cTGF-β1 ≈ 4 ng/mL, cpeptide = 100 μM, cBSA ≈
0.8 μg/mL, N = 2, error bars indicate standard
deviation). (B) Molecular structures of the peptide derivatives assuming
a pH of 7.4.
Peptide
derivatives were assessed on their stabilization behavior
on TGF-β1. (A) Optical density of TGF-β1 after incubation
with different peptide derivatives as measured with an ELISA assay.
Sulfonated peptide SP3 showed the highest stabilizing effect (cTGF-β1 ≈ 4 ng/mL, cpeptide = 100 μM, cBSA ≈
0.8 μg/mL, N = 2, error bars indicate standard
deviation). (B) Molecular structures of the peptide derivatives assuming
a pH of 7.4.The four peptides were
synthesized with manual solid phase peptide
synthesis using sulfated or sulfonated amino acids. Because of the
acid sensitive sulfate groups,[31] both SP1
and SP2 were difficult to obtain in a fully defined state (about 1.5
sulfate groups instead of 2 were obtained). The purified excipient
peptides were mixed with TGF-β1 and incubated for different
time points (Figure A and Supporting Information, Figure S1).
In the ELISA, UF and SP2 showed a low relative absorbance whereas
SP1 and SP3 showed a more enhanced optical density over time. The
lower stabilization effect of SP1 might be due to the labile sulfate
group or the less-defined state of only 1–1.5 sulfate groups
per molecule instead of the maximum of 2, and the presence of more
salt as counterions yielding a slightly lower concentration as intended.
Peptide SP2 and the UF peptide showed similar behavior highlighting
the importance of both a sulfate or sulfonate and an aromatic ring
for TGF-β1 binding. All peptides showed a significant enhancement
of the half-life of TGF-β1, of which SP3 was shown to have the
most pronounced stabilization potential of the peptides studied. Moreover,
increasing or decreasing the concentration of the excipient peptides
has an enhanced or reduced effect, respectively (Supporting Information, Figure S2). In addition, it was shown
that SP1 at 10 μM has a higher stabilizing effect as compared
to heparin. This introductory study indicated that a combination of
hydrophobic effects, hydrogen bonding, and electrostatic effects contribute
to growth factor binding and is concentration dependent.
Implementation
into the Supramolecular Platform
Subsequently, the sulfonated
peptide SP3 was integrated in a UPy-based supramolecular system to
investigate increased local concentration on the stabilization of
TGF-β1. It was previously shown that a subtle change in the
design and coassembly of the supramolecular polymer system has a profound
effect on the internal dynamics of the system.[26] Moreover, the size of the hydration shell of the ethylene
glycol might have an effect on growth factor stabilization as well.
Therefore, three different UPy scaffolding molecules (UPy-OMe, UPy-10k-UPy,
and UPy-20k-UPy, Figure B) were used. SP3 was coupled onto a UPy precursor molecule to allow
incorporation in the scaffolding molecules by coassembly (Figure ). Different percentages
of UPy-SP3 conjugate were coassembled into monovalent UPy stacks and
the stacking behavior was investigated using UV–vis spectroscopy
(Supporting Information, Figure S3). Since
the absorbance of the peptide overlapped with the absorption spectrum
of the UPy, bare SP3 at different concentrations was measured and
subtracted from the corresponding coassembled spectra. The spectra
obtained after subtraction overlapped with each other, thus indicating
the successful incorporation, though increased intensity at 270 nm
for 100% UPy-SP3 was observed. This is probably due to steric and
repulsive effects of the peptides generating smaller and less defined
aggregates at a 100% functionalization. As a result, a coassembly
percentage of 25 mol % was chosen to include in a TGF-β1 stabilization
assay. The three bare UPy scaffolding molecules (i.e., without UPy-SP3)
were also included to investigate the effect of physical adsorption
on TGF-β1 stabilization.
Figure 3
Effect of supramolecular polymers on TGF-β1 stabilization.
(A) Optical density of TGF-β1 after incubation with different
supramolecular excipients as measured with an ELISA assay. Physical
entanglement of TGF-β1 with bare UPy fibers showed a similar
stabilizing effect as compared to SP3, whereas the incorporation of
UPy-SP3 in supramolecular fibers enhanced the stabilization significantly
(cTGF-β1 ≈ 4 ng/mL, cpeptide = 100 μM, cUPy = 400 μM, c25%UPy-SP3 in UPy = 100 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.8 μg/mL, N = 2, error bars indicate standard deviation). (B) Molecular
structures of the excipient molecules. (C) Cartoon representing the
proposed binding of TGF-β1 (orange) to supramolecular polymers
(blue) coassembled with sulfonated peptides (red).
Figure 2
Synthesis of the UPy-SP3 conjugate. The
UPy precursor was coupled
onto the peptide resin, followed by the cleavage of the protecting
groups and the resin (green).
Synthesis of the UPy-SP3 conjugate. The
UPy precursor was coupled
onto the peptide resin, followed by the cleavage of the protecting
groups and the resin (green).
Investigation
of TGF-β1 Stabilization
TGF-β1 was mixed with
preassembled UPy samples with different compositions and incubated
for different time points (Figure , and Supporting Information, Figure S4). The concentration of the functional
epitope was kept constant (cSP3 = cUPy-SP3 = 100 μM) resulting in
a total UPy concentration of 400 μM. All studies were performed
in solution; however, the UPy-10k-UPy excipient formed a thin viscous
layer on the bottom of the well plate indicative of minor gel formation
at a 400 μM concentration. For the bare UPy scaffolds (UPy-OMe,
UPy-10k-UPy, and UPy-20k-UPy), a slightly higher relative absorbance
over time was observed as compared to the reference SP3, probably
due to the four-times higher concentration. Upon incorporating 25
mol % of UPy-SP3 in the different scaffolding monomers, a synergistic
effect was observed, with the highest stabilizing effect of UPy-10k-UPy
scaffold with 25 mol % UPy-SP3 incorporated. The same trend was observed
at lower concentration TGF-β1 (2.5 ng/mL) mixed with 1.6 fold
lower UPy concentration (Supporting Information, Figure S5).Effect of supramolecular polymers on TGF-β1 stabilization.
(A) Optical density of TGF-β1 after incubation with different
supramolecular excipients as measured with an ELISA assay. Physical
entanglement of TGF-β1 with bare UPy fibers showed a similar
stabilizing effect as compared to SP3, whereas the incorporation of
UPy-SP3 in supramolecular fibers enhanced the stabilization significantly
(cTGF-β1 ≈ 4 ng/mL, cpeptide = 100 μM, cUPy = 400 μM, c25%UPy-SP3 in UPy = 100 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.8 μg/mL, N = 2, error bars indicate standard deviation). (B) Molecular
structures of the excipient molecules. (C) Cartoon representing the
proposed binding of TGF-β1 (orange) to supramolecular polymers
(blue) coassembled with sulfonated peptides (red).The binding of TGF-β1 to the excipient molecules
was proposed
to occur via electrostatic interactions to binding sites at the interface
between the TGF-β1 dimers rather than wrapping around the growth
factor based on previous studies[32,33] (Figure C). In contrast,
binding to nonfunctionalized supramolecular polymers might be due
to nonspecific PEG binding or hydrophobic interactions. Importantly,
growth factor binding has a minor influence on the stacking behavior
as shown with UV–vis spectroscopy (Supporting Information, Figure S6). Moreover, it was proposed that due
to the temporal noncovalent interactions between the excipient and
growth factor, dissociation of the growth factor might result in presentation
to the cell receptor (important for in vitro assays)
or prone to conformational changes due to its free occurrence in solution
or adherence to the plastic environment leading to denaturation. Nevertheless,
the results obtained here indicate that the half-life of TGF-β1
was significantly enhanced by binding to the UPy fibers without changing
the fiber organization.
Investigation
of BMP4 Stabilization
To investigate whether the excipient
molecules are also applicable to other growth factors, the stabilization
of bone morphogenic protein-4 (BMP4) was evaluated (Figure , and Supporting Information, Figures S7 and S8). BMP4 plays an important role
in cardiac development during the embryonic stage and it is known
to be upregulated during impaired remodeling of the adult heart.[34,35] Despite being a member of the transforming growth factor beta superfamily
with similarities in secondary structure, binding of BMP4 to heparan
sulfate might occur on different positions compared to TGF-β1.[36] Therefore, excipient binding and stabilization
of BMP4 might be altered. In addition to investigation of the stabilization
of BMP4, also the influence of BSA was evaluated, since supraphysiological
amounts of BSA are typically added to enhance growth factor stability.
All previous experiments were carried out in the presence of BSA.
Here, we investigate the stability of a growth factor both in the
presence and in the absence of BSA. In both cases, with or without
BSA added, growth factor binding by monovalent UPy-OMe functionalized
with 25 mol % UPy-SP3 showed a synergistic effect as compared to the
nonfunctionalized supramolecular polymer (UPy-OMe) and reference SP3,
which remained relatively constant over a few hours (Figure A and B, respectively). Interestingly,
when BSA was added, the relative absorbance of BMP4 after 1 h was
slightly higher than the 0 h sample, probably due to experimental
error or conformational changes of the UPy at 37 °C leading to
more optimal binding hence stabilization. Without BSA, BMP4 has a
low stability, with about six-fold lower initial relative absorbance
as compared to BMP4 containing BSA (cBSA ≈ 0.5 μg/mL, Figure B). This lower concentration could be explained by
the acid treatment necessary to activate BMP4, which most likely degraded
BMP4 much more in the absence of BSA. As a result, BSA has a strong
and short initial stabilization effect which quickly diminishes after
an hour. In contrast, upon addition of the supramolecular platform
after activation, the percentage active BMP4 was better retained.
Therefore, the stability of BMP4 might be further enhanced when the
supramolecular platform would be added during growth factor activation,
that is, acid treatment.
Figure 4
Supramolecular polymers also stabilize BMP4
(A) with BSA (+BSA)
and (B) without BSA (-BSA). Without BSA, BMP4 has a low stability;
however, when mixed with supramolecular polymers and BSA, the activity
of BMP4 was enhanced for several hours (cBMP4 ≈ 2.5 ng/mL, cpeptide = 62.5
μM, cUPy = 250 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.5 μg/mL, error bars indicate
standard deviation, N = 2).
Supramolecular polymers also stabilize BMP4
(A) with BSA (+BSA)
and (B) without BSA (-BSA). Without BSA, BMP4 has a low stability;
however, when mixed with supramolecular polymers and BSA, the activity
of BMP4 was enhanced for several hours (cBMP4 ≈ 2.5 ng/mL, cpeptide = 62.5
μM, cUPy = 250 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.5 μg/mL, error bars indicate
standard deviation, N = 2).
Cellular
Readout of Active TGF-β1
To investigate, as a proof-of-principle,
whether the stabilized TGF-β1 with excipient molecules is still
able to induce cellular responses, HT1080fibrosarcoma cells were
exposed to different conditions. These cells have a luciferase reporter,
which can convert active TGF-β1 into luciferase.[27] The converted amount of luciferase is directly
proportional to the amount of active TGF-β1. Moreover, the luciferase
activity corresponds to the initial concentration of TGF-β1
rather than the concentration during incubation with the cells (Supporting Information, Figures S9 and S10).
For this reason, excipient molecules mixed with TGF-β1 were
preincubated for 4 h prior to cell exposure (2.5 ng/mL TGF-β1,
62.5 μM SP3, and 250 μM UPy, Figure , and Supporting Information, Figures S11 and S12). As expected, a high luciferase activity was
observed when the cells were exposed to fresh TGF-β1 (i.e.,
TGF-β1 addition directly after thawing) and the activity decreased
when TGF-β1 was preincubated before addition to cells (Figure A). Both SP3 and
UPy-10k-UPy showed the highest luciferase activity. However, ELISA
clearly confirmed the presence of more active TGF-β1 when mixed
with UPy excipients (UPy-10k-UPy + 25% UPy-SP3 and 100% UPy-SP3, Figure B). This might be
due to the poly(ethylene glycol) surrounding the fibers, which can
partly shield the TGF-β1 presentation toward cells owing to
their hydration shell.[37] Although the 100%
UPy-SP3 has the same concentration as the reference experiment with
SP3, which should increase the local concentration, a lower cellular
response was observed in contradiction to the ELISA results. Because
of multivalent effects, the binding affinity to the excipient might
be increased, lowering receptor binding availability. Moreover, a
thin layer of gel was observed on the bottom of the well plate (during
preincubation) for the UPy samples, which might contain local higher
growth factor concentration. Though this layer was not transferred
onto the cells, probably some TGF-β1 was lost during this step.
Interestingly, heparin even showed a lower cellular response than
PBS, in corroboration with the ELISA results. The reason that heparin
has no stabilizing effect might be due to a suboptimal sulfate-pattern
present, failing to support TGF-β1 binding. This observation
is supported by a study of Gallagher et al. where heparan sulfate
originating from porcine mucosa was proved to have low binding affinity.[33]
Figure 5
(A) TGF-β1 response after cell incubation in the
form of
luciferase and (B) corresponding optical density of TGF-β1 as
measured with ELISA. In contrast to the cell experiments, the UPy
samples have a slightly higher TGF-β1 optical density as compared
to SP3 indicating that the PEG shell decreases TGF-β1 receptor
presentation (cTGF-β1 ≈
2.5 ng/mL, cpeptide = 62.5 μM, cUPy = 250 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.5 μg/mL, error bars indicate standard deviation,
(A) N = 3, (B) N = 2, (A) data was
corrected for the DNA content).
(A) TGF-β1 response after cell incubation in the
form of
luciferase and (B) corresponding optical density of TGF-β1 as
measured with ELISA. In contrast to the cell experiments, the UPy
samples have a slightly higher TGF-β1 optical density as compared
to SP3 indicating that the PEG shell decreases TGF-β1 receptor
presentation (cTGF-β1 ≈
2.5 ng/mL, cpeptide = 62.5 μM, cUPy = 250 μM, cBSA ≈ 0.5 μg/mL, error bars indicate standard deviation,
(A) N = 3, (B) N = 2, (A) data was
corrected for the DNA content).Taking the results all together, a strong cellular response
was
observed in all cases. However, coassembling the sulfonated peptide
in the supramolecular platform (UPy-10k-UPy + 25% UPy-SP3) did not
increase the luciferase activity as compared to the bare supramolecular
polymer (UPy-10k-UPy) when TGF-β1 was preincubated for 4 h,
though more active TGF-β1 was detected with ELISA. Probably
the concentration plays an important role, which is in this case close
to receptor saturation levels (Supporting Information, Figure S9), and also the preincubation time could be extended to
induce more differences between the conditions. Further extensive
studies are necessary to find the optimal concentration and incubation
time for these cell experiments.
Conclusion
Materials
based on supramolecular polymers are proposed to be ideal
platforms for mimicking the natural extracellular matrix due to their
dynamic, responsive and adaptable properties. Supramolecular polymers
based on peptide amphiphiles functionalized with bioactive cues were
already proven to be successful in binding growth factors. Here, we
introduced a sulfonated peptide coassembled in ureidopyrimidinone-based
supramolecular polymer platforms for the stabilization of the growth
factor TGF-β1. Different excipient molecules were shown to prolong
the half-life of the growth factor, and proof-of-principle cell experiments
confirmed high cellular response in the form of luciferase, indicating
the maintenance of TGF-β1 activity upon excipient binding. Although
there is a slight difference in cellular read-out and the corresponding
ELISA experiments, maybe due to steric effects of the PEG preventing
optimal cell presentation, all results show a significant stabilization
in all experimental systems. Moreover, it was shown that the excipient
molecules can also be used for the stabilization of other heparan
sulfate binding proteins, as was revealed with BMP4. This approach
can be used to extend the activity of important growth factors but
can also be implemented in hydrogel systems. In hydrogel systems,
the sustained release can be controlled by the binding strength to
the protein and by tuning the physical properties of the hydrogel.
Gaining more control over growth factor concentrations is beneficial
in biomedical applications, for example, in directing specific processes
during different stages of tissue regeneration.
Authors: Patricia Y W Dankers; Thomas M Hermans; Travis W Baughman; Yuko Kamikawa; Roxanne E Kieltyka; Maartje M C Bastings; Henk M Janssen; Nico A J M Sommerdijk; Antje Larsen; Marja J A van Luyn; Anton W Bosman; Eliane R Popa; George Fytas; E W Meijer Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Liming Bian; David Y Zhai; Elena Tous; Reena Rai; Robert L Mauck; Jason A Burdick Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Giulia Morgese; Bas F M de Waal; Silvia Varela-Aramburu; Anja R A Palmans; Lorenzo Albertazzi; E W Meijer Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Silvia Varela-Aramburu; Giulia Morgese; Lu Su; Sandra M C Schoenmakers; Mattia Perrone; Luigi Leanza; Claudio Perego; Giovanni M Pavan; Anja R A Palmans; E W Meijer Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 6.988