Literature DB >> 30989440

Mapping pH at Cancer Cell Surfaces.

Da Wei1, Donald M Engelman2, Yana K Reshetnyak1, Oleg A Andreev3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop a tool to measure the pH at the surfaces of individual cells. PROCEDURES: The SNARF pH-sensitive dye was conjugated to a pHLIP® peptide (pH-Low Insertion Peptide) that binds cellular membranes in tumor spheroids. A beam splitter allows simultaneous recording of two images (580 and 640 nm) by a CCD camera. The ratio of the two images is converted into a pH map resolving single spheroid cells. An average pH for each cell is calculated and a pH histogram is derived.
RESULTS: Surface pH depends on cellular glycolytic activity, which was varied by adding glucose or deoxy-glucose. Glucose was found to decrease the surface pH relative to the pH of the bulk solution. The surface pH of metastatic cancer cells was lower than that of non-metastatic cells indicating a higher glycolytic activity.
CONCLUSIONS: Our method allows cell surface pH measurement and its correlation with cellular glycolytic activity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  SNARF fluorescence; Tumor acidity; Warburg effect; pH measurements; pHLIP

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30989440      PMCID: PMC9258692          DOI: 10.1007/s11307-019-01335-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol        ISSN: 1536-1632            Impact factor:   3.484


  24 in total

1.  Hypoxia-inducible expression of tumor-associated carbonic anhydrases.

Authors:  C C Wykoff; N J Beasley; P H Watson; K J Turner; J Pastorek; A Sibtain; G D Wilson; H Turley; K L Talks; P H Maxwell; C W Pugh; P J Ratcliffe; A L Harris
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 12.701

2.  Determination of intracellular pH by 31P magnetic resonance.

Authors:  R B Moon; J H Richards
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1973-10-25       Impact factor: 5.157

3.  Measurement of the extracellular pH of solid tumours in mice by magnetic resonance spectroscopy: a comparison of exogenous (19)F and (31)P probes.

Authors:  A S Ojugo; P M McSheehy; D J McIntyre; C McCoy; M Stubbs; M O Leach; I R Judson; J R Griffiths
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.044

Review 4.  Imaging pH and metastasis.

Authors:  Arig Ibrahim Hashim; Xiaomeng Zhang; Jonathan W Wojtkowiak; Gary V Martinez; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2011-03-08       Impact factor: 4.044

Review 5.  Tumor pH and its measurement.

Authors:  Xiaomeng Zhang; Yuxiang Lin; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 10.057

6.  Family of pH (low) insertion peptides for tumor targeting.

Authors:  Dhammika Weerakkody; Anna Moshnikova; Mak S Thakur; Valentina Moshnikova; Jennifer Daniels; Donald M Engelman; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-03-25       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  31P-MRS measurements of extracellular pH of tumors using 3-aminopropylphosphonate.

Authors:  R J Gillies; Z Liu; Z Bhujwalla
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1994-07

8.  Probe for the measurement of cell surface pH in vivo and ex vivo.

Authors:  Michael Anderson; Anna Moshnikova; Donald M Engelman; Yana K Reshetnyak; Oleg A Andreev
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  Targeting diseased tissues by pHLIP insertion at low cell surface pH.

Authors:  Oleg A Andreev; Donald M Engelman; Yana K Reshetnyak
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Comparison of three reference methods for the measurement of intracellular pH using 31P MRS in healthy volunteers and patients with lymphoma.

Authors:  Mihaela Rata; Sharon L Giles; Nandita M deSouza; Martin O Leach; Geoffrey S Payne
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.044

View more
  7 in total

1.  Tumor-Targeted, Cytoplasmic Delivery of Large, Polar Molecules Using a pH-Low Insertion Peptide.

Authors:  Alexander A Svoronos; Raman Bahal; Mohan C Pereira; Francisco N Barrera; John C Deacon; Marcus Bosenberg; Daniel DiMaio; Peter M Glazer; Donald M Engelman
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 4.939

2.  PET Imaging of Acidic Tumor Environment With 89Zr-labeled pHLIP Probes.

Authors:  David Bauer; Hannah Visca; Anuradha Weerakkody; Lukas M Carter; Zachary Samuels; Spencer Kaminsky; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak; Jason S Lewis
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  Whole-transcriptome Analysis of Fully Viable Energy Efficient Glycolytic-null Cancer Cells Established by Double Genetic Knockout of Lactate Dehydrogenase A/B or Glucose-6-Phosphate Isomerase.

Authors:  Elizabeth Mazzio; Ramesh Badisa; Nzinga Mack; Shamir Cassim; Masa Zdralevic; Jacques Pouyssegur; Karam F A Soliman
Journal:  Cancer Genomics Proteomics       Date:  2020 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.069

4.  Pharmacokinetic modeling reveals parameters that govern tumor targeting and delivery by a pH-Low Insertion Peptide (pHLIP).

Authors:  Alexander A Svoronos; Donald M Engelman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-12-21       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  An antibody Fc engineered for conditional antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity at the low tumor microenvironment pH.

Authors:  Yutong Liu; Alison G Lee; Annalee W Nguyen; Jennifer A Maynard
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 6.  Targeting Acidic Diseased Tissues by pH-Triggered Membrane-Associated Peptide Folding.

Authors:  Yana K Reshetnyak; Anna Moshnikova; Oleg A Andreev; Donald M Engelman
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-04-28

7.  pHLIP ICG for delineation of tumors and blood flow during fluorescence-guided surgery.

Authors:  Troy Crawford; Anna Moshnikova; Sean Roles; Dhammika Weerakkody; Michael DuPont; Lukas M Carter; John Shen; Donald M Engelman; Jason S Lewis; Oleg A Andreev; Yana K Reshetnyak
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.