Chelsea Anorma1, Jamila Hedhli2,3, Thomas E Bearrood1, Nicholas W Pino1, Sarah H Gardner1, Hiroshi Inaba1, Pamela Zhang1, Yanfen Li2, Daven Feng1, Sara E Dibrell1, Kristopher A Kilian2,4, Lawrence W Dobrucki2,3, Timothy M Fan5, Jefferson Chan1,1,3. 1. Department of Chemistry and Department of Biochemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 600 S. Mathews Avenue, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States. 2. Department of Bioengineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1304 W. Springfield Avenue, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States. 3. Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 405 N. Mathews Avenue, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States. 4. School of Materials Science and Engineering, School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia. 5. Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2001 S Lincoln Avenue, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States.
Abstract
Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are progenitor cells that contribute to treatment-resistant phenotypes during relapse. CSCs exist in specific tissue microenvironments that cell cultures and more complex models cannot mimic. Therefore, the development of new approaches that can detect CSCs and report on specific properties (e.g., stem cell plasticity) in their native environment have profound implications for studying CSC biology. Herein, we present AlDeSense, a turn-on fluorescent probe for aldehyde dehydrogenase 1A1 (ALDH1A1) and Ctrl-AlDeSense, a matching nonresponsive reagent. Although ALDH1A1 contributes to the detoxification of reactive aldehydes, it is also associated with stemness and is highly elevated in CSCs. AlDeSense exhibits a 20-fold fluorescent enhancement when treated with ALDH1A1. Moreover, we established that AlDeSense is selective against a panel of common ALDH isoforms and exhibits exquisite chemostability against a collection of biologically relevant species. Through the application of surface marker antibody staining, tumorsphere assays, and assessment of tumorigenicity, we demonstrate that cells exhibiting high AlDeSense signal intensity have properties of CSCs. Using these probes in tandem, we have identified CSCs at the cellular level via flow cytometry and confocal imaging, as well as monitored their states in animal models.
Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are progenitor cells that contribute to treatment-resistant phenotypes during relapse. CSCs exist in specific tissue microenvironments that cell cultures and more complex models cannot mimic. Therefore, the development of new approaches that can detect CSCs and report on specific properties (e.g., stem cell plasticity) in their native environment have profound implications for studying CSC biology. Herein, we present AlDeSense, a turn-on fluorescent probe for aldehyde dehydrogenase 1A1 (ALDH1A1) and Ctrl-AlDeSense, a matching nonresponsive reagent. Although ALDH1A1 contributes to the detoxification of reactive aldehydes, it is also associated with stemness and is highly elevated in CSCs. AlDeSense exhibits a 20-fold fluorescent enhancement when treated with ALDH1A1. Moreover, we established that AlDeSense is selective against a panel of common ALDH isoforms and exhibits exquisite chemostability against a collection of biologically relevant species. Through the application of surface marker antibody staining, tumorsphere assays, and assessment of tumorigenicity, we demonstrate that cells exhibiting high AlDeSense signal intensity have properties of CSCs. Using these probes in tandem, we have identified CSCs at the cellular level via flow cytometry and confocal imaging, as well as monitored their states in animal models.
Cancer stem cells (CSCs)
were first discovered in human acute myelogenous
leukemia[1] and have since been identified
in breast cancer, glioblastoma, multiple myeloma, gastric cancer,
pancreatic cancer, and colon cancer, among others.[2] CSCs have an increased capacity to activate antiapoptotic
and pro-survival pathways, as well as to overexpress ATP-binding cassette
transporters which act as potent efflux pumps to extrude small molecules
(e.g., chemotherapeutics) from the cancer cells.[3,4] As
such, conventional chemotherapeutics can inadvertently lead to an
enrichment of CSCs by killing non-CSCs, which in turn contributes
to the emergence of highly aggressive and treatment-resistant phenotypes
during relapse.[5] Unfortunately, the behavior
of CSCs, especially in an in vivo context, is insufficiently understood
despite the availability of cell cultures and three-dimensional (3D)
models. A major drawback of these systems is that they cannot mimic
the complex microenvironment where CSCs are thought to reside. Moreover,
CSCs are rare and represent only a small fraction of cells within
a tumor. CSCs also exist in a dynamic equilibrium between undifferentiated
and differentiated states,[6] which is modulated
by specific properties of the tumor microenvironment (e.g., hypoxia),
as well as interactions with a network of cells, signaling molecules,
and the extracellular matrix.[7−9] Thus, methods that can be employed
to not only detect CSCs but also to report on specific in vivo properties
such as stem cell plasticity are highly desirable. One approach to
image CSCs is to target CSC surface biomarkers with a reporter (e.g.,
optical dye) conjugated to an antibody.[10] However, this can lead to off-target binding[11] and uneven or incomplete staining because antibody–dye
conjugates cannot readily permeate into tumor regions distal from
blood vasculature.[12,13] Alternatively, genetically engineered
CSCs expressing fluorescent proteins (e.g., GFP) or luciferase bioluminescent
constructs can facilitate lineage tracing experiments.[14−16] Major limitations are that it can only be used to visualize CSCs
that have been previously isolated, transfected, and reintroduced
into an animal model, but not all cell types are amenable to genetic
manipulation.In contrast, aldehyde dehydrogenases (ALDHs),
in particular, the
1A1 isoform, is believed to be a reliable marker of CSCs across many
cancer types, including prostate, lung, breast, esophageal, and ovarian
cancers.[17−22] In these instances, ALDH1A1 is associated with treatment resistance
and poor clinical outcome. In addition to ALDH1A1, there are 18 other
ALDH isoforms in humans, many of which display promiscuous and overlapping
substrate scopes with ALDH1A1 when catalyzing the oxidation of endogenous
and xenobiotic aldehydes to the corresponding carboxylic acid products.[23,24] Although challenging, the development of a selective activity-based
fluorescent probe for ALDH1A1 would enable detection of CSCs, as well
as concurrently report on their degree of stemness. In this regard,
there is a gradient of ALDH1A1 activity ranging from high in CSCs
to low in differentiated cancer cells (infra vide). Several probes
have been developed for ALDH, including BODIPY-aminoacetaldehyde (BAAA).[25−27] However, these examples suffer from major drawbacks. Because BAAA
is equally fluorescent compared to its turned-over carboxylate product,
CSCs are identified based on their ability to retain the BAAA product
relative to the unactivated probe using efflux pump inhibitors. Additionally,
an ALDH inhibitor (i.e., N,N-diethylaminobenzaldehyde
(DEAB)) must also be used in tandem to distinguish between signal
from ALDH activity and nonspecific accumulation in cells.[28,29] While these are useful tools for isolating CSCs from solid tumors
and cell cultures, introduction of efflux pump and ALDH inhibitors
to live animals will have unintended consequences. More importantly,
BAAA exhibits cross-reactivity with several ALDH isoforms rendering
the interpretation of experimental results challenging.[18,30,31] Herein, we describe the development
of a highly selective, activity-based fluorescent probe to target
elevated ALDH1A1 in CSCs. Through the application of established protocols
that include identifying CSC surface markers, cultivation of tumorspheres,
and assessment of tumorigenicity, we provide evidence that the
brightest AlDeSense cells possess CSC properties. Finally, we employ
our probe to monitor CSC plasticity in a tumor model using live mice.
Results
Design
and Synthesis of AlDeSense
Our ALDH1A1 probe,
AlDeSense, is based on the photostable Pennsylvania Green dye platform
and is equipped with a pendant benzaldehyde moiety (Figure a).[32] Electron deficient aryl groups such as benzaldehyde can attenuate
fluorescence via the donor-photoinduced electron transfer (d-PeT)
quenching mechanism.[33,34] This provides the desired signal
enhancement upon conversion to the unquenched carboxylic acid by ALDH1A1.
We rationally selected the Pennsylvania Green scaffold because at
physiological pH it is negatively charged (apparent pKa = 4.81). The negative charge on the dye is expected
to negate the need for efflux pump inhibitors because the turned-over
product will be dianionic and less able to cross the cell membrane.[35] The low pKa serves
a second purpose since it can presumably form an ionic interaction
with His-293 located at the entrance of the active site (Figure S1).[36] This
imparts selectivity against isoforms such as ALDH1A3 where the corresponding
His residue is not present.[37−39] As predicted by the literature,
the benzaldehyde moiety will also augment isoform selectivity, since
benzaldehydes are better substrates for ALDH1A1 than many of the other
ALDH isoforms.[40] Despite the fact that
AlDeSense is weakly fluorescent until activated, nonspecific staining
can still contribute to misidentification of non-CSC populations.
To account for this and circumvent the need for ALDH inhibitors, we
developed Ctrl-AlDeSense, a nonresponsive matching control reagent
(Figure b). Although
Ctrl-AlDeSense is structurally similar to AlDeSense and displays nearly
identical physical properties, replacing the benzaldehyde moiety with
an acetophenone group renders it unreactive to ALDH1A1 (Figure c, Figures S2 and S3).
Figure 1
Chemical structures of (a) AlDeSense and (b) Ctrl-AlDeSense.
(c)
Comparison of photophysical and chemical properties of AlDeSense and
Ctrl-AlDeSense. (d) Fluorescence spectra of AlDeSense upon incubation
with recombinant ALDH1A1 at room temperature. Inset shows fluorescence
increase over time under the same conditions. (e) Comparison of fluorescence
signal from ALDH1A1 reacting with the following: AlDeSense, AlDeSense
with additional inhibition with DEAB (100 nM), and Ctrl-AlDeSense.
(f) Normalized fluorescence turn-on of AlDeSense after incubation
with 20 units of each ALDH isoform for 30 min at room temperature.
Units are defined as 1 μmol of substrate turned over/μmol
enzyme/min. (g) Response of AlDeSense to various reactive oxygen species,
biological thiols, and amines at concentrations of 100 μM (GSH
was tested at 1 mM). For all assays, AlDeSense was used at 1 μM
final concentration.
Chemical structures of (a) AlDeSense and (b) Ctrl-AlDeSense.
(c)
Comparison of photophysical and chemical properties of AlDeSense and
Ctrl-AlDeSense. (d) Fluorescence spectra of AlDeSense upon incubation
with recombinant ALDH1A1 at room temperature. Inset shows fluorescence
increase over time under the same conditions. (e) Comparison of fluorescence
signal from ALDH1A1 reacting with the following: AlDeSense, AlDeSense
with additional inhibition with DEAB (100 nM), and Ctrl-AlDeSense.
(f) Normalized fluorescence turn-on of AlDeSense after incubation
with 20 units of each ALDH isoform for 30 min at room temperature.
Units are defined as 1 μmol of substrate turned over/μmol
enzyme/min. (g) Response of AlDeSense to various reactive oxygen species,
biological thiols, and amines at concentrations of 100 μM (GSH
was tested at 1 mM). For all assays, AlDeSense was used at 1 μM
final concentration.The synthesis of AlDeSense involved DIBAL reduction of methyl
4-bromo-3-methylbenzoate 1 to afford the corresponding
benzyl alcohol , which was protected
with tert-butyldimethylsilyl chloride to give 2 in 93% yield over two steps. Lithiumhalogen exchange enabled
coupling to MEM-protected difluoroxanthone 3 giving the
Pennsylvania Green intermediate 4 in 48% yield after
acid mediated global deprotection. IBX oxidation of the benzyl alcohol
then afforded AlDeSense in 79% yield. Preparation of AlDeSense AM,
a cell permeable derivative, could be achieved via alkylation of AlDeSense
with bromomethyl acetate in 60% yield (Scheme ). Once internalized, intracellular esterases
can hydrolyze the AM group to afford the parent AlDeSense reagent.
The synthesis of Ctrl-AlDeSense involved similar chemistry, and the
details can be found in the Supporting Information. Of note, both AlDeSense and AlDeSense AM will herein be referred
to as AlDeSense for simplicity. AM protected versions were utilized
for all cellular and animal studies.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of AlDeSense
and AlDeSense AM
In Vitro Characterization
With AlDeSense in hand, we
first evaluated its response to purified ALDH1A1. Prior to activation,
AlDeSense was weakly fluorescent (ΦF = 0.04); however,
addition of ALDH1A1 resulted in a robust ∼20-fold fluorescent
enhancement (Figure d). Inhibition of ALDH1A1 with DEAB completely abolished the turn-on
response, and the resulting fluorescent signal was comparable to that
of Ctrl-AlDeSense (Figures e and S4). Next, we screened for
potential cross-reactivity against a panel of the most common ALDH
isoforms and found that only ALDH1A1 led to probe activation (Figures f and S5). To ensure that AlDeSense is only activated
by ALDH1A1 when in cells, we assessed potential off-target responses
against various biologically relevant analytes. Although aldehyde
groups are prone to oxidation, we did not observe any oxidized fluorescent
products when screened against a panel of reactive oxygen species
(Figure g). Similarly,
when AlDeSense was incubated with various thiols and amines, we did
not detect formation of fluorescent hemithioacetal[41,42] and Schiff base[43] products, respectively
(Figure g). We also
established that AlDeSense, its turned-over product, and the control
reagent are nontoxic using standard cell viability assays (Figure S6). Moreover, LC-MS shows that AM deprotection,
as well as ALDH1A1-catalyzed oxidation occurs upon cell uptake (Figure S7). Together, these key experiments indicate
that AlDeSense is suitable for detecting ALDH1A1 activity in living
systems.
Detection of ALDH1A1 Activity in K562 Cells
To investigate
the ALDH1A1 sensing capabilities of AlDeSense in cell culture, we
utilized the K562human chronic myeloid leukemia cell line, which
is known to exhibit high overall ALDH activity.[44] We hypothesized that AlDeSense can be used to stratify
these cells based on ALDH1A1 activity and that the brightest cells
would exhibit CSC markers. First, using flow cytometry analysis, we
found that K562 cells stained with AlDeSense are significantly brighter
compared to those treated with either AlDeSense with an inhibitor
or Ctrl-AlDeSense (Figures a–c and S8). We also identified
a population of AlDeSense positive cells that exhibits the CD34+/CD38-
profile characteristic of leukemic stem cells. The relative proportion
of these cells increased when K562 cells were cultured under an environment
low in oxygen (Figure S9). Exposure to
hypoxia is a common condition to enrich for CSCs.[45,46] We also assessed the utility of AlDeSense for confocal fluorescence
imaging, which in contrast to flow cytometry, requires less sample
and allows for visual assessment of cell morphology (Figure d). First, we determined the
subcellular staining pattern of AlDeSense. ALDH1A1 is a cytoplasmic
enzyme, and therefore, AlDeSense should not be localized to organelles
such as the mitochondria where other ALDH isoforms (e.g., ALDH2) are
present at high abundance. Co-staining with organelle-specific trackers
revealed that AlDeSense did in fact stain the cytoplasm and was not
extensively localized to various organelles (Figures S10 and S11). After several minutes, a small population of
highly fluorescent cells began to emerge owing to ALDH1A1-mediated
activation of our probe. Treatment with an ALDH inhibitor as well
as ALDH1A1-specific siRNA knockdown confirmed that ALDH1A1 is responsible
for the fluorescence enhancement (Figures g, S12, S13).
Further confirmation of in cellulo selectivity was obtained by comparing
K562 cells with HEK293T cells, an ALDH1A1 negative cell line (Figure S14).[47] Cells
treated with Ctrl-AlDeSense allowed us to establish baseline microscope
settings which account for fluorescence due to accumulation of dye
(Figure S15). Applying these settings to
the AlDeSense-stained population, any cell which shows fluorescence
above baseline can only be due to the ALDH1A1-catalyzed turnover of
AlDeSense (Figure d–f). Of note, the brightest cells also displayed the CD34+/CD38-/CD133+
leukemic stem cell profile (Figure S16),
suggesting that AlDeSense was being activated to the greatest extent
in putative CSCs.
Figure 2
Application of AlDeSense and Ctrl-AlDeSense in live K562
cells.
Flow cytometry analysis of K562 cells stained with (a) Ctrl-AlDeSense
(1.5 μM) or (b) AlDeSense (1.5 μM). (c) Histographic profiles
of (a) and (b) shown in blue and green, respectively. Confocal images
of K562 cells stained with (d) AlDeSense or (e) Ctrl-AlDeSense both
at 2 μM. Scale bars are 100 μm. (f) Percentage of total
cells showing fluorescence using each of these stains. (Error bars
are ± SD, n = 9, unpaired t test with Welch’s correction.) (g) Knockdown of ALDH1A1 using
siRNA showed an ablation of signal compared to cells treated with
a scrambled siRNA as a negative control. (Error bars are SD, n = 15, unpaired t test with Welch’s
correction.)
Application of AlDeSense and Ctrl-AlDeSense in live K562
cells.
Flow cytometry analysis of K562 cells stained with (a) Ctrl-AlDeSense
(1.5 μM) or (b) AlDeSense (1.5 μM). (c) Histographic profiles
of (a) and (b) shown in blue and green, respectively. Confocal images
of K562 cells stained with (d) AlDeSense or (e) Ctrl-AlDeSense both
at 2 μM. Scale bars are 100 μm. (f) Percentage of total
cells showing fluorescence using each of these stains. (Error bars
are ± SD, n = 9, unpaired t test with Welch’s correction.) (g) Knockdown of ALDH1A1 using
siRNA showed an ablation of signal compared to cells treated with
a scrambled siRNA as a negative control. (Error bars are SD, n = 15, unpaired t test with Welch’s
correction.)
Identification of CSCs
in Cell Culture Using AlDeSense
Next, we sought to determine
whether our probe would yield greater
fluorescence in CSCs obtained using two different enrichment strategies.
First, we used the well-established mammosphere assay to cultivate
MDA-MB-231 CSCs by growing cells in low serum conditions on nonadherent
plates.[48] Under these conditions, non-CSCs
die off, leaving individual CSCs to proliferate into spherical structures.
Mammospheres as well as tumorspheres derived from other cancer types
have been shown to generate cells with nearly all known CSC characteristics—such
as increased in vivo tumorigenicity, invasiveness, metastasis rates,
EMT transition, and resistance to chemotherapeutics. Thus, they are
widely used to study CSCs and develop CSC-specific therapeutics.[49] Mammospheres stained with AlDeSense were 3-fold
brighter than those stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense, showing increased
levels of ALDH1A1 activity in the mammospheres. In addition, transferring
the mammospheres to normal cell culture media and allowing them to
differentiate led to a gradual decrease of AlDeSense signal over 36
h, demonstrating that AlDeSense can be used to monitor CSC differentiation
(Figure a–e).
Figure 3
Imaging
of enriched-CSC cell cultures. Representative brightfield
and fluorescence images of mammospheres stained with (a) AlDeSense
and (b) Ctrl-AlDeSense. Representative brightfield and fluorescence
images of mammospheres after 36 h in normal cell culture media, stained
with (c) AlDeSense and (d) Ctrl-AlDeSense. (e) Mean fluorescence signals
from mammospheres for both dyes at several time points throughout
differentiation. Error bars are ± SD, n ≥
7. Confocal imaging of patterned (e-CSC) B16F0 melanoma versus nonpatterned
(non-CSC) melanoma using AlDeSense (AS) and Ctrl-AlDeSense (Ctrl).
Representative composite brightfield and fluorescence images of (f)
e-CSCs stained with AlDeSense, (g) e-CSCs stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense,
(h) non-CSCs stained with AlDeSense, and (i) non-CSCs stained with
Ctrl-AlDeSense. Quantification of the fluorescence intensity (j).
For each condition, n ≥ 21 images were taken
across three different sample preparations. Error bars are ±
SD. Scale bars are 50 μm.
Imaging
of enriched-CSC cell cultures. Representative brightfield
and fluorescence images of mammospheres stained with (a) AlDeSense
and (b) Ctrl-AlDeSense. Representative brightfield and fluorescence
images of mammospheres after 36 h in normal cell culture media, stained
with (c) AlDeSense and (d) Ctrl-AlDeSense. (e) Mean fluorescence signals
from mammospheres for both dyes at several time points throughout
differentiation. Error bars are ± SD, n ≥
7. Confocal imaging of patterned (e-CSC) B16F0 melanoma versus nonpatterned
(non-CSC) melanoma using AlDeSense (AS) and Ctrl-AlDeSense (Ctrl).
Representative composite brightfield and fluorescence images of (f)
e-CSCs stained with AlDeSense, (g) e-CSCs stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense,
(h) non-CSCs stained with AlDeSense, and (i) non-CSCs stained with
Ctrl-AlDeSense. Quantification of the fluorescence intensity (j).
For each condition, n ≥ 21 images were taken
across three different sample preparations. Error bars are ±
SD. Scale bars are 50 μm.For the second model in our study, we chose to enrich CSCs
using
a protocol recently published by Kilian and co-workers,[50] where they reported that B16F0 melanoma cells
cultured on a spiral-patterned hydrogel platform to mimic mechanical
properties of the tumor microenvironment gave rise to cells that displayed
increased CSC marker expression (e.g., CD271), as well as metastatic
potency and tumorigenicity. Only a small fraction of the B16F0 cells
cultured under standard conditions were identified to exhibit elevated
ALDH1A1 activity via flow cytometry and confocal imaging using AlDeSense.
However, when the cells enriched in CSCs via the patterned platform
(herein referred as e-CSCs) were treated with AlDeSense, they were
11.3-fold brighter than those grown under standard conditions (referred
herein as non-CSCs). e-CSCs treated with AlDeSense were also 9.0-fold
brighter than e-CSCs treated with Ctrl-AlDeSense, demonstrating that
the signal was due to ALDH1A1 (Figure f–j). Flow cytometry analysis revealed that
e-CSCs displayed colocalization of AlDeSense with CD271, a commonly
used melanoma stem cell marker, when compared to non-CSCs (Figure S17).[51,52]
Ex Vivo Imaging
of ALDH1A1 Activity in e-CSCs
We subsequently
sought to visualize ALDH1A1 activity in e-CSCs introduced into whole
animal models. First, we intravenously injected either e-CSCs or non-CSCs
into mice via the tail vein to generate metastatic lesions in the
lung. Immunocompetent mice were used with this syngeneic cell line
because the immune system is known to influence the tumor microenvironment
and hence properties of CSCs in vivo.[11] Since e-CSCs lost many of the stem cell-related properties within
5 days after they were replated on glass slides,[50] it was essential to determine whether ALDH1A1 activity
was maintained after CSCs were introduced into a living system. Specifically,
can metastatic niches be established within this time frame before
differentiation takes place? We hypothesized that if e-CSCs retained
their stemness, the AlDeSense signal would be higher for e-CSC lungs
compared to non-CSC lungs. At various time points during tumor progression
(day 7 and 11) mice were sacrificed, their lungs were removed and
perfused with solutions of either AlDeSense or Ctrl-AlDeSense (Figure a–d). When
stained with AlDeSense, the fluorescence of the e-CSC-treated lungs
was indeed higher than the signal from non-CSC-treated lungs (Figure e). However, it is
possible that e-CSCs simply gave rise to larger metastatic lesions
which could uptake more dye, leading to increased fluorescence intensity.
To resolve this, we compared the signal of e-CSC and non-CSC lungs
stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense and found that they were not statistically
different, allowing us to confidently rule out this as a possibility
(Figure f). Moreover,
e-CSC lungs also had a higher signal from AlDeSense versus Ctrl-AlDeSense
(Figure g). On the
other hand, differences in intensity were not observed between AlDeSense
and Ctrl-AlDeSense in lungs with non-CSC metastases (Figure h). Results from days 7 and
11 showed consistent patterns (Figure S18). Taken together, these results demonstrate that the e-CSCs continue
to have higher ALDH1A1 activity levels after introduction into a living
system, and that AlDeSense in conjunction with Ctrl-AlDeSense can
be used to identify e-CSCs exhibiting this activity.
Figure 4
Assessment of AlDeSense
in murine melanoma models. Representative
images of lungs collected at day 11 with (a) e-CSC metastases stained
with AlDeSense (AS), (b) e-CSC metastases stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense (Ctrl-AS),
(c) non-CSC metastases stained with AlDeSense, and (d) non-CSC metastases
stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense, all displayed as bright field images
overlaid with fluorescence signal. Staining with AlDeSense (e) led
to a significant difference in signal between e-CSC metastases and
non-CSC metastases, but staining with Ctrl-AlDeSense (f) did not show
a difference between e-CSC and non-CSC. When analyzing the e-CSC samples,
AlDeSense showed a significant increase in signal in comparison to
Ctrl-AlDeSense (g). This difference was not observed when analyzing
non-CSC samples (h). For panels (e–h) error bars are ±
SD, n ≥ 4 for each condition.
Assessment of AlDeSense
in murinemelanoma models. Representative
images of lungs collected at day 11 with (a) e-CSC metastases stained
with AlDeSense (AS), (b) e-CSC metastases stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense (Ctrl-AS),
(c) non-CSC metastases stained with AlDeSense, and (d) non-CSC metastases
stained with Ctrl-AlDeSense, all displayed as bright field images
overlaid with fluorescence signal. Staining with AlDeSense (e) led
to a significant difference in signal between e-CSC metastases and
non-CSC metastases, but staining with Ctrl-AlDeSense (f) did not show
a difference between e-CSC and non-CSC. When analyzing the e-CSC samples,
AlDeSense showed a significant increase in signal in comparison to
Ctrl-AlDeSense (g). This difference was not observed when analyzing
non-CSC samples (h). For panels (e–h) error bars are ±
SD, n ≥ 4 for each condition.
In Vivo Imaging of ALDH1A1 Activity in e-CSCs
Implanted into
Live Animals
With this information in hand, we then evaluated
the tumorigenicity of e-CSCs and the corresponding performance of
AlDeSense in a live animal model. Allografts in BALB/c mice were generated
via the subcutaneous injection of e-CSCs and non-CSCs into the right
and left flanks, respectively. Tumors were monitored and imaged up
to 2 weeks using a whole-body fluorescence imager following an intratumoral
injection of AlDeSense or Ctrl-AlDeSense. Results revealed a consistently
higher signal from AlDeSense in the e-CSCs versus non-CSCs tumors
(Figure a–c)
at both 1 and 2 weeks. Ctrl-AlDeSense, on the other hand, did not
show increased signal from the e-CSC tumor and had much lower signal
over all. This demonstrates that AlDeSense can be used to image ALDH1A1
activity in vivo, and more importantly that e-CSCs retained high ALDH1A1
activity after implantation and induction of tumorigenesis. Moreover,
consistent with higher tumorgenicity, implantation of e-CSCs into
mice yielded larger, more aggressive tumors compared to non-CSCs (Figure d).
Figure 5
Representative images
of mice implanted with both non-CSC and e-CSC
tumors on either flank and injected with (a) Ctrl-AlDeSense or (b)
AlDeSense intratumorally. Tumor regions are highlighted with white
circles and fluorescence signal was overlaid over CT images to show
placement of signal. (c) Ratio of signal from e-CSC/non-CSC tumors
is shown for both Ctrl-AlDeSense and AlDeSense injections. Error bars
are ± SD, n = 3 for each dye. (d) Mean volumes
of both e-CSC and non-CSC tumors throughout the time course of the
experiment. Error bars are ± SD, n = 5 for each
tumor type.
Representative images
of mice implanted with both non-CSC and e-CSC
tumors on either flank and injected with (a) Ctrl-AlDeSense or (b)
AlDeSense intratumorally. Tumor regions are highlighted with white
circles and fluorescence signal was overlaid over CT images to show
placement of signal. (c) Ratio of signal from e-CSC/non-CSC tumors
is shown for both Ctrl-AlDeSense and AlDeSense injections. Error bars
are ± SD, n = 3 for each dye. (d) Mean volumes
of both e-CSC and non-CSC tumors throughout the time course of the
experiment. Error bars are ± SD, n = 5 for each
tumor type.
Discussion
In
conclusion, we have developed AlDeSense, a powerful new turn-on
fluorescent reagent optimized for the detection of CSCs and monitoring
of stem cell plasticity via ALDH1A1 activity. Unactivated AlDeSense
is weakly fluorescent owing to d-PeT quenching from the pendant benzaldehyde
moiety; however, the fluorescence signal is enhanced by nearly 20-fold
upon oxidation to the corresponding benzoic acid product by ALDH1A1.
Importantly, we did not observe cross-reactivity with any of the other
ALDH isoforms tested. This selectivity can be attributed to benzaldehyde
being a better substrate for ALDH1A1 and a crucial ionic interaction
that we postulate to be forming between the negatively charged dye
scaffold and a positively charged His residue at the entrance of the
ALDH1A1 active site. Attempts to elucidate the exact nature of this
selectivity by cocrystallizing AlDeSense and ALDH1A1 were unsuccessful.
The interaction between the active site cysteine residue (Cys-302)
and AlDeSense results in a dynamic equilibrium between the aldehyde
and hemithioacetal forms which creates too much disorder for crystallographic
visualization of the complex. Nevertheless, the exquisite selectivity
of AlDeSense for ALDH1A1 over other isoforms, as well as its excellent
chemoselectivity against a panel of biologically relevant analytes
ensures that any signal above the background established using Ctrl-AlDeSense
is due to ALDH1A1 activity.This property offers unique advantages
over existing approaches
such as those that involve antibody-dye conjugates for CSC imaging.
Dyes that are appended to antibodies targeting CSCs are always in
a fluorescent “on” state, meaning background signal
will be high. In contrast, AlDeSense is weakly fluorescent until it
is activated by ALDH1A1, and any nonspecific staining can be readily
accounted for by employing the matching control reagent (Ctrl-AlDeSense).
Another advantage is that our probe is compatible with many cancer
cell types because elevated ALDH1A1 activity is a general property
of CSCs. In contrast, CSC surface biomarkers are unique to specific
cancers but are often ill-defined and heterogeneously displayed. Because
AlDeSense is cell-permeable and acts intracellularly, it does not
directly interfere with native cell-surface processes through formation
of tight-binding antibody–antigen interactions, offering yet
another advantage. Finally, AlDeSense will only activate if CSCs are
viable because ALDH1A1 depends on availability of NADH. In contrast,
CSCs that are no longer living can still display surface biomarkers.
In comparison to BAAA, a nonselective commercial reagent designed
to also target ALDH activity, AlDeSense is selective for only the
ALDH1A1 isoform. BAAA on the other hand has been shown to react with
a variety of isoforms, including ALDH1A2, ALDH1A3, ALDH2, and ALDH4A1,
both in previous reports[18,30,31] and under our own examination (Figure S19). Furthermore, AlDeSense is a turn-on probe that localizes in the
cytosol, while BAAA is accumulation-based and localizes to the ER
and mitochondria (Figure S20). This means
that unlike BAAA, AlDeSense does not require either ALDH or efflux
pump inhibitors to selectively label CSCs and will not show false
positives from mitochondrially-located ALDH isoforms, such as ALDH2.Owing to the unique imaging capabilities of AlDeSense, CSCs enriched
using various approaches can be imaged via confocal microscopy to
approximate the degree of stemness versus the extent of differentiation.
Indeed, we have demonstrated in this study through the application
of surface marker antibody staining, tumorsphere assays, and assessment
of tumorigenicity, that cells exhibiting high AlDeSense signal intensity
have properties of CSCs. For both chronic myelogenous leukemia and
melanoma, cells exhibiting the CSC markers CD34+/CD38-/CD133+ and
CD271, respectively, were among the brightest cells when stained with
AlDeSense. In addition to costaining with antibodies, we also generated
CSC-enriched mammospheres and showed that they displayed elevated
ALDH1A1 activity. We also observed a decrease in ALDH1A1 activity
by allowing the mammospheres to differentiate over time, demonstrating
that AlDeSense could be used as a tool to monitor CSC plasticity.
Lastly, we used AlDeSense to assess CSC plasticity after introduction
into living systems.Prior to this study, it was unknown whether
e-CSCs would retain properties
of stemness such as high ALDH1A1 activity after introduction
into a living system. Our imaging experiments demonstrate that ALDH1A1
activity persists up to several weeks in e-CSCs after they are introduced
into a living animal, implicating that a niche must be established
that supports this population of cells. Current efforts will focus
on employing AlDeSense to determine parameters of the tumor microenvironment
that govern the transition from a differentiated to CSC state and
vice versa. Future work will be focused on two fronts. First, we will
develop red-shifted congeners to enable higher resolution imaging
of CSCs in deeper tissues. Second, we will generate selective probes
for other ALDH isoforms such as ALDH1A3 that are also believed to
be linked to stemness. Beyond leading to a greater understanding of
fundamental CSC biology, we envision that AlDeSense and other ALDH
activity-based probes can be utilized as powerful prognostic indicators
and assist in the development of CSC-specific chemotherapeutics.
A flame-dried round-bottom flask was charged
with methyl 4-bromo-3-methylbenzoate (11.5 g, 50.0 mmol, 1.00 equiv)
and anhydrous CH2Cl2 (100 mL). A flame-dried
addition funnel was attached to the flask and the system was flushed
with nitrogen. The reaction was cooled to 0 °C and treated with
1.0 M DIBAL-H in CH2Cl2 (110 mL, 110 mmol, 2.2
equiv) via funnel addition over 23 min. The reaction was allowed to
warm to room temperature. After stirring at room temperature for 4
h, the reaction was cooled to 0 °C and quenched via the slow
addition of H2O (5 mL), 1 M NaOH (5 mL), and additional
H2O (30 mL). The resulting emulsion was poured over filter
paper and washed with CH2Cl2. The organics were
combined, dried over Na2SO4, and concentrated
under reduced pressure. The crude residue was eluted through a silica
plug and concentrated to afford a light-yellow oil which was used
without further purification. A solution of this intermediate in anhydrous
CH2Cl2 (50 mL) was treated with imidazole (6.8
g, 100 mmol, 2.0 equiv) and tert-butyldimethylsilyl
chloride (8.2 g, 55 mmol, 1.1 equiv). After overnight stirring, the
reaction was filtered and washed with CH2Cl2. The filtrate was collected, washed with aqueous NH4Cl,
and concentrated under reduced pressure. The crude material was purified
via flash chromatography on a silica column (2:98 v/v EtOAc/hexanes)
to afford the title compound (14.6 g, 46.3 mmol, 92.6% yield over
two-steps beginning from methyl 4-bromo-3-methylbenzoate). 1H NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3) δ 7.47 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H), 7.18 (d, J = 1.6 Hz, 1H), 7.01 (dd, J = 8.2, 1.5 Hz, 1H), 4.66 (s, 2H), 2.39 (s, 3H), 0.94 (s,
9H), 0.10 (s, 6H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3)
δ 140.82, 137.67, 132.22, 128.63, 125.20, 123.15, 64.48, 26.09,
23.09, 18.57, −5.10.
A flame-dried
round-bottom flask was charged with 2 (0.348 g, 1.1 mmol,
1.1 equiv) and anhydrous THF (5 mL). The reaction was cooled to −78
°C and treated with 1.4 M sec-butyllithium in
cyclohexane (0.9 mL, 1.1 mmol, 1.1 equiv). The reaction was stirred
at the same temperature for 30 min and then treated with a solution
of 3 (0.440 g, 1.0 mmol, 1.0 equiv) in anhydrous THF
(5 mL). The reaction was stirred at the same temperature for 2 h.
The reaction was warmed to room temperature and treated with 1.0 M
aq. HCl (6.0 mL, 6.0 mmol, 6.0 equiv). The reaction was warmed to
50 °C and stirred for 4 h. The reaction was concentrated under
a vacuum to remove the THF and cyclohexane. The remaining mixture
was poured over filter paper, washed with H2O (100 mL)
and CH2Cl2 (100 mL), and vacuum-dried to yield
the title compound as a red-orange solid (0.176 g, 0.483 mmol, 48.3%
yield). 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 7.44 (s, 1H), 7.39 (d, J = 7.7 Hz, 1H),
7.23 (d, J = 7.7 Hz, 1H), 6.82 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 2H), 6.59 (d, J = 11.3 Hz, 2H), 5.33
(s, 0H), 4.62 (s, 2H), 2.02 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (125 MHz,
DMSO-d6) δ 150.29 (t, J = 6.1 Hz), 144.31, 135.32, 129.86, 128.71, 128.50, 124.21, 114.00,
111.28 (d, J = 21.9 Hz), 105.06 (d, J = 4.3 Hz), 62.52, 19.11. HRMS-ESI (m/z): [M + H]+ Calc. mass for C21H15O4F2 = 369.0938; Found mass = 369.0930.
AlDeSense
A round-bottom flask was charged with 4 (0.368 g,
1.0 mmol, 1.0 equiv), IBX (0.336 g, 1.2 mmol,
1.2 equiv), and DMSO (10 mL). After being stirred for 3 h at room
temperature, the reaction was quenched via the addition of brine (100
mL). The resulting mixture was poured over filter paper and vacuum-dried.
The red solid was suspended in H2O (200 mL) and heated
to 80 °C. After stirring for 2 h, the reaction was cooled to
room temperature and poured over filter paper and vacuum-dried to
yield the title compound as a rust-orange solid (0.290 g, 0.79.2 mmol,
79.2% yield). AlDeSense used in biological assays was further purified
via chromatography on a silica column (10:90 v/v MeOH:CH2Cl2). 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.12 (s, 1H), 8.02 (s, 1H), 7.95 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 7.52 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H),
6.80 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 1H), 6.60 (d, J = 11.4 Hz, 2H), 2.12 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 193.01, 154.48, 154.28, 152.48, 148.77
(t, J = 5.7 Hz), 138.57, 136.95, 136.83, 131.32,
129.88, 127.32, 110.11 (d, J = 21.7 Hz), 109.50 (d, J = 8.2 Hz), 104.93 (d, J = 5.4 Hz), 18.90.
[M + H]+ Calc. mass for C21H13O4F2 = 367.0782; Found mass = 367.0784.
AlDeSense AM
A flame-dried round-bottom flask was charged
with AlDeSense (0.037 g, 0.10 mmol, 1.0 equiv), anhydrous DMF (2.0
mL), bromomethyl acetate (0.020 mL, 0.20 mmol, 2.0 equiv), and Hünig’s
base (0.035 mL, 0.20 mmol, 2.0 equiv). After being stirred for 12
h at room temperature, all volatiles were removed under a vacuum at
room temperature. The crude material was purified via column chromatography
on a silica column (20:80 v/v EtOAc:CH2Cl2)
to afford the title compound as an orange solid (0.0265 g, 0.060 mmol,
60.4% yield). 1H NMR (500 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ 10.14 (s, 1H), 8.03 (s, 1H), 7.98 (d, J = 7.8 Hz, 1H), 7.76 (d, J = 6.9 Hz, 1H), 7.52 (d, J = 7.7 Hz, 1H), 6.81 (d, J = 10.9 Hz,
1H), 6.63 (d, J = 11.1 Hz, 1H), 6.55 (d, J = 7.0 Hz, 1H), 6.01 (s, 2H), 2.14 (s, 3H), 2.13 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (125 MHz, DMSO-d6) δ
193.51, 175.18 (d, J = 20.8 Hz), 169.80, 157.56 (t,
d, J = 5.1 Hz), 155.16 (d, J = 265.5
Hz), 148.82 (d, J = 245.5 Hz), 149.12, 148.91 (d, J = 12.5 Hz), 147.81 (d, J = 9.8 Hz), 137.33,
137.23, 137.14, 131.55, 130.02, 127.44, 117.80 (d, J = 8.5 Hz), 113.98 (d, J = 7.7 Hz), 113.02 (d, J = 21.5 Hz), 109.73 (d, J = 21.8 Hz),
105.77 (d, J = 4.8 Hz), 104.62, 84.80, 20.58, 19.00.
[M + H]+ Calc. mass for C24H17O6F2 = 439.0993; Found mass = 439.1008.
ALDH Isoform
Activity Assays
The activity of each isoform
of ALDH was confirmed by monitoring the production of NADH at 340
nm when incubated with the most commonly used substrate for that enzyme
(propionaldehyde for ALDH1A1, ALDH1A2, ALDH1A3, ALDH2, and ALDH4A1;
benzaldehyde for ALDH3A1, and succinic semialdehyde for ALDH5A1).
Each isoform was diluted with 50 mM triethanolamine (TEA, pH 7.4)
to a final concentration of 1 μM and placed in a 1 mL quartz
cuvette. Directly before measurement, NAD+ was added to
final concentration of 2.5 mM, and the preferred substrate was added
to a final concentration of 1 mM. Absorbance spectra were taken from
300 to 500 nm every half minute for 15 min. Units of activity for
each enzyme were calculated from the slope of absorbance increase
at 340 nm over time, (1 unit = 1 μmol substrate turned over/
μmol enzyme/min).
AlDeSense Isoform Selectivity Assay
Activation of AlDeSense
was assessed using 20 units of each ALDH isoform. Activity was determined
by activity measurements using each isoform’s preferred substrate
(1 unit = 1 μmol substrate turned over/μmol enzyme/min).
Further details are in the Supporting Information. All enzymatic reactions were performed in 50 mM triethanolamine
buffer (pH 7.4, Thermo Fisher) with 2.5 mM NAD+ (Alfa Aesar)
and 5% v/v DMSO (Thermo Fisher) in a 1 mL quartz cuvette at room temperature.AlDeSense activation was determined using fluorescence. Immediately
before measurement, AlDeSense (1 μM) was added to a quartz cuvette.
After vigorous mixing, the reaction was monitored at room temperature
for 15 min. Fluorescence spectra were acquired according to following
parameters: λex = 498 nm, and emission range = 505–580
nm. All scans were normalized to the signal from AlDeSense in 50 mM
TEA and 2.5 mM NAD+ (without enzyme). End point measurements
at 15 min were performed in triplicate and reported as the averages
± standard deviation.
Inhibition of ALDH1A1
ALDH1A1 (100
nM) in 50 mM TEA
(pH 7.4) was incubated with 2.5 mM NAD+. Immediately before
measurement, 4-diethylaminobenzaldehyde (DEAB) in 95% ethanol was
added for a final concentration of 100 nM. The reaction was initiated
with the addition of AlDeSense (1 μM). The solution was mixed
with vigorous pipetting and fluorescence spectra were acquired. Fluorescence
spectra were acquired according to following parameters: λex = 498 nm, and emission range = 505–580 nm. Scans
were taken periodically for up to 30 min. The reaction proceeded at
room temperature throughout the experiment. All scans were normalized
to the peak of AlDeSense in 50 mM TEA and 2.5 mM NAD+ without
the addition of enzyme.
siRNA Knockdown of ALDH1A1
K562
cells were grown to
∼70% confluency in a poly-l-lysine (Trevigen) coated
Nunc Lab-Tek 8-well Chamber Slide system (Thermo Scientific) 1 day
before treatment with siRNA. Both the negative control scrambled siRNA
(Sigma-Aldrich, MISSION siRNA Universal Negative Control #1) as well
as the ALDH1A1 siRNA (Sigma-Aldrich, SASI_Hs01_00244056) was applied
at 50 μM concentrations following the Lipofectamine 3000 (Thermo
Fisher) protocol for a 24-well plate. 0.75 μL of the Lipofectamine
3000 reagent was used per sample. After treatment, cells incubated
with the siRNA in Opti-MEM (Gibco) at 37 °C, 5% CO2 for 8 h. At this point, the Opti-MEM was removed and replaced with
full growth media (IMDM supplemented with 10% FBS). Cells were incubated
further at 37 °C, 5% CO2 for 48 h before imaging on
the Zeiss LSM 700 confocal. To stain the cells with each imaging reagent,
1 μL of 2 mM AlDeSense AM in DMSO was used per 1 mL of serum-free
media (DMEM/F12 supplemented with 15 μM HEPES). Growth media
was removed from the cells and replaced with the premixed dye solution.
Cell staining continued for 30 min at room temperature (25 °C),
after which the cells were immediately imaged. The optical configuration
was optimized for the scrambled siRNA samples and the same optical
settings were used for all images.
Mammosphere Culture and
Imaging
Mammosphere formation
from MDA-MB-231breast cancer cells was performed as described previously
with some modifications. Cells were resuspended and diluted to a density
of 2000 cells/mL in DMEM/F12 (Sigma-Aldrich) supplemented with 2%
B27 supplement (Thermo Fisher), 40 ng/mL rhFGF-2 (Miltenyi Biotec),
and 20 ng/mL rhEGF (Gibco). They were plated in ultralow attachment
six-well plates (Corning) and incubated at 37 °C and 5% CO2 for 5 days or until most mammospheres were between 60 and
100 nm. At this point, the mammospheres were transferred to a four-well
chamber slide coated with Poly-l-lysine as described previously.
The mammospheres were then either immediately imaged with AlDeSense
or Ctrl-AlDeSense, or the media was exchanged with full DMEM media
supplement with 10% FBS and nonessential amino acids to allow differentiation
over 36 h.At various time points, the mammospheres were stained
with 2 μM AlDeSense or Ctrl-AlDeSense as described above. Staining
continued for 1 h at room temperature before imaging with a wide field
fluorescence microscope (Zeiss Axiovert 200M). A GFP filter set was
used to excite the fluorophores. Exposure times were set equally for
all images taken within a data set and configured to give low signal
in Ctrl-AlDeSense stained tumorspheres. Only mammospheres greater
than 50 μm in diameter were considered in the analysis.
B16F0Melanoma
Confocal Imaging
B16F0 murinemelanoma
cells were cultured for 5 days on polyacrylamide hydrogels with or
without spiral patterns as described previously.[18] The coverslips on which the hydrogels and cells were mounted
were transferred to a glass-bottomed dish for confocal imaging, leaving
the cells intact. Solutions of either 2 μM AlDeSense AM or 2
μM Ctrl-AlDeSense AM in PBS were added to the two types of cells.
The cells were incubated at room temperature for 1 h and then immediately
imaged. Confocal imaging was performed on a Zeiss LSM700 Confocal
Microscope, utilizing the 488 nm laser line to excite AlDeSense AM
and the 20X/0.8 objective. Three different coverslips of cells were
imaged for each set of conditions and at least six images were taken
for each coverslip. Using ImageJ, ROIs were drawn around areas covered
with cells and mean fluorescence values were measured for each image.
Ex Vivo Lung Metastases Imaging
Six- to eight-week-old
female C57BL/6J mice were purchased from Jackson Laboratory. Experimental
metastases were established by injecting 2 × 105 melanoma cells
via lateral tail vein injection. Mice were euthanized at either 7
or 11 days post injection. Immediately after euthanization, their
lungs were excised and perfused with about 1 mL of either 15 μM
AlDeSense AM or 15 μM Ctrl-AlDeSense AM in PBS. Outer portions
of the lungs were rinsed in 15 mL of PBS to remove blood or excess
dyes. After 2 h incubation at room temperature (25 °C), the lungs
were imaged on the IVIS spectrum imaging system (PerkinElmer). Data
were processed using Living Image software (Version 4.1).
In Vivo Melanoma
Tumor Fluorescence Imaging
All in
vivo imaging experiments were performed with the approval of the Institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
Six- to eight-week-old female BALB/c mice were purchased from the
Jackson Laboratory for the tumor imaging experiment. Primary localized
tumors were established by subcutaneously injecting B16F0 cells (5
× 105 cells in 100 μL of Hanks’ balanced
salt solution per injection). For each animal, cells that were grown
on patterned gels were injected on the right lateral flank and cells
grown on nonpatterned gels were injected on the left lateral flank.
At 1 and 2 weeks, mice were intravenously injected with either 15
μM AlDeSense or Ctrl-AlDeSense. After 24 h, the mice were imaged
using an IVIS spectrum imaging system for epifluorescence in conjunction
with a CT scan. Data was processed using Living Image software (Version
4.1).
Authors: Peter J Thul; Lovisa Åkesson; Mikaela Wiking; Diana Mahdessian; Aikaterini Geladaki; Hammou Ait Blal; Tove Alm; Anna Asplund; Lars Björk; Lisa M Breckels; Anna Bäckström; Frida Danielsson; Linn Fagerberg; Jenny Fall; Laurent Gatto; Christian Gnann; Sophia Hober; Martin Hjelmare; Fredric Johansson; Sunjae Lee; Cecilia Lindskog; Jan Mulder; Claire M Mulvey; Peter Nilsson; Per Oksvold; Johan Rockberg; Rutger Schutten; Jochen M Schwenk; Åsa Sivertsson; Evelina Sjöstedt; Marie Skogs; Charlotte Stadler; Devin P Sullivan; Hanna Tegel; Casper Winsnes; Cheng Zhang; Martin Zwahlen; Adil Mardinoglu; Fredrik Pontén; Kalle von Feilitzen; Kathryn S Lilley; Mathias Uhlén; Emma Lundberg Journal: Science Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Anuj K Yadav; Christopher J Reinhardt; Andres S Arango; Hannah C Huff; Liang Dong; Michael G Malkowski; Aditi Das; Emad Tajkhorshid; Jefferson Chan Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Raul Pereira; Renée L Flaherty; Richard S Edwards; Hannah E Greenwood; Adam J Shuhendler; Timothy H Witney Journal: RSC Chem Biol Date: 2022-03-11
Authors: Sebastiaan T A Koenders; Lukas S Wijaya; Martje N Erkelens; Alexander T Bakker; Vera E van der Noord; Eva J van Rooden; Lindsey Burggraaff; Pasquale C Putter; Else Botter; Kim Wals; Hans van den Elst; Hans den Dulk; Bogdan I Florea; Bob van de Water; Gerard J P van Westen; Reina E Mebius; Herman S Overkleeft; Sylvia E Le Dévédec; Mario van der Stelt Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2019-12-12 Impact factor: 14.553