Elena Ambrosetti1,2,3, Pamela Paoletti1,4, Alessandro Bosco5, Pietro Parisse1, Denis Scaini1,2, Elda Tagliabue6, Ario de Marco7, Loredana Casalis1. 1. NanoInnovation Lab, Elettra-Sincrotone S.C.p.A., ss 14 km 163.5 in Area Science Park, 34149 Basovizza-Trieste, Italy. 2. PhD School in Nanotechnology, University of Trieste, Piazzale Europa 1, 34127 Trieste, Italy. 3. INSTM-ST Unit, ss 14 km 163.5 in Area Science Park, 34149 Basovizza-Trieste, Italy. 4. International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Via Bonomea 265, 34136 Trieste, Italy. 5. Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Scheeles väg, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Department of Experimental Oncology and Molecular Medicine, Fondazione IRCCS-Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Amadeo 42, 20133 Milano, Italy. 7. Center for Biomedical Sciences and Engineering, University of Nova Gorica, Dvorec Lanthieri, Glavni Trg 8, 5271 Vipava, Slovenia.
Abstract
Early detection of cancer plays a crucial role in disease prognosis. It requires the recognition and quantification of low amounts of specific molecular biomarkers, either free or transported inside nanovesicles, through the development of novel sensitive diagnostic technologies. In this context, we have developed a nanoarray platform for the noninvasive quantification of cancer biomarkers circulating in the bloodstream. The assay is based on molecular manipulation to create functional spots of surface-immobilized binders and differential topography measurements. It is label-free and requires just a single binder per antigen, and when it is implemented with fluorescence labeling/readout, it can be used for epitope mapping. As a benchmark, we focused on the plasma release of Her2 extracellular domain (ECD), a proposed biomarker for the progression of Her2-positive tumors and response to anticancer therapies. By employing robust, easily engineered camelid nanobodies as binders, we measured ECD-Her2 concentrations in the range of the actual clinical cutoff value for Her2-positive breast cancer. The specificity for Her2 detection was preserved when it was measured in parallel with other potential biomarkers, demonstrating a forthcoming implementation of this approach for multiplexing analysis. Prospectively, this nanorarray platform may be customized to allow for the detection of promising new classes of circulating biomarkers, such as exosomes and microvesicles.
Early detection of cancer plays a crucial role in disease prognosis. It requires the recognition and quantification of low amounts of specific molecular biomarkers, either free or transported inside nanovesicles, through the development of novel sensitive diagnostic technologies. In this context, we have developed a nanoarray platform for the noninvasive quantification of cancer biomarkers circulating in the bloodstream. The assay is based on molecular manipulation to create functional spots of surface-immobilized binders and differential topography measurements. It is label-free and requires just a single binder per antigen, and when it is implemented with fluorescence labeling/readout, it can be used for epitope mapping. As a benchmark, we focused on the plasma release of Her2 extracellular domain (ECD), a proposed biomarker for the progression of Her2-positive tumors and response to anticancer therapies. By employing robust, easily engineered camelid nanobodies as binders, we measured ECD-Her2 concentrations in the range of the actual clinical cutoff value for Her2-positive breast cancer. The specificity for Her2 detection was preserved when it was measured in parallel with other potential biomarkers, demonstrating a forthcoming implementation of this approach for multiplexing analysis. Prospectively, this nanorarray platform may be customized to allow for the detection of promising new classes of circulating biomarkers, such as exosomes and microvesicles.
The past decade has
witnessed the development of diagnostic devices
based on diverse physical principles for the highly sensitive, noninvasive,
and fast detection of disease-related biomolecules.[1−3] In this assorted
framework, nanotechnological breakthroughs in terms of integration
and miniaturization of the various bioassays[2] have pushed beyond the limitations of conventional approaches. Notable
examples are miniaturized electrochemical and surface plasmon resonance
(SPR)-based sensors, functional nanoparticles, and protein/DNA nanoarrays
that can offer enhanced precision and significantly faster measurements
than those achieved with current technologies.[4−7] Miniaturized, integrated, and
multiplexed strategies would be of particular utility when moving
in the direction of noninvasive “liquid biopsy”, i.e.,
the detection of reliable biomarkers (proteins, nucleic acids, nano-
and microvesicles, and circulating cells) directly in the bloodstream
of patients to monitor early stage tumor occurrence as well as its
evolution during therapy.We propose here an atomic force microscopy
(AFM)-based miniaturized
bioaffinity test for the quantification of blood-circulating protein
biomarkers. This approach capitalizes on other studies performed by
our group[1,8,9] and is based
on the precise confinement of high-affinity antigen-binding molecules
on a surface by means of AFM nanografting of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)
and DNA-directed immobilization (DDI) of conjugated binders, following
the scheme in Figure .
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the DDI strategy to immobilize antibodies
on a microsized DNA-based biosensor.
Schematic representation of the DDI strategy to immobilize antibodies
on a microsized DNA-based biosensor.In particular, we focused our attention on the detection
of the
blood-released portion of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2
(Her2). Her2 is a member of the epithelial growth factor receptor
(EGFR/ErbB) family, which is involved in many biological processes,
such as signal transduction, regulation of cell adhesion, regulation
of transcription, positive regulation of cell growth/proliferation,
and negative regulation of apoptosis.[10] It is normally expressed at low levels in the epithelial cells of
many tissues, whereas gene amplification and overexpression of Her2
are observed in many types of cancer, such as breast, lung, ovarian,
and gastric.[11] In breast cancer, this amplification
defines a subtype of cancer (Her2-positive cancers) with a unique
gene signature that is maintained during progression.[12,13] The ability to reveal this “signature” at extremely
low concentrations may be used for early stage cancer detection and/or
to monitor and follow cancer progression to tune personalized drug
treatments.The increase in membrane concentration (crowding)
of Her2 induced
by receptor overexpression might be the leading cause of aberrant,
ligand-independent homodimerization or heterodimerization with other
ErbB receptors, which in turn causes proteolytic cleavage of the Her2
extracellular domain (ECD), known as shedding,[14] and downstream signaling activation.[15,16] Anti-Her2-positive cancer therapies based on humanized antibodies,
such as trastuzumab and pertuzumab, are focused on blocking Her2 dimerization
and/or shedding and/or Her2-dependent signals.[17] Although it is strongly discussed in the clinic, the lack
of suitable technologies to detect circulating ECD-Her2 prevents this
molecule from being considered a proper biomarker at present. A precise
quantification of the level of ECD-Her2 released and circulating freely
in the bloodstream or as nanovesicle (exosome) cargo might boost the
ability to detect Her2-positive tumors early in their development
after diagnosis and allow tumor response to Her2-targeted therapy
to be monitored.So far, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays
(ELISAs) constitute
the only FDA-approved clinical method to evaluate the amount of circulating
ECD-Her2 in the serum of patients with both primary breast cancer
and metastatic disease[16] and to monitor
their response to therapeutic treatments.[18,19] With this method, ECD-Her2 has been found in 30% of primary breast
tumors and 50% of metastatic ones.[20] However,
ELISA bears some limitations, such as the use of expensive labels
and the need for multiple antibodies for the same analyte, in addition
to the difficulty of implementing it in multiplexing analysis. This
last point is crucial, given that other soluble forms of ECD-Her2
could derive from alternative splicing (e.g., herstatin and p100).
The ability to detect multiple biomarkers is strongly required to
unequivocally correlate these quantitative measurements with tumor
status and progression.In this specific context, we propose
to exploit the full potential
of our innovative nanoarray platforms. To move toward clinical applications,
we pushed their sensitivity for antigen detection, exploiting different
binders with different affinity/recognition epitopes. With respect
to ELISA, AFM nanoarrays enable multiplexing, require no labeling,
and entail a single type of binder for analysis. In particular, we
used two different mouse IgG monoclonal antibodies (Abs) selected
for their high binding affinity to regions outside the epitope recognized
by trastuzumab, which makes them suitable for monitoring the disease
during therapeutic drug treatment. Then, we explored alternative binders
such as high-affinity single-domain nanobodies (VHH) (12–15
kDa) selected to bind epitopes in the Her2 hinge region.[21,22] With respect to antibodies, nanobodies are more stable and can be
easily engineered with specific tags and fusion partners to meet diagnostics
needs, contributing to an overall reduction in the cost of the device.[22,23] Moreover, nanobodies can be selected to avoid cross-reaction with
the human anti-mouse antibodies (HAMA) that are present in human serum
and could limit the efficacy of antigen quantification.Nanoarray
detection performance was tested for a broad range of
Her2 concentrations in buffer and then in standardized human serum.
To demonstrate the multiplexing capabilities of this approach, we
evaluated the simultaneous recognition of Her2 and urokinase plasminogen
activator (uPA), which participate in cell migration, angiogenesis,
embryogenesis, tumor cell dissemination, and metastasis in many tumors.
Increased levels of uPA have been reported in primary breast cancerpatients and correlate with tumor aggressiveness.[24] To prove the reliability to our method, we validated the
AFM nanoarray with SPR and fluorescence microscopy (FM) measurements.
We also used different combinations of available Her2 binders to build
a sandwich assay to identify, via combined AFM and FM measurements,
the epitope involved in the specific binding interaction.
Results
Her2 Detection
with MGR2 and MGR3 Antibodies
Initially,
we used two mouse monoclonal antibodies, MGR2 and MGR3, for to set
up and validate the nanoarray. Both antibodies recognize ECD-Her2
with high specificity and have been thoroughly characterized in immunoprecipitation
experiments and by immunohistochemistry using Her2-overexpressing
cell lines.[25,26] A competitive immunoassay as
an epitope binning experiment demonstrated that MGR2 and MGR3 bind
to independent epitopes on the ECD-Her2 protein surface, which in
turn differ from the epitope bound by trastuzumab.[25]Toward the realization of the nanoassay, we first
conjugated the two antibodies with ssDNA by means of a commercial
click chemistry kit that exploits amine groups available on the surface
of an antibody to covalently anchor the DNA. Such a bioconjugation
method is a highly efficient (>80% of the protein is conjugated),
three-step procedure in which both protein and DNA are first modified
with specific chemical groups that “click” together.
The produced conjugate is extremely stable, and the degree of DNA–protein
functionalization is then quantifiable by UV spectrophotometry. To
avoid multiple strands attached to a single Ab, sterically limiting
the binding affinity to the target, we optimized the original conjugation
protocol, obtaining two–three strands per protein, on average,
and never more than four.For nanoscale functionalization, we
combined DNA nanografting,
fine-tuning the process to optimize the density of patterned biomolecules,[8] and the immobilization of semisynthetic Abs–DNA
conjugates through DDI with high efficiency, site-selectivity, and
reversibility.[27,28] We then capitalized on AFM topographic
imaging to visualize any change in the surface topography of the nanopatches
occurring upon interaction with the antigen, with subnanometric resolution,
and to quantify the number of biorecognition events, as successfully
demonstrated in previous work published by our group.[1,8,27,29,30] The height of the patch is measured at each
step of the fabrication (i.e., ssDNA nanografting, DDI of Abs–DNA
conjugates, antigen binding) with respect to the surrounding self-assembled
monolayer (SAM) of biorepellent alkanethiols through topographic AFM
images. The unchanged roughness over the SAM throughout the entire
process is an indication of SAM antifouling action.[31−33]The binding
of 10 nM ECD-Her2 over MGR2 and MGR3 antibody nanostructures
is reported in Figure . Images of the nanopatches (Figure A,D) show that the height increases at each step of
the assay until antigen binding (the brighter the color, the higher
the nanoassembly height versus the reference SAM). Relative height
variations are visualized that show the topographic line profiles
(Figure B,E) and are
reported as absolute values (Figure C,F).
Figure 2
ECD-Her2 nanoarray detection by MGR2 (A–C) and
MGR3 (D–F)
Abs. (A, D) AFM images across the nanopatches after DNA immobilization,
antibody loading via DDI, and binding of the antigen. (B, E) Relative
topographic line profiles from the AFM images in panels A and D (light
blue, DNA nanografting; red, Ab-conjugate immobilization via DDI;
green, 10 nM ECD-Her2 binding). (C, F) Mean and SD values of the patch
heights measured from the line profiles across the nanopatches, which
correspond to the colored areas in images A and D at each step of
the experiment.
ECD-Her2 nanoarray detection by MGR2 (A–C) and
MGR3 (D–F)
Abs. (A, D) AFM images across the nanopatches after DNA immobilization,
antibody loading via DDI, and binding of the antigen. (B, E) Relative
topographic line profiles from the AFM images in panels A and D (light
blue, DNA nanografting; red, Ab-conjugate immobilization via DDI;
green, 10 nM ECD-Her2 binding). (C, F) Mean and SD values of the patch
heights measured from the line profiles across the nanopatches, which
correspond to the colored areas in images A and D at each step of
the experiment.In both cases, the average
height of the ssDNA nanopatches (Figure B,E, blue lines)
is close to 3.0 nm. This experimental value is in agreement with the
expected output due to the “low-density” nanografting
conditions (S/A = 0.3–0.6), in which the vertically standing
thiolated DNA molecules are below the highest packing limit (around
5 nm[34]) and are therefore not fully vertically
stretched by repulsive electrostatic forces.[35] This DNA density has been previously identified as the optimal one
to accommodate the steric hindrance of the subsequently immobilized
antibodies and to make their binding site easily accessible to the
analyte in solution (Figure S4).Immobilization of the DNA–antibody conjugate provides a
height increase of roughly 4–5 nm (Figure B,E, red lines). The further increase in
the height after incubation with ECD-Her2 (Figure B,E, green lines) clearly indicates the efficient
antibody-dependent capture of the antigen.Next, the nanodevice
was assessed for its ability to quantitatively
measure the target. We calculated the affinity calibration curve for
both MGR2 and MGR3, with the assumption that the variation in height
across the nanopatches is proportional to the amount of analyte bound
to the ligand. Variations in height were plotted versus ECD-Her2 concentration
(ranging from 200 pM to 100 nM in the case of MGR2 and from 1 to 300
nM in the case of MGR3; Figure ).
Figure 3
ECD-Her2 binding curves for MGR2–DNA (left) and MGR3–DNA
(right) conjugates immobilized on the nanoarray. Average values of
the variation in height (Δh) detected on the
nanopatches (n = 4) are plotted versus ECD-Her2 concentration.
Data were analyzed using the Hill equation with sigmoidal fitting,
and KD values were determined.
ECD-Her2 binding curves for MGR2–DNA (left) and MGR3–DNA
(right) conjugates immobilized on the nanoarray. Average values of
the variation in height (Δh) detected on the
nanopatches (n = 4) are plotted versus ECD-Her2 concentration.
Data were analyzed using the Hill equation with sigmoidal fitting,
and KD values were determined.The sigmoidal distribution of data is in agreement
with the saturable
binding isotherm for a receptor–ligand binding equilibrium
and was fitted with the Hill equation,[36] obtaining a dissociation constant KD in the low nanomolar range for both MGR2 (KD = 3.3 ± 0.9 nM) and MGR3 (KD = 17.0 ± 10.7 nM). From Figure , we determined a limit of blank (LoB) value of about
1 nM for the higher affinity MGR2 and 3 nM for MGR3.To validate
the nanoarray results, we set up a standard ELISA assay
in which different concentrations of Abs were added to ECD-Her2-coated
wells (Figure S6). The dissociation constant
values found with this assay (MGR2: KD = 2.3 ± 1.3 nM; MGR3: KD = 23.0
± 6.2 nM) were in very good agreement with those found with the
nanoarray (confidence level (CL) = 0.74 and 0.69, respectively). SPR
experiments were also performed to evaluate whether functionalization
affects an antibody’s affinity for its antigen. The immobilization
conditions used on the nanoarray were reproduced by attaching biotinylated
ssDNAs to a streptavidin-modified dextran matrix. The Ab conjugated
with the complementary DNA was then linked by DDI to the matrix, and
then the ECD-Her2 analyte was fluxed. We tested the conjugate with
the higher affinity Ab, MGR2, and found that the KD was in the low nanomolar range (17.1 ± 1.1). The
different experimental setup explains the much higher KD value obtained with SPR with respect to the nanoarray
and ELISA; nonetheless, the low nanomolar KD value confirms that efficient antigen recognition is enabled in
a nanoarray-like configuration.
Her2 Detection with EM1
Nanobody
As an alternative
to conventional antibodies, we exploited camelid nanobodies, which
are recombinant molecules that can be easily engineered at precise
and unique residues to avoid multiple and heterogeneous labeling and
loss of activity. Moreover, due to their reduced dimensions, nanobodies
can be used to prepare functional surfaces with higher ligand densities
compared to that with conventional antibodies, which simultaneously
increases the active detection surface and avoids steric hindrance.
In particular, we recently showed the advantage of producing nanobodies
specialized for ECD-Her2 biorecognition with a free C-terminal cysteine
available for single-point maleimide functionalization.[37] This approach enables functionalization using
residues not involved in the Ab paratope, which consequently prevents
modifications of the Ab–antigen binding features. The llama
nanobody EM1 was selected in vitro from a naïve library[38] using the same strategy reported in Djender
et al.[39] It binds to an ECD-Her2 epitope
close to the one recognized by trastuzumab. EM1 was expressed with
a free C-terminal cysteine and covalently linked with a maleimide–ssDNA
construct. We first measured the binding properties of 1:1 EM1–ssDNA
conjugates by SPR, finding a KD of 3.4
± 0.3 nM. We then proceeded with nanobody–DNA conjugate
nanoscale immobilization on a gold surface with the same DDI approach
used for the MGR2 and MGR3 antibodies.The first two preliminary
steps (grafting ssDNA and hybridizing the DNA–nanobody conjugate)
were optimized according to the small dimensions (2 × 2 ×
3 nm3; ∼15 kDa) of VHHs. Notably, the density of
grafted ssDNA sequences has a great impact on the hybridization of
the conjugate and consequently on the detection of Her2. Whereas low
DNA densities are needed to avoid steric hindrance effects in the
case of full antibodies, voids should not be left in the nanografted
DNA SAM for nanobodies; the nanobody itself could hide in such voids,
becoming unavailable to interact with the analyte. On the contrary,
at high DNA density, the nanostructures are well packed and the binder
stands up over the surface DNA layer in the right configuration. This
explains why, as shown in Figure S5, the
conditions for high-performance target detection were reached only
at high density. Tuning the DNA density and DDI conditions, depending
on the dimensions and the specific characteristics of the binder,
to optimize detection performance in the immunoassay is a unique feature
of AFM nanografting.Having optimized the immobilization conditions,
we performed ECD-Her2
detection with EM1 conjugate nanostructures, following the same experimental
procedure as that used for the Abs (ssDNA grafting, DDI-driven conjugate
immobilization, and target binding). As a representative case, we
report the results related to the detection of 1 nM ECD-Her2 (Figure ).
Figure 4
Detection of ECD-Her2
on the nanoarray. Images of nanopatches on
the gold surface (A) and their topographical profiles (B). (C) Mean
and SD values of the height measured across the nanopatches at each
step of the experiment (light blue, grafting of ssDNA; red, hybridization
of VHH–DNA conjugate; and green, 1 nM ECD-Her2 incubation).
Detection of ECD-Her2
on the nanoarray. Images of nanopatches on
the gold surface (A) and their topographical profiles (B). (C) Mean
and SD values of the height measured across the nanopatches at each
step of the experiment (light blue, grafting of ssDNA; red, hybridization
of VHH–DNA conjugate; and green, 1 nM ECD-Her2 incubation).The measured height of the “high-density”
grafted
ssDNA is 4.5 ± 0.2 nm, a value that describes the highest packing
nanopattern in which the thiolated DNA molecules stand vertically.[34]As provided for the MGR2 and MGR3 Abs,
we determined the EM1–ECD-Her2
binding affinity curve with different analyte concentrations ranging
from 200 pM to 10 nM (Figure ).
Figure 5
Binding curve of ECD-Her2 and EM1 nanobody conjugate immobilized
on the nanoarray surface. Average changes in height (Δ height)
values on nanopatches (n = 8) are plotted versus
ECD-Her2 concentration; the data were analyzed with the Hill using
equation sigmoidal fitting, and KD values
were determined.
Binding curve of ECD-Her2 and EM1 nanobody conjugate immobilized
on the nanoarray surface. Average changes in height (Δ height)
values on nanopatches (n = 8) are plotted versus
ECD-Her2 concentration; the data were analyzed with the Hill using
equation sigmoidal fitting, and KD values
were determined.We fitted data with the
Hill equation in this case as well, determining
a dissociation constant of KD = 1.8 ±
0.6 nM, which is lower than that for MGR2. The S/N ratio improves
substantially upon moving from antibody to nanobody binders, probably
because the higher density DNA layer underneath increases the mechanical
robustness of the device; the read-out, in fact, is based on a mechanical
probe, which still reflects the mechanical resistance of the surface
even though it is operated at minimum force. Overall, the limit of
sensitivity (LoB) decreases to about 200 pM, pushing the nanoarray’s
sensitivity to a level comparable to the cutoff value of 15 ng/mL
that is commonly used in the clinic for Her2-positive breast cancer
assessment.[40,41]
Her2 Detection in Standardized
Human Serum
As an intermediate
step toward using this approach for detection in blood serum samples,
we tested the capability of the nanoarray to recognize the target
of interest in human serum. We chose to work with standardized human
serum first, which mimics the serum of humanpatients in terms of
protein content (IgG antibody and albumin). First, we assessed nonspecific
protein binding to the functionalized patches and/or to the surrounding
thiolcarpet. As shown in Figure A, we observed a negligible increase in the patch height
(about 0.2 ± 0.4 nm) upon moving from PBS to standardized human
serum. Also, the roughness of the biorepellent SAM carpet did not
change significantly (rms = 0.23 and 0.25 nm before and after serum
incubation, respectively). Instead, upon addition of 1 nM ECD-Her2
to the serum, we observed a relevant patch height increase of 1.3
nm (Figure A). This
value is the same as the differential height increase (Δh) extracted for an ECD-Her2 concentration of 1 nM from
the calibration curve obtained with the recombinant protein in buffer
solution. This proves that our nanoarray is capable of filtering the
background noise of a biological sample and recognizing a specific
biomarker of interest.
Figure 6
ECD-Her2 detection in standardized human serum. (A) Nanopatch
height
variation (n = 8) on the nanobody-immobilized nanoarray
incubated with standardized human serum with or without 1 nM ECD-Her2.
(B) Extrapolation of the height increase expected from the nanobody-based
calibration curve.
ECD-Her2 detection in standardized human serum. (A) Nanopatch
height
variation (n = 8) on the nanobody-immobilized nanoarray
incubated with standardized human serum with or without 1 nM ECD-Her2.
(B) Extrapolation of the height increase expected from the nanobody-based
calibration curve.
Multiplexed Detection
To further challenge the capability
of the nanoarray and to prove its validity for use in clinical practice,
we performed a preliminary multiplex analysis, testing the simultaneous
detection of ECD-Her2 and uPA, another relevant breast cancer biomarker.
As shown in Figure , we grafted ssDNA SAM nanopatches of two different DNA sequences
(SH-cF9 and SH-cF5) in serial order, enabling the immobilization of
two binders (VHH EM1 and αuPA Ab)—each of them conjugated
by means of its complementary ssDNA (F9 and F5)—specific for
independent antigens. We then performed a selective detection of the
different targets, adding each of them in sequence to the solution.
Figure 7
Multiplex
detection of two different biomarkers (ECD-Her2 and uPA)
on the same surface. (A) Schematic of DDI immobilization of binders
on the DNA-based biosensor and subsequent detection of the antigens.
Height variations of the two separated sets of DNA nanopatch SAMs
(cF5 and cF9) after each biomolecule incubation step (in the following
sequential order: VHH EM1-F9 conjugate, αuPA Ab-F5; ECD-Her2
antigen, and uPA antigen) are visualized by topographic profiles (B)
and histograms (C); mean and SD height values (n =
4) are reported in the tables. Columns where no binding was expected
(and therefore no height increase) are gray.
Multiplex
detection of two different biomarkers (ECD-Her2 and uPA)
on the same surface. (A) Schematic of DDI immobilization of binders
on the DNA-based biosensor and subsequent detection of the antigens.
Height variations of the two separated sets of DNA nanopatch SAMs
(cF5 and cF9) after each biomolecule incubation step (in the following
sequential order: VHH EM1-F9 conjugate, αuPA Ab-F5; ECD-Her2
antigen, and uPA antigen) are visualized by topographic profiles (B)
and histograms (C); mean and SD height values (n =
4) are reported in the tables. Columns where no binding was expected
(and therefore no height increase) are gray.The profile across the grafted SH-cF5 and SH-cF9 ssDNA patches
was acquired first (black profiles in Figure B, left and right, respectively). Then, we
inserted the VHH-F9 conjugate (red curves in Figure B), observing that only the patches on the
right show a height increase, whereas across the patches on the left,
the red profile almost overlaps with the previously acquired black
curve. This demonstrated the specificity of the DDI process. Similarly,
after adding the uPA Ab-F5 (blue curves in Figure B), we see a height increase corresponding
to the cF5 patches (panel B, left) but not corresponding to the cF9
patches (panel B, right). Finally, the loading of uPA was sensitively
measurable only across the uPA Ab-F5 patches (green profiles in Figure B), and the last
incubation with ECD-Her2 was detectable only across the VHH-F9 patches
(yellow profiles in Figure B), completing the demonstration of the specificity of our
nanoarray.The unchanged roughness of the thiol SAM carpet at
each step further
indicated that nonspecific binding over the surface did not occur,
proving again the validity of the TOEG6 SAM carpet as a
reference for height measurements. Two different antigens were incubated
over the surface at the same concentration (20 nM); the different
Δh values (uPA = 2.7 nm; ECD-Her2 = 4 nm) observed
can be explained by the different dimensions of the two proteins (53
and 72 kDa, respectively).The high selectivity of the binding
of the two Ab–Ag pairs
working in parallel is a promising result that indicates the possibility
of implementing the multiplexing nanoarray under real conditions.
Fluorescence Experiments
So far, we have demonstrated
that our nanoarrays work in a sensitive and antigen-specific manner,
with clear advantages over ELISA platforms because the nanoarrays
use small volumes and, more importantly, require only one binder per
antigen. To perform an additional validation of our nanoarray, we
compared the single protein binder topographic measurement approach
and the conventional nanoarray-based sandwich approach with a fluorescent
readout. The goal is to label the nanostructures with a fluorescent
molecule as unequivocal proof of the presence of the target bound
on the surface.Moreover, we also aim to demonstrate that a
fluorescence-integrated sandwich nanoarray allows epitope binning
of the binders to be performed by analyzing the pattern of simultaneous
or competitive action of different pairs of binders.As a first
approach, we used an “indirect” sandwich
configuration (Figure A), more similar to classical ELISA setups. We first immobilized
the Abs on the surface, and after ECD-Her2 capture, we added another
Ab specific for another independent epitope. The fluorescent signal
was obtained using a fluorescently labeled secondary α-mouse
Ab. From Figure ,
it can be seen that the match between topographic and fluorescence
data in this indirect nanosandwich approach is very good.
Figure 8
Fluorescent
visualization of ECD-Her2 captured by the nanoarray.
(A) Schematic of the molecular nanoassembly on a gold surface together
with AFM images of the patches at each step of the incubation (sequentially:
ssDNA, trastuzumab–DNA conjugate, 200 pM ECD-Her2, and MGR2)
at different densities of grafted ssDNA (indicated with different
colors, see the text). Scale bar 2 μm. (B) Fluorescent image
of the patches described in (A) after incubation with anti-mouse Ab
labeled with Alexa488 fluorophore. Scale bar 2 μm. (C) Height
increase values recorded with AFM topographic analysis after each
incubation step on the patches and fluorescence intensity values measured
as pixel counts. The plot shows fluorescence–AFM topography
correlation (number of independent patches: four for each grafted
ssDNA density).
Fluorescent
visualization of ECD-Her2 captured by the nanoarray.
(A) Schematic of the molecular nanoassembly on a gold surface together
with AFM images of the patches at each step of the incubation (sequentially:
ssDNA, trastuzumab–DNA conjugate, 200 pM ECD-Her2, and MGR2)
at different densities of grafted ssDNA (indicated with different
colors, see the text). Scale bar 2 μm. (B) Fluorescent image
of the patches described in (A) after incubation with anti-mouse Ab
labeled with Alexa488 fluorophore. Scale bar 2 μm. (C) Height
increase values recorded with AFM topographic analysis after each
incubation step on the patches and fluorescence intensity values measured
as pixel counts. The plot shows fluorescence–AFM topography
correlation (number of independent patches: four for each grafted
ssDNA density).The successive incubation
steps were as follows: (i) ssDNA, (ii)
trastuzumab–DNA conjugates, (iii) ECD-Her2, (iv) MGR2, and
(v) secondary α-mouse fluorescent Ab. Notably, we confirmed,
by means of fluorescence measurements, that even a low topographic
height increase (0.2–0.5 nm) corresponds to a measurable fluorescent
signal, validating the occurrence of binding of target at very low
concentrations (200 pM). Moreover, as demonstrated by the values reported
in the tables and in the AFM–fluorescence correlation graph
in Figure c, the fluorescence
signal scales linearly with the topographic signal and with the density
of ssDNA grafted on the surface, which in turn correlates with the
binder density and therefore the total amount of captured target molecules.
This not only validates the quantitative analysis performed through
topographic measurements across the nanopatches of the nanoarray but
also confirms that our single-binder assay retains all the benefits
of ELISA with the advantages of simplicity, lower cost, and greater
efficiency.In addition, the fluorescence-integrated sandwich-nanoarray
setup
might be useful to obtain important information about protein epitopes
recognized by different binders. For this, we used the same indirect
approach described above as well as a simplified “direct”
sandwich approach by exploiting the easy functionalization of the
VHH EM1. As the first binder, we used a mouse/humanized Ab, whereas
the second one was GFP-conjugated VHH. The two configurations are
reported in Figure together with fluorescence images relative to different combinations
of binders in the sandwich.
Figure 9
Fluorescence images obtained with different
combinations in the
Ab/VHH “sandwich” assay. For images related to the indirect
configuration (A–C), the first Ab of the sandwich is indicated
in purple and the second is in blue; for the direct configuration
(D–F), the first Ab of the sandwich is indicated in purple.
Next to each fluorescence image is reported the schematic representation
of the position of the patches (violet squares). Scale bar 2 μm.
Fluorescence images obtained with different
combinations in the
Ab/VHH “sandwich” assay. For images related to the indirect
configuration (A–C), the first Ab of the sandwich is indicated
in purple and the second is in blue; for the direct configuration
(D–F), the first Ab of the sandwich is indicated in purple.
Next to each fluorescence image is reported the schematic representation
of the position of the patches (violet squares). Scale bar 2 μm.We noticed that the fluorescence
signal coming from the secondary
antibody is generally sharper compared to the GFP fluorescent signal
on the VHH. This could be related to the different fluorescence quantum
yield, to the amplification effect due to the secondary Ab, or to
the different dimensions of the two systems, with VHH being 5 times
shorter than the Abs and therefore closer to the gold surface, which
could partially quench the fluorescence signal.With this in
mind, we used the VHH-related direct configuration
(Figure D–F)
to test its relative epitope for ECD-Her2 recognition. While a fluorescence
signal was visible when it was coupled to MGR2 (Figure D) and pertuzumab (Figure F), no fluorescence was observable when it
was coupled to trastuzumab (Figure E). This fact indicated that VHH EM1 and trastuzumab
bind on close/overlapping epitopes and that these are totally independent
from the one recognized by pertuzumab, as reported in the literature.[42] Concerning MGR2, whose epitope has not been
mapped yet, our preliminary experiments indicate simultaneous binding
with VHH; therefore, MGR2 does not exhibit cross-reactivity with VHH.
Translating the results of Figure D,E, we conclude that MGR2 and trastuzumab recognize
different epitopes. This was confirmed by results obtained with the
indirect configuration (Figure C), where we observed the presence of the fluorescence signal
corresponding to the concomitant binding of MGR2 and trastuzumab,
proving that the MGR2-functionalized nanoarray is suitable for monitoring
a response to therapeutic treatment with this humanized Ab.With the indirect assay, we also confirmed the simultaneous binding
of MGR2 and MGR3 (Figure A). The data in Figure B relative to the sandwich binding of MGR2 and VHH are apparently
in contradiction with the data in Figure D, in which the same binders are used but
in reverse order. This could be explained by the fact that, due to
the small dimensions of the nanobody, the accessibility of the Ab
to the analyte would be limited as a consequence of its proximity
to the surface. Combining the evidence from both the direct and indirect
configurations with these two binders, we can assume that the binding
sites of VHH EM1 and MGR2 on ECD-Her2 are most likely very close.
These experiments demonstrate that nanografting-based nanoarrays,
beyond their potential as a detection tool, can serve as an alternative
approach, complementary to more conventional methods, for identifying
the molecular determinants of antibody–antigen recognition.
Discussion
The use of miniaturized devices in liquid biopsy
for cancer biomarker
detection and therapy monitoring will ultimately improve the outcome
of early diagnosis and tumor treatment. Here, we employed a nanoarray
based on AFM nanolithography and a topographic readout for the detection
of cancer-relevant biomarkers circulating in the bloodstream. We focused
on the detection of ECD-Her2, optimizing the choice of binders to
increase the detection sensitivity and even using it in multiplexing
with uPA, to move toward biomolecular footprinting of the disease.In particular, we demonstrated that nanoarrays employing panning-selected
camelid nanobodies can detect ECD-Her2 at less than 200 pM, which
corresponds to the cutoff value of 15 ng/mL currently used in the
clinic to discriminate between a healthy and pathological status.
We showed that the high affinity of nanobodies can be fully exploited
by tuning the surface density of the binders: At variance with classical
antibodies, for which steric hindrance can promote anticooperativity
of adjacent binders, higher probe densities can be used for smaller
binders and indeed help to improve the overall sensitivity of target
identification.We expect that the introduction and optimization
of suitable linkers
and in silico engineering platforms exploiting novel mixed computational–experimental
protocols for boosting the affinity for a cognate antigen[43] will substantially improve the use of nanobodies
as capture molecules and further decrease the detection limit to the
hundreds of femtomolar/low picomolar range. In this direction, we
plan to identify in silico customized VHHs for specific (nonimmunogenic)
epitopes of Her2 fragments by means of computational design[42] and/or high-affinity peptides for chosen epitopes
of target proteins by stochastically exploring their sequence and
structure space.In conclusion, we demonstrated that this simple
assay has the required
sensitivity to be operated in the clinic, allowing detection in small
volumes of complex matrices and enabling continuous noninvasive monitoring
of therapy from single blood droplets. Moreover, at variance with
ELISA, our assay requires a single binder for each biomarker and is
label-free, avoiding false results connected to fluorescence interference
susceptibility and tremendously reducing diagnostic costs while maintaining
high biorecognition specificity and fast readout. On the basis of
the achieved results, we put forward the idea of implementing a simplified,
automated, cantilever-based readout machine in the clinic for antigen
quantification purposes.[1]When coupled
with frequent, noninvasive monitoring in single blood
droplets, our method might then have a crucial impact on therapeutic
drug monitoring, simultaneously profiling multiple circulating biomarkers
and accounting for the time evolution of the cancer genome and consequent
resistance to drug treatment. Similar nanoscale platforms can be generated
to anchor selected populations of exosomes, via the binding of a specific
transmembrane protein, and to characterize them in terms of other
membrane protein components. All of these features heighten the significance
of our nanoarray as an attractive platform for personalized cancer
diagnostic applications.Finally, the same nanoarray can serve
as a platform for epitope
binning. This, combined with fluorescent assays in living cell membranes
for colocalization of different receptors, will help to understand
the specific functions enabled by selective binding, paving the way
to the modular design of synthetic receptors.
Methods
DNA
ssDNA sequences (SH-cF9: SH-(CH2)6-5′-CTTCACGATTGCCACTTTCCAC-3′,
F9: NH2-(CH2)6-5′-GTGGAAAGTGGCAATCGTGAAG-3′,
SH-cF5: SH-(CH2)6-5′-CTTATCGCTTTATGACCGGACC-3′,
F5: NH2-(CH2)6-5′-GGTCCGGTCATAAAGCGATAA-3′)
were from Biomers GmbH Ulm, Germany.
Antibodies and Nanobodies
Monoclonal mouse antibodies
MGR2 and MGR3[25,26] were produced at Fondazione IRCCS
Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan. These Abs have been tested in
IHC, immuno precipitation (CoIP), and immunoblot assays.[25,26]Commercial monoclonal human antibodies trastuzumab and pertuzumab
were from Genentech.Commercial monoclonal αuPA antibody
was from MyBioSource.Single-domain antibodies (VHH) were isolated
and produced at the
University of Nova Gorica as described previously using a naïve
nanobody library,[38] a differential panning
approach on whole cells, and the cytoplasmic expression of the nanobodies
in the presence of sulfhydryl oxidase.[39]
Proteins and Standardized Serum
Recombinant humanECD-Her2
and uPA were from ACRO Biosystems.Standardized human serum
was from Biseko (Biotest).
Conjugates Production
Antibodies
Conjugation
of the MGR2, MGR3, trastuzumab,
and pertuzumab antibodies with ssDNA sequence F9 and the αuPA
antibody with F5 was performed using a click chemistry reaction using
the commercial three-step SoluLink protein–oligo conjugation
kit (Figure S1).
Protein Modification
Antibodies at a concentration
of 2.5–4.0 mg/mL were buffer exchanged into modification buffer
(100 mM phosphate, 150 mM NaCl, pH 8.0) usingZeba desalt spin columns
(Pierce Chemical) before adding 10–20 mol equiv of HyNic/mol
antibody. The reaction was carried out at room temperature for 1.5
h, and the HyNic-modified antibody was desalted into conjugation buffer
(100 mM phosphate, 150 mM NaCl, pH 6.0).
Oligonucleotide Modification
The oligonucleotide was
desalted into nuclease-free water using a 5K MWCO VivaSpin diafiltration
apparatus, and the OD/μL concentration at 260 nm was adjusted
to 0.2–0.5 OD/μL. A volume containing 20 equiv S-4FB
was added to the oligonucleotide solution and incubated at room temperature
for 2 h. The 4FB-modified oligonucleotide was equilibrated into conjugation
buffer (100 mM phosphate, 150 mM NaCl, pH 6.0).
Protein–Oligo
Conjugation
Volumes of the antibody
and oligonucleotide were mixed. One-tenth of the volume of 10×
TurboLink catalyst buffer was added to the conjugation solution, and
the reaction was carried out at room temperature for 2 h; the amount
of the two components used in this step is strictly related to the
concentration and the molar substitution ratio (MSR) of both HyNic-modified
protein and 4FB-modified oligonucleotide obtained in the previous
steps.The conjugation reaction was visualized spectrophotometrically
by determining the absorbance at A354 due
to the formation of the chromophoric conjugate bond. The reaction
solution was exchanged with PBS using Zeba columns.
Nanobody
The conjugation of nanobody EM1 with ssDNA
sequence F9 was performed by a maleimide reaction (Figure S2): the nanobody, containing a free cysteine at its
C-terminus, was diluted to a concentration of 100 μM in Hepes
10 mM pH 7.4 buffer and kept reduced by the addition of TCEP in a
10-fold molar excess for 20 min at room temperature. F9-maleimide
was dissolved in TE buffer (Tris 10 mM, EDTA 1 mM) pH 8.0 and then
added to the nanobody with a ssDNA:protein molar ratio of 10:1 (250:25
μM:μM). After 2 h at room temperature, the modified nanobody
was separated from the reactants and reaction byproducts using a G-25
Illustra microspin column (GE Healthcare Life Science).
Surface
Plasmon Resonance
Biacore T100 and Biacore
2000 SPR instruments were used at a constant temperature of 25 °C.As shown in Figure S3, a biotinylated
cF9 sequence (cF9-biotin, 2 μM in PBS buffer) was immobilized
over the Biacore SA gold chip surface. A continuous flow (5 μL/min)
of PBS buffer (running buffer) was maintained during all experiments.
The immobilization through streptavidin–biotin binding was
stopped after reaching a binding level of ∼1200 RU, corresponding
to an amount of ssDNA on the surface that ensured an efficient attachment
of the molecules in the following steps of the experiment. The surface
was rinsed twice with a 1 min pulse of 50 mM NaOH solution to remove
unbound cF9-biotin.[44] The hybridization
was carried out by incubation with the conjugates at 100 μM
in TE buffer with 1 M NaCl until reaching a binding level of ∼1200
RU. The binding affinity of ECD-Her2 was evaluated by injecting two
different concentrations of the protein in running buffer at a flow
rate of 30 μL/min for 3 min (association phase) and afterward
flushing with running buffer for 10 min (dissociation phase). Since
the dissociation phase allows complete detachment of the protein,
no regeneration procedure was required.Binding affinity parameters
were determined using the 1:1 Langmuir
model in the BIAevaluation 3.1 software.
AFM Measurements
The tip-assisted AFM-based nanolithography
used to fabricate DNA nanoarrays and all high-resolution topographic
measurements were performed using an XE-100 (Park-Systems) with a
custom liquid cell at room temperature. First, a biorepellent SAM
of top oligo(ethylene glycol)-terminated alkylthiols (TOEG6: HS-(CH2)11-(OCH2CH2)6-OH, Sigma-Aldrich) was prepared on ultraflat stripped
gold surfaces following a modified version of the Ulman procedure.[45] A gold sample was soaked in a 300 μM solution
of TOEG6 in ethanol for about 24 h. Then, it was rinsed
with distilled water and ethanol, dried with a gentle stream of nitrogen,
and finally glued inside the AFM liquid cell.Multiple nanografting
assembled monolayers of thiol-modified ssDNA SH-cF9 were prepared
by serial AFM-based nanografting inside the TOEG6 SAM.[1,8,27,29,46] An AFM tip with sufficient rigidity (MikroMasch
NSC 19/no Al, spring constant 0.6 nN nm–1) was operated
at high load (set point/force ≈ 100 nN) on areas of 1 μm
× 1 μm in order to locally displace the TOEG6 SAMs and to facilitate the exchange with the thiolated ssDNA biomolecules
(5 μM in TE buffer 1 M NaCl) present in the liquid cell.Antibody/nanobody conjugate immobilization was performed via DDI,[27,28] incubating the ssDNA SAM with Abs/VHH-F9 at 100 nM in TE buffer
with 1 M NaCl. ECD-Her2 binding was promoted through the incubation
of the antibody/nanobody nanopatches with a solution containing recombinant
protein at different concentrations in PBS buffer (binding curve determination
and multiplex measurement) or in Biseko (detection in standardized
human serum).Topographic height variations of the nanopatches
at each step of
the experiment were measured with AFM in gentle contact mode in liquid
using a softer AFM tip (MikroMasch CSC 38/no Al, spring constant 0.03
nN nm–1), at a cantilever speed of 1 Hz, in buffer
solution (TE buffer, Tris 10 mM, EDTA 1 mM). To minimize perturbations,
the applied force during measurement was the minimum stable value
(>0.1 nN). We already proved that under these conditions nanostructures
can be imaged and their height with respect to the SAM carpet (Δh) can be measured.[29] The AFM
topography analysis results were expressed as mean ± SD obtained
from measurements performed on at least four independent patches (n ≥ 4).The fabrication parameters of the nanografting
process were systematically
tuned, consequently modifying the density of ssDNA molecules adsorbed
in the nanopatch.[1,8,27] In
particular, it was possible to control the nanoscale DNA surface by
modifying the number of scanning lines during nanografting over the
area, a parameter described by the S/A ratio (where S is the scanned area and A is the area of the final patch).[35]
Fluorescence Imaging
Fluorescence measurements were
performed both on direct and indirect sandwich configurations. Monoclonal
IgG antibodies specific for ECD-Her2 (MGR2, transtuzumab, and pertuzumab)
were directly immobilized via DDI on the surface, incubating the ssDNA
nanopatches with the immunoconjugate at 100 nM in TE buffer 1 M NaCl.
ECD-Her2 binding to immobilized antibodies was obtained by incubating
nanopatches with a solution containing ECD-Her2 at 100 pM (nanoarray
validation) or 10 nM (epitope mapping studies).With respect
to direct measurements, the EM1–GFP fusion construct (1 μM)
was incubated for 1 h over the surface; indirect measurements were
performed using a second Ab specific for ECD-Her2 at the saturating
concentration of 500 nM and then the secondary fluorescent α-mouse_Alexa488
Ab (Thermo Fisher Scientific) diluted 1:500 in PBS buffer, which was
incubated over the surface for 30 min. After repeated washing steps
with PBS buffer, the gold sample was mounted on a glass coverslip
with Vectashield H-1400 mounting media (Vector).Fluorescent
images were acquired on an inverted epifluorescence
microscope (Nikon Eclipse TiU) using 20× (NA = 0.45) and 40×
(NA = 0.70) air objectives and a dichroic filter for FITC (Nikon;
excitation: 465–495 nm; DM: 505 nm; emission: 515–555
nm). 1600 × 1200 pixel images were collected using a color digital
camera and controller (Nikon DS-Fi2 and Digital Sight DS-L2) at acquisition
times ranging from 1 to 10 s.
ELISA assay
The
indirect ELISA assay was performed
first by coating the ECD-Her2 antigen to a PVC microtiter plate. The
protein was diluted to a final concentration of 100 μg/mL in
carbonate buffer (100 mM, pH 9.6), and 50 μL was used to coat
the wells of the microplate overnight at 4 °C. Then, the coating
solution was removed, and the plate washed three times with PBS. The
coated wells were blocked with 1% BSA in PBS (blocking buffer) for
2 h at room temperature. The plate was washed twice in PBS, and serial
dilutions (from 100 pM to 1 μM) of primary antibody were added.
The plate was washed three times with PBS after a 4 h incubation at
4 °C, and horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated secondary
antibody (Sigma) diluted 1:2000 in blocking buffer was added. After
the incubation (1 h at 4 °C), binding was assessed by adding
the substrate 3,3′,5,5′-tetramethylbenzidine (TMB, Pierce).
The reaction was stopped with a solution of 1 M HCl after 15 min of
incubation at room temperature, and the optical density was read at
450 nm.
Statistical Analysis
The LoB is the highest measured
test result likely to be observed (typically at 95% certainty) for
a sample containing no analyte. Values above the LoB are not consistent
with the absence of analyte; hence, LoB frequently replaces the analytical
sensitivity of a method. It is calculated as follows:
Authors: Pooja Gupta; Katja Loos; Alexander Korniakov; Chiara Spagnoli; Mary Cowman; Abraham Ulman Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2004-01-16 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: LiNa Loo; Joseph A Capobianco; Wei Wu; Xiaotong Gao; Wan Y Shih; Wei-Heng Shih; Kambiz Pourrezaei; Matthew K Robinson; Gregory P Adams Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2011-03-30 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Rodrigo Ochoa; Miguel A Soler; Ivan Gladich; Anna Battisti; Nikola Minovski; Alex Rodriguez; Sara Fortuna; Pilar Cossio; Alessandro Laio Journal: Methods Mol Biol Date: 2022
Authors: J Burrello; V Biemmi; M Dei Cas; M Amongero; S Bolis; E Lazzarini; S Bollini; G Vassalli; R Paroni; L Barile Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 4.379