Dendritic cells (DCs) are armed with a multitude of Pattern Recognition Receptors (PRRs) to recognize pathogens and initiate pathogen-tailored T cell responses. In these responses, the maturation of DCs is key, as well as the production of cytokines that help to accomplish T cell responses. DC-SIGN is a frequently exploited PRR that can effectively be targeted with mannosylated antigens to enhance the induction of antigen-specific T cells. The natural O-mannosidic linkage is susceptible to enzymatic degradation, and its chemical sensitivity complicates the synthesis of mannosylated antigens. For this reason, (oligo)mannosides are generally introduced in a late stage of the antigen synthesis, requiring orthogonal conjugation handles for their attachment. To increase the stability of the mannosides and streamline the synthesis of mannosylated peptide antigens, we here describe the development of an acid-stable C-mannosyl lysine, which allows for the inline introduction of mannosides during solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS). The developed amino acid has been successfully used for the assembly of both small ligands and peptide antigen conjugates comprising an epitope of the gp100 melanoma-associated antigen and a TLR7 agonist for DC activation. The ligands showed similar internalization capacities and binding affinities as the O-mannosyl analogs. Moreover, the antigen conjugates were capable of inducing maturation, stimulating the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and providing enhanced gp100 presentation to CD8+ and CD4+ T cells, similar to their O-mannosyl counterparts. Our results demonstrate that the C-mannose lysine is a valuable building block for the generation of anticancer peptide-conjugate vaccine modalities.
Dendritic cells (DCs) are armed with a multitude of Pattern Recognition Receptors (PRRs) to recognize pathogens and initiate pathogen-tailored T cell responses. In these responses, the maturation of DCs is key, as well as the production of cytokines that help to accomplish T cell responses. DC-SIGN is a frequently exploited PRR that can effectively be targeted with mannosylated antigens to enhance the induction of antigen-specific T cells. The natural O-mannosidic linkage is susceptible to enzymatic degradation, and its chemical sensitivity complicates the synthesis of mannosylated antigens. For this reason, (oligo)mannosides are generally introduced in a late stage of the antigen synthesis, requiring orthogonal conjugation handles for their attachment. To increase the stability of the mannosides and streamline the synthesis of mannosylated peptide antigens, we here describe the development of an acid-stable C-mannosyl lysine, which allows for the inline introduction of mannosides during solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS). The developed amino acid has been successfully used for the assembly of both small ligands and peptide antigen conjugates comprising an epitope of the gp100melanoma-associated antigen and a TLR7 agonist for DC activation. The ligands showed similar internalization capacities and binding affinities as the O-mannosyl analogs. Moreover, the antigen conjugates were capable of inducing maturation, stimulating the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and providing enhanced gp100 presentation to CD8+ and CD4+ T cells, similar to their O-mannosyl counterparts. Our results demonstrate that the C-mannose lysine is a valuable building block for the generation of anticancer peptide-conjugate vaccine modalities.
Immunotherapy
for cancer is
gaining momentum. More and more therapies have reached the clinic
or are in advanced clinical trials, including immune checkpoint blocking
(ICB) antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T cells),
adoptive cell transfer (ACT), and dendritic cell (DC) vaccination.[1−4] DC-based strategies rely on the role of dendritic cells as key initiators
of the adaptive immune system that are crucial in the induction of
memory responses. Via antigen capture and processing, DCs can present
peptides to naïve T lymphocytes and skew their differentiation
end points, and by exposing DCs to synthetic tumor (neo-)antigens,
the immune response can be directed toward specific cancer-associated
antigens. Although animal models have demonstrated promising results
for peptide-based vaccine strategies, human trials often result in
minimal tumor regression and only partial effectiveness.[5,6] Vaccine efficacy may be improved by the incorporation of adjuvants
that can target Pattern Recognition Receptors (PRRs), which can induce
DC maturation and improve antigen processing.[7] Toll-Like Receptors (TLRs) are a family of PRRs, of which members
have been successfully targeted with covalent adjuvant-antigen conjugates,[8−12] to induce DC maturation and improve antigen processing and presentation.[13,14] Another family of PRRs that has frequently been exploited as an
endocytic receptor to facilitate antigen cross-presentation is the
C-type Lectin Receptors (CLRs). This family of PRRs recognizes carbohydrate
patterns and is an essential determinant in discerning host from foreign
antigens. An often studied receptor is DC-SIGN (CD209), a CLR present
on DCs that internalizes carbohydrate modified antigens for cross-presentation
to T cells. DC-SIGN recognizes mannose and Lewis-type carbohydrate
moieties on a wide variety of pathogens and is often targeted to activate
specific signaling and tailor the immune response.[15] DC-SIGN can also act as a scavenger receptor that can induce
receptor-mediated endocytosis. Due to its tetramic structure, a multivalent
presentation of its ligand enhances the avidity for DC-SIGN. Thus,
while the affinity for a single monomannoside ligand is low, targeting
mannosylated constructs can be markedly increased by the multivalent
presentation of the monosaccharides on a polyvalent core or carrier
platform such as dendrimers, liposomes, or nanoparticles.[16−18] Vaccination with mannosylated antigens in mice has demonstrated
improved cytotoxic lymphocyte responses, stronger Th1 and Th2 responses,
and increased antibody responses.[19] The
addition of an adjuvant can further boost the generated immune response
of mannosylated conjugates. For example, the conjugation of multivalent
mannosides and TLR7 adjuvants to an antigen via a self-immolative
linker resulted in a more robust and higher-quality humoral and cellular
immune response in mice.[20]In earlier
work, we have also demonstrated the significance of
antigen mannosylation.[21] We systematically
increased the number of well-defined mono-, di-, and trimannosides
on a peptide backbone to evaluate the effect of multivalent presentation
of DC-SIGN ligands on the peptide antigens. We could also extend the
conjugates with a secondary adjuvant. Using this strategy, we generated
precisely defined trifunctional conjugates (CLR-antigen-TLR), which
effectively targeted DC-SIGN.[21] This approach,
however, required the conjugation of O-mannosides
via a Cu(I) catalyzed azide–alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC), which
involved an additional purification step and limits the number of
available orthogonal handles that can be incorporated into the conjugates.
Furthermore, O-mannosides may be enzymatically cleaved,
rendering them less suitable for DC-SIGN targeting.[16,22,23] Therefore, we here report the design and
synthesis of a C-mannose functionalized lysine building
block (1, Scheme ). This C-mannoside lacks the exocyclic anomeric
oxygen to render the glycosidic linkage resistant to the acidic conditions
necessary for standard automated solid phase peptide synthesis (SPPS).
In addition, the C-glycoside is resistant to enzymatic
hydrolysis. By attachment to an Fmoc-protected amino acid building
block, the mannoside can be incorporated via “inline”
synthetic methodology, obviating postsynthesis conjugation steps and
preventing the use of an azide–alkyne click reaction. The C-mannoside building block has been used to generate peptide-antigen
conjugates, carrying one or six mannosides, in addition to a syntheticTLR7 ligand. The generated constructs have been evaluated, in a side
by side comparison to the corresponding O-mannoside
clusters, for binding affinity, uptake, and antigen presentation capacity,
revealing that C-mannosides can effectively be used
to replace their more labile O counterparts in covalent
antigen conjugates.
Scheme 1
Synthesis of C-Mannoside Lysine 1
Reagents and conditions: (a)
NaH, BnBr, TBAI, DMF, 78%; (b) allylTMS, TMSOTf, ACN, 73%; (c) either
(i) BCl3, DCM and (ii) Ac2O, pyridine 95% or (i) Li, naphthalene,
THF, −20 °C and (ii) Ac2O,
pyridine, 54%; (d, i) NaOMe, MeOH, (ii) NaH, PMBCl, TBAI, DMF, 69%; (e) methyl acrylate, Grubbs second
gen. catalyst, DCM, 73%; (f) RuCl3, NaBH4, DCE/MeOH,
93%; (g) KOH, THF/H2O, qnt.; (h) 11, HCTU,
DIPEA, DMF, 99%; (i) LiOH, H2O2, THF/H2O/t-BuOH, 79%.
Synthesis of C-Mannoside Lysine 1
Reagents and conditions: (a)
NaH, BnBr, TBAI, DMF, 78%; (b) allylTMS, TMSOTf, ACN, 73%; (c) either
(i) BCl3, DCM and (ii) Ac2O, pyridine 95% or (i) Li, naphthalene,
THF, −20 °C and (ii) Ac2O,
pyridine, 54%; (d, i) NaOMe, MeOH, (ii) NaH, PMBCl, TBAI, DMF, 69%; (e) methyl acrylate, Grubbs second
gen. catalyst, DCM, 73%; (f) RuCl3, NaBH4, DCE/MeOH,
93%; (g) KOH, THF/H2O, qnt.; (h) 11, HCTU,
DIPEA, DMF, 99%; (i) LiOH, H2O2, THF/H2O/t-BuOH, 79%.
Results and Discussion
Synthesis
of the C-Mannoside Lysine Building
Block
The synthesis of the key SPPS-ready mannosylated Fmoc
amino acid is achieved in 11 steps and is shown in Scheme . The crucial step in the synthesis
of 1 is the introduction of the α-C-glycosidic bond. On the basis of previously reported work by Girard
et al.,[24] the anomeric allyl was introduced
via a Hosomi–Sakurai reaction using allyltrimethylsilane (allyl-TMS).
The synthesis starts from methyl 2,3,4,6-tetra-O-benzyl-α-d-mannopyranoside 3, obtained by benzylation of
methyl α-d-mannopyranoside 2. [The use
of per-acetylated mannosyl donors has previously been shown to lead
to anomeric mixtures, indicating that neighboring group participation
falls short in effecting stereoselective C-glycosylation
reactions.[21−25]] The allyl group was introduced by treatment of the methyl mannoside
with allyltrimethyl silane and trimethylsilyl triflate in acetonitrile
to provide C-mannoside 4. This reaction
proceeded with high stereoselectivity and was complete within an hour
when assisted by ultrasound irradiation.[25] Selective removal of the benzyl ethers in the presence of the allyl
functionality was initially effected using either BCl3 or
a Birch reduction in liquid ammonia.[26] However,
both reactions proved difficult to scale up, and we therefore switched
to the use of a single electron reduction using lithium naphthalenide
in THF. This reaction could be run at 80 mmol scale, to provide the
desired tetra-ol, which was acetylated to ease purification, delivering 5 in 54% yield. After the installation of four PMB ethers,
the anomeric allyl appendage was elongated through a cross-metathesis
with methyl acrylate to afford α,β-unsaturated ester 7. The reduction of the double bond in this product with RuCl3 in the presence of NaBH4 and MeOH[27] was followed by saponification of the resulting ester 8 to obtain carboxylic acid 9. Fully protected C-mannosyl lysine 12 was obtained by coupling
of carboxylic acid 9 with the methyl ester of Nα-Fmoc protected lysine 11, using HCTU as condensation
agent. Selective hydrolysis of the ester in the presence of the Fmoc
group was achieved with LiOOH,[28,29] which is more nucleophilic
but less basic than LiOH,[30] resulting in
the isolation of key building block 1 in 79% yield. Altogether,
SPPS-compatible C-mannosyl 1 was synthesized
in 20% yield over 11 steps.
Synthesis of the Mannoside Clusters
Our previous work
has described the synthesis of the O-mannoside clusters[21] and resulted in monovalent- (24), bivalent- (25), trivalent- (26), and
hexavalent (27) O-mannoside clusters. Biotinylation of
these compounds resulted in biotinylated O-mannoside clusters 28, 29, 30, and 31,
respectively (Figure A). To enable a direct comparison to these clusters, we here generated
clusters containing one, two, three, or six copies of the C-mannosyl through an SPPS approach (Scheme ). Using Tentagel S RAM amide resin, Fmoc-Lys(Boc)-OH
and Fmoc-Gly-OH were introduced successively, followed by elongation
with C-mannosyl 1 using a standard Fmoc
protocol and HCTU as the condensation agent. Building block 1 was introduced manually, using only a small excess of the
amino acid and prolonged coupling times (2 equiv, overnight) to prevent
the use of a large excess of 1. After completion of the
sequence, the N-termini were capped with acetyl groups, resulting
in immobilized peptides 12–15. Subjecting
resins 12–15 to a cleavage cocktail
of TFA/TIS/H2O (190/5/5, v/v/v) successfully removed the
Boc and PMB ethers, and the peptide clusters were isolated after RP-HPLC
purification to obtain monovalent (16), bivalent (17), trivalent (18), and hexavalent (19) clusters in 7%, 14%, 6%, and 2% yield, respectively (Scheme , R = R1). Further
functionalization via the introduction of a biotin handle was achieved
by reacting the primary amine of the C-terminal lysine with a biotin-N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS) ester. This resulted in biotinylated
mannoside clusters 20–23 (Scheme , R = R2).
Figure 1
Binding of the C-mannoside clusters to DC-SIGN.
(A) Structure of the mono-, di-, tri-, or hexavalent O-mannoside clusters, with and without biotin. (B) Schematic representation
of the binding, internalization, and endosomal routing assays. (C)
Binding of the biotinylated clusters to moDC DC-SIGN as measured by
flow cytometry (left panel, eight donors) and to moDC with blocked
DC-SIGN (right panel). Polyacrylamide decorated with monomannosides
or LeY antigens were used as positive controls. Paired
Student’s t test error: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.001. (D) DC-SIGN-mediated
internalization of the clusters was measured by flow cytometry. One
donor is depicted as a representative of four individuals. (E) The
routing of the clusters to the endosomes/lysosomes as measured by
flow cytometry and normalized to a negative control. One donor is
depicted as representative of three individuals.
Reagents and conditions: (a)
Fmoc-SPPS (1, HCTU, DIPEA, DMF); (b) TFA, TIS, H2O, (octanethiol, phenol; 16, 7.0%; 17, 14%; 18, 6.0%; 19, 2.1%); (c) BiotinOSu,
DIPEA, DMSO (20, 94%; 21, 72%; 22, 99%; 23, 80%).Binding of the C-mannoside clusters to DC-SIGN.
(A) Structure of the mono-, di-, tri-, or hexavalent O-mannoside clusters, with and without biotin. (B) Schematic representation
of the binding, internalization, and endosomal routing assays. (C)
Binding of the biotinylated clusters to moDC DC-SIGN as measured by
flow cytometry (left panel, eight donors) and to moDC with blocked
DC-SIGN (right panel). Polyacrylamide decorated with monomannosides
or LeY antigens were used as positive controls. Paired
Student’s t test error: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.001. (D) DC-SIGN-mediated
internalization of the clusters was measured by flow cytometry. One
donor is depicted as a representative of four individuals. (E) The
routing of the clusters to the endosomes/lysosomes as measured by
flow cytometry and normalized to a negative control. One donor is
depicted as representative of three individuals.
Binding of the C-Mannoside Clusters to moDCs
With the biotinylated constructs in hand, the effect of the O to CH modification was evaluated
by studying the binding, internalization, and endosomal routing upon
DC-SIGN engagement of the C-mannoside clusters and
their O-mannoside equivalents 28–31 (Figure A,B).[21] The binding of the clusters to
cellular membrane DC-SIGN was evaluated using DC-SIGN expressing monocyte-derived
DCs (moDCs; Figure C, also see Supporting Information, Figure SI.1A). The assay was performed at a temperature of 4 °C to prevent
the internalization of DC-SIGN from the cell membrane surface. The
cells were incubated with the biotinylated clusters for 30 min, after
which unbound clusters were washed away. Treatment of the cells with
fluorophore-labeled streptavidin allowed quantification of binding
by flow cytometry. An increase in binding of bivalent C-mannoside 21, trivalent O-mannoside 30 and C-mannoside 22, and hexavalent O-mannoside 31 and C-mannoside 23 was seen when compared to the unstimulated control. Compared
to a mannosylated polyacrylamide control, all compounds showed better
binding, with the exception of mono-O-mannoside 28. A clear valency-dependent increase in binding was seen
within each of the O- and C-mannoside
sets. These results are in line with our previous study, in which
we compared the monomannoside clusters to clusters built up from more
complex di- and trimannosides.[21] For all
clusters, higher valency led to higher binding affininty. Binding
of the hexavalent monomannoside cluster was comparable to the binding
of the higher valent di- and trimannosides. Blocking of the DC-SIGN
receptor effectively diminished the binding, although low residual
binding with a similar valency-dependent increase remained (see SI, Figure SI.1B). The residual binding suggests
cluster recognition of other mannose-binding receptors on DCs, such
as the mannose receptor.[31]We next
selected the mono- and hexavalent O- and C-mannoside clusters to assess their internalization. The
assessment of cluster internalization was executed at 4 °C, similar
to the binding assay. To this end, the cells were incubated for 60
min to saturate the immobilized DC-SIGN receptors at the cell surface,
followed by the removal of unbound clusters. Resuspension of the samples
in warm (37 °C) medium initiated internalization. At the indicated
time points, samples were taken and immediately put on ice. The signal
loss of the membrane was measured through flow cytometry upon treatment
with a fluorophore-conjugated streptavidin. To exclude cluster-DC-SIGN
dissociation, we additionally gently fixed the cells with 1% paraformaldehyde
for permanent immobilization of DC-SIGN at the membrane. No dissociation
of the mannosylated clusters from DC-SIGN on fixed cells was measured
(see SI, Figure SI.1C), indicating that
the ligands are internalized upon DC-SIGN binding. Internalization
(>50%) of the hexavalent cluster 23 was seen after
5
min (Figure D). The
complementary O-mannoside cluster (31) accomplished the same level of internalization after 15 min. Uptake
of the monovalent clusters occurred at a slower rate, requiring 30
min for internalization of approximately 50% of both the O- and C-mannose clusters (28, 20). The relative internalization efficiency seems to mirror
the binding profiles seen in Figure C.Mono- and hexavalent cluster trafficking to
the endosomes was further
studied using pHrodo Red. This dye acts as a pH-sensitive sensor,
as the fluorescence is considerably increased in acidic environments,
while it is quenched in the neutral extracellular environment. Prior
to moDC stimulation, the biotinylated mannoside clusters were treated
with the avidin-conjugated fluorophore (2:1). The precomplexed clusters
were subsequently added to the moDCs at 37 °C, continued by sample
collection at each time point. The cells were washed and gently fixed,
and fluorescence was subsequently measured by flow cytometry. After
30 min, a 2-fold increase was visible in the fluorescence of the hexavalent O- and C-mannoside clusters (Figure E). On the other hand, the
fluorescence of both monovalent clusters (28 and 20) was increased 2.5-fold at 30 min, suggesting higher endosomal
ligand concentrations. Although the C-mannosides
resembled the O-mannoside clusters, the deviation
between mono- and hexavalent presentation is surprising. In the previous
binding and internalization assays, the hexavalent clusters 31 and 23 were superior to monovalent mannoside
presentation. The increased MFI of the monovalent over the hexavalent
clusters at 30 min could indicate faster endolysosomal trafficking
of the smaller clusters, as the emitted fluorescence by the dye is
higher with lower pH.[32,33] Moreover, the mannosylated clusters
were precomplexed with the pHrodo dye into a larger particle, possibly
contributing to the altered endocytosis.[34] Altogether these results indicate that the C-mannoside
clusters 20 and 23 were able to convincingly
resemble the DC-SIGN binding[16] and internalization
profiles of the O-mannoside equivalents, encouraging
the implementation of C-mannosylated antigen conjugates.
Synthesis of Mannosylated gp100 Conjugates
Melanoma
derived from transformed pigment-carrying melanocytes is a highly
lethal cancer, and this malignancy is considered one of the most immunogenic
cancer types.[35] We therefore selected the
melanoma-associated antigen gp100 as our vaccine target, and we introduced
C-terminal mannoside clusters and a secondary TLR ligand to generate
self-adjuvating peptide antigen vaccine conjugates.[36] Endosomal TLR7 was selected as a PRR target because we
reasoned that the use of a cell surface PRR targeting PAMP would lead
to competition for binding with DC-SIGN on the outside of the DC surface
membrane. Furthermore, DC-SIGN-mediated endocytosis should deliver
the conjugates to the endosomes, where it will encounter the TLR7
receptor. The target gp100 peptide antigen combines the CD4+ T cell binding epitope gp100280–288 and CD8+ T cell binding epitope gp10044–59. Multiple
conjugates were synthesized bearing the TLR7 agonist either on the
N or C terminus and carrying either one or six mannosides, to study
the effect of these modifications on antigen presentation.The
SPPS of the conjugates started with the introduction of a monomethoxytrityl
(Mmt) functionalized Fmoc-Lys-OH on Tentagel S RAM amide resin (Scheme ). Both termini of
the antigen sequence were extended with four naturally occurring amino
acids to act as spacers between the antigens, the mannoside cluster,
and the TLR7 ligand. The Cys60 in the N-terminal spacer
was replaced with an isosteric α-amino-butyric acid analog to
prevent potential oxidation and peptide dimerization,[37] a modification we previously demonstrated not to affect
antigen biology.[21] The sequences were elongated
at the N-terminus with either one or six copies of
the C-mannosyl 1, resulting in immobilized
peptides 33 and 34 (Scheme ). Next, 33 and 34 were further extended at their N-termini with the
TLR7 ligand 2-butoxy-8-oxo-adenine, using the previously described
Boc protected building block 32,[38] to give immobilized conjugates 35 and 36. Alternatively, the N-termini were acetylated,
after which the C-termini were further functionalized
by selective removal of the C-terminal lysineMmt-group,
followed by the introduction of the TLR7 ligand to provide 37 and 38.[39] It was observed
that a cocktail of TFA (1%) in DCM, led to partial removal of the
PMB groups leading to the undesired esterification of some of the
carbohydrate alcohols with the TLR7 ligand. Therefore, milder conditions
were explored for the removal of the C-terminal Mmt
group. Eventually, the use of acetic acid in a mixture of trifluoroethanol
(TFE) and DCM (1/2/7, v/v/v), a cocktail first described to selectively
cleave the Mmt over methyltrityl and trityl groups selectively,[40] was found to be effective for the selective
unmasking of the MMT in the resin-bound protected conjugates. Using
these conditions, the immobilized N-terminal elongated conjugates 37 and 38 were successfully generated.
Scheme 3
Synthesis
of C- and O-Mannoside–gp100–TLR7 Agonist
Conjugates
Reagents and conditions: (a)
Fmoc-SPPS (1, HCTU, DIPEA, DMF); (b) Fmoc-SPPS (Fmoc-AEEA-OH
or 32, HCTU, DIPEA, DMF); (c, i) Ac2O, DIPEA, DMF; (ii) AcOH, TFE, DCM; (iii) Fmoc-SPPS (Fmoc-AEEA-OH or 32, HCTU, DIPEA,
DMF); (d) TFA, TIS, H2O, octanethiol, phenol (39, 2.60% over 36 couplings; 40, 1.30% over 41 couplings; 41, 2.10% over 36 couplings; 42, 0.60% over 41
couplings); (e) Fmoc-SPPS, see ref (21); (f) pent-4-ynoic acid succinimidyl ester, DIPEA,
DMSO (43, 62%; 44, 66%); (g) CuI, THPTA,
DIPEA, H2O, DMSO (46, 34%; 47, 29%).
Synthesis
of C- and O-Mannoside–gp100–TLR7 Agonist
Conjugates
Reagents and conditions: (a)
Fmoc-SPPS (1, HCTU, DIPEA, DMF); (b) Fmoc-SPPS (Fmoc-AEEA-OH
or 32, HCTU, DIPEA, DMF); (c, i) Ac2O, DIPEA, DMF; (ii) AcOH, TFE, DCM; (iii) Fmoc-SPPS (Fmoc-AEEA-OH or 32, HCTU, DIPEA,
DMF); (d) TFA, TIS, H2O, octanethiol, phenol (39, 2.60% over 36 couplings; 40, 1.30% over 41 couplings; 41, 2.10% over 36 couplings; 42, 0.60% over 41
couplings); (e) Fmoc-SPPS, see ref (21); (f) pent-4-ynoic acid succinimidyl ester, DIPEA,
DMSO (43, 62%; 44, 66%); (g) CuI, THPTA,
DIPEA, H2O, DMSO (46, 34%; 47, 29%).Initial attempts to deprotect and
release the peptides from the
resin with a cleavage cocktail of TFA/TIS/H2O (190/5/5,
v/v/v) resulted in complex crude mixtures. Analysis of the mixtures
indicated that the poor quality of the crude material was due to side
reactions of the cleavage and deprotection step and not due to incomplete
couplings. Reactive cationic species are liberated during the acidic
removal of the PMB ethers, which can react with functional groups
in the unprotected peptide.[41] Howard et
al.[42] effectively scavenged PMB cations
using phenol as an electron-rich aromatic additive, and when this
additive was applied here, the quality of the crude mixture indeed
improved. Further optimization of the cleavage conditions was achieved
by increasing the concentration of the scavengers (up to 10% of the
total volume) and increasing the volume of the cleavage medium (effectively
diluting the concentration of reactive cationic species and reactive
functional groups). Using this optimized cleavage protocol, all four
peptides were successfully deprotected and released from the resin.
After RP-HPLC purification, the monovalent C-mannose
conjugate 39 was obtained in 2.6% yield after 36 coupling
steps and the hexavalent C-mannose conjugate 40 in 1.3% yield over 41 couplings. The conjugates 41 and 42 were isolated in 2.1% (after 36 steps) and 0.6%
(after 41 couplings), respectively (Scheme ). Unlike the O-mannoside
conjugates we previously generated, these constructs did not require
additional conjugation and purification steps.To compare the
activity of the C- vs the O-mannoside
conjugates, O-mannoside clusters 24 and 27 were functionalized with an alkyne
handle (yielding 43 and 44) and conjugated
through a CuAAC ligation to the TLR7L- gp100 peptide 45 to obtain analogs 46 and 47.
Mannosylated
gp100 Conjugate Efficacy As Vaccination Strategy
We analyzed
the influence of the C-mannosylated
antigens on dendritic cell maturation, cytokine secretion, and antigen
presentation to CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes
in relation to their O-mannosylated peptide counterpart
(Figure A). Furthermore,
the effect of C versus N terminal ligation of the TLR7 ligand was
assessed.
Figure 2
Targeting efficacy of the mannoside-peptide conjugates. (A) Schematic
representation of the compounds and overview of the moDC maturation,
cytokine secretion, CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocyte
antigen presentation. (B) Expression of costimulatory marker CD86
as measured by flow cytometry. One out of four donors is depicted.
LPS and 49 were included as positive controls, as well
as 48 as a negative control. (C) IL-6, IL-10, IL-12p70,
and TNFα secretion of four donors was measured using ELISA upon
overnight stimulation with O- or C-mannoside conjugates. (D) Antigen presentation capacity of moDCs
to CD8+ T lymphocytes was quantified by the IFNγ
production of activated T cells. The dashed lines represent the directionality
between the donors when comparing mono- and hexavalent mannosides
analogs. (E) Antigen presentation capacity of moDCs to CD4+ T lymphocytes was quantified by the IFNγ production of activated
T cells.
Targeting efficacy of the mannoside-peptide conjugates. (A) Schematic
representation of the compounds and overview of the moDC maturation,
cytokine secretion, CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocyte
antigen presentation. (B) Expression of costimulatory marker CD86
as measured by flow cytometry. One out of four donors is depicted.
LPS and 49 were included as positive controls, as well
as 48 as a negative control. (C) IL-6, IL-10, IL-12p70,
and TNFα secretion of four donors was measured using ELISA upon
overnight stimulation with O- or C-mannoside conjugates. (D) Antigen presentation capacity of moDCs
to CD8+ T lymphocytes was quantified by the IFNγ
production of activated T cells. The dashed lines represent the directionality
between the donors when comparing mono- and hexavalent mannosides
analogs. (E) Antigen presentation capacity of moDCs to CD4+ T lymphocytes was quantified by the IFNγ production of activated
T cells.Dendritic cell maturation is considered
an essential requirement
for proper T lymphocyte activation and polarization. As a measure
of DC maturation, we quantified expression of the costimulatory molecules
CD86 (Figure B) and
CD83 (see SI, Figure SI.1D) using the six
variants of the trivalent conjugates. The nonglycosylated gp100 48 and the bivalent gp100-TLR7L conjugate 49 were
included as controls. After overnight stimulation with the conjugates,
we found that all conjugates induced expression of CD86 and CD83.
The C-mannoside conjugates did not hamper the DC
maturation processes and effectively elevated expression levels to
the same extent as the O-mannosylated conjugates.
The position to which the TLR7 agonist was attached does not seem
to affect the maturation of the DCs in this assay.During maturation,
DCs produce and secrete a tailored cytokine
cocktail for subsequent T lymphocyte skewing. The secreted cytokine
profile depends on the triggered TLR, the signaling pathway of which
can be modified by DC-SIGN or other CLR engagement.[43] To assess DC activation, we quantified four key cytokines
using a sandwich ELISA. IL-6 and IL-12 are primarily characterized
as pro-inflammatory cytokines, with functions aiding DC maturation
and Th1 stimulation, respectively. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α
is required for DC activation and proliferation and reduces IL-10
mediated inhibition during DC development.[44] IL-10 is a cytokine that interferes with DC maturation and inhibits
the production of IL-12 and, as such, has been implied to play a role
in skewing of naïve T lymphocytes to Treg differentiation.[45] Low levels of autocrine IL-10 prevent spontaneous
maturation of DCs.[46]Figure C shows that the stand-alone peptide (48) and gp100-TLR7L (49) minimally induced the
production of IL-6, while both the monovalent and hexavalent O-mannoside trifunctional conjugates 46 and 47 increased the secretion of this pro-inflammatory cytokine.
The monovalent and hexavalent C-mannoside conjugates 41 and 42 increased the IL-6 levels to a similar
extent as their O-mannoside counterparts. However,
when moDCs were stimulated with conjugates 39 and 40, having both the C-mannosides and the
TLR7L attached to the N-terminus of the peptide sequence,
cytokine production was abrogated. A similar pattern was observed
for the IL-12 production profile: the O- and C-mannose conjugates having the TLR7 ligand at the C-terminus
of the conjugate were most active in stimulating the production of
this cytokine, while the gp100 peptide and gp100 peptide-TLR7L conjugate
were less active. The conjugates 39 and 40 induced low levels of the IL-12 cytokine. TNF-α expression
levels were minimally affected upon stimulation of the DCs with the
various conjugates. Also here, the conjugates carrying the TLR7 ligand
and the mannosides on the same side of the peptide antigen showed
the least activation. Finally, a low level of the anti-inflammatory
IL-10 was detected in the ELISA with the nonstimulated DCs, as well
as for those treated with peptide 49. Figure C shows that while LPS effectively
triggers the production of IL-10, the mannosylated conjugates do not
induce the production of this cytokine. Overall the cytokine production
profiles of the O- and C-mannose
conjugates appear to be very similar for both the monovalent and hexavalent
clusters. In addition, these experiments revealed that the arrangement
of the CLR and TLR ligands within the trifunctional conjugates has
a great influence on the activity of the conjugates. Possibly, the
processing of these conjugates is different from the conjugates bearing
the CLR and TLR ligand on either side of the conjugate, due to differential
cleavage of the conjugates by proteases.Finally, we studied
the antigen presentation capacity of the DCs
upon stimulation with all the trifunctional conjugate variations.
During DC maturation, the intrinsic focus of these cells shifts from
antigen endocytosis to antigen processing, major histocompatibility
complex (MHC) molecule loading, and presentation of the antigens for
initiation of the T cell response. Upon recognition of the cross-presented
antigen in MHC-I, cytotoxicCD8+ T cells induce programmed
cell death of targeted cells. On the other hand, CD4+ T
lymphocytes induce and support a cellular and humoral response upon
antigen-MHC-II binding. As both T-cell responses are needed for a
robust immune response, we studied the antigen (gp100) presenting
capacity of the DCs to both CD8+ and CD4+ T
cells after stimulation with the trifunctional conjugates.[47] To this end, DCs were stimulated for 30 min
with the conjugates, before washing and coculturing with the CD8+ HLA-A2.1 or CD4+ HLA-DR4.1 restricted T cell clone
for 24 h. Activation of T cells was measured by quantification of
the IFNγ cytokine produced. As shown in Figure D, the conjugates carrying a TLR7 ligand
are more active than the stand-alone peptide, except for conjugate 40. The introduction of a CLR ligand also increases the antigen-presenting
activity of the conjugates, although the hexavalent C-mannoside conjugate appears to hamper antigen presentation with
respect to the monovalent conjugate partially. The presence of the
TLR7 ligand and the hexavalent mannoside cluster on the same side
of the conjugate blocks CD8+ antigen presentation, likely
as the result of suboptimal processing. In our previous study, in
which we have investigated gp100 conjugates bearing hexavalent clusters
comprising di- and trimannosides, we found that the α1,2-dimannoside
cluster gp100 conjugates, although being the best DC-SIGN binders,
showed less antigen presentation than a gp100-TLR7 conjugate lacking
the carbohydrate cluster. Clusters composed of α1,3- and α1,6-linked
dimannosides or α1,3-α1,6-linked trimannosides showed
slightly enhanced antigen presentation. Taken together, these results
show that optimal antigen presentation requires not only DC-SIGN binding
but also adequate processing of the incorporated antigens. These results
were substantiated by the CD4+ T cell activation assay,
as similar gp100 antigen presentation effects were seen (Figure E). Monovalent O- andC-mannosyl conjugates 46 and 41 improved antigen presentation to CD4+ T cells most, and attachment of the TLR7 ligand to the same side
as the CLR ligand again nullified activity of the conjugates. Overall,
also in these assays, the O- and C-mannosides perform similarly. The combined results from the assays
in Figure show that
the most attractive vaccine conjugates require the antigenic peptide
to be placed between an N-terminal CLR ligand and a C-terminal TLR-ligand
for antigen presentation and secretion cell activation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we have developed a C-mannosyllysine that can be effectively used in solid-phase peptide synthesis
(SPPS) campaigns. The stability of the C-glycosidic
linkage renders the mannoside stable to both acidic reaction conditions
employed during SPPS and enzymatic degradation. The protecting groups
on the building block were designed to be compatible with standard
SPPS protocols to allow the straightforward “in-line”
incorporation of the mannosylated residues in oligopeptides. This
allows for the generation of mannosylated conjugates without the necessity
of a postassembly conjugation step requiring orthogonal click strategies.
Not only does this streamline the synthesis of these conjugates, it
also ensures that bio-orthogonal handles, such as azides and alkynes,
can be incorporated into these multifunctional antigen conjugates
to allow these for the incorporation of additional functionalities,
such as other immune stimulating agents or fluorophores. We have applied
the mannosylated lysine in the assembly of a set of synthetic long
peptide antigens to equip these with either one or six mannosides
to target the antigens to mannose-binding C-type lectins on professional
antigen-presenting cells to improve the antigenicity of the peptides.
The conjugates were further armed with a syntheticTLR7 ligand to
further boost the response against the antigens. In comparing the C- vs the O-mannosylated conjugates for
DC-SIGN mediated uptake, DC maturation, and stimulation as well as
CD4+ and CD8+ antigen presentation, the stabilized
mannosides performed virtually identically to their natural analogs.
The conjugates bearing the mannosides and a TLR7 ligand were shown
to bind DC-SIGN and activate DCs, as indicated by pro-inflammatory
cytokine release, upregulation of cell surface maturation markers,
and increased antigen presentation to both CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes. Notably, the relative position of the CLR and
TLR ligands in the peptide antigen conjugates played an important
role in shaping the activity of the conjugates. The conjugates bearing
the mannose cluster and the TLR7 ligand on the same side of the conjugates
proved to be poor immune-stimulating agents, incapable of elucidating
an effective pro-inflammatory response and showing poor antigen presentation.
These differences are likely due to differences in the processing
of the conjugates. As DC vaccination therapies hold great promise
as an immunotherapeutic approach to fight cancer, the development
of more effective, tailor-made cancer vaccine conjugates, of which
the action is well understood and can be controlled, is of great importance.
The conjugates described here can be further equipped with biorthogonal
visualization handles to allow tracking of the conjugates during uptake
and processing. Because the C-mannosyl lysine building
block can be incorporated in an “in-line” manner and
does not rely on a postassembly conjugation step, often used biorthogonal
coupling partners, such as azides and alkynes, remain at one’s
disposal for inclusion in the conjugates.
Methods
Synthesis
The synthesis of C-mannosyl 1 and
all clusters and conjugates is described in the Supporting Information.
Cell Isolation and Culture
Buffy coats of healthy donors
were obtained from Sanquin Amsterdam (reference: S03.0023-XT). Monocytes
were isolated using a Ficoll (STEMCELL Technologies) and sequential
Percoll (Sigma) gradient centrifugation. The monocytes were differentiated
to monocyte-derived dendritic cells (moDCs) in RPMI 1640 (Invitrogen),
supplemented with 10% FCS (Biowittaker), 1.000 U/mL penicillin (Lonza),
1 U/mL streptomycin (Lonza), 262.5 U/mL IL-4 (Biosource), and 112.5
U/mL GM-CSF (Biosource), for 5 days. Flow cytometric monitoring of
DC-SIGN (AZN-D1-Alexa488, in house[48]),
CD83, and CD86 (both PE-conjugated, Becton Dickinson) expression was
conducted for every donor.
Binding of the Mannose Clusters to moDCs
Day 5 moDCs
(approximately 105 per condition) were washed and resuspended
in ice-cold RPMI medium (Invitrogen). The entire experiment was conducted
at 4 °C with precooled reagents. DC-SIGN and mannose receptor
were blocked with 20 μg/mL AZN-D1 (in house[48]) and purified mouse antihuman CD206 antibody (Clone 19.2,
BD Bioscience), respectively, for 45 min. The biotinylated mannoside
clusters (10 μM) or LewisY-conjugated polyacrylamide
(1 μg/mL) as positive control was allowed to bind for 30 min.
The moDCs were washed with PBS and stained with an Alexa647-labeled
streptavidin (Invitrogen) in PBS supplemented with 0.5% BSA and 0.02%
NaN3 (PBA) for 30 min. The moDCs were subsequently washed
and fixed in PBS with 0.5% PFA, before the fluorescence was measured
by flow cytometry (CyAn ADP with Summit Software) and analyzed using
FlowJo v10.
Internalization of the Mannoside Clusters
Day 5 moDCs
(approximately 105 per condition) were washed and resuspended
in ice-cold HBSS medium (Thermo Fischer). The biotinylated mannoside
clusters (20 μM) were added in ice-cold medium to the moDCs
for 1 h and washed away with ice-cold medium. Prewarmed HBSS (37 °C)
was added to the cells and was incubated at 37 °C in a shaking
heating block (800 rpm). Samples of the cells were taken at the indicated
time points (t = 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60 min) and immediately
put on ice. The moDCs were washed with ice-cold PBS supplemented with
0.5% BSA and 0.02% NaN3 (PBA) and stained with Alexa647-labeled
streptavidin (InvitrogenTM) for 30 min at 4 °C. The fluorescence
was measured by flow cytometry (CyAn ADP with Summit Software) and
analyzed using FlowJo v10.
Endosomal Routing of the Mannoside Clusters
Day 5 moDCs
(approximately 105 per condition) were washed and resuspended
in prewarmed (37 °C) HBSS medium (Thermo Fischer). The biotinylated
mannoside clusters (20 μM) were complexed with pHrodo (2:1 ratio)
for 15 min at RT. The precomplexed pHrodo-labeled ligands were added
to the cells and were incubated at 37 °C in a shaking heating
block (800 rpm). Samples of the cells were taken at the indicated
time points (t = 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120 min) and
immediately put on ice. The moDCs were washed with ice-cold PBS supplemented
with 0.5% BSA and 0.02% NaN3 (PBA). The fluorescence was
measured by flow cytometry (BD LSRFortessa X-20 with FACSDiva Software)
and analyzed using FlowJo v10.
moDC Cytokine Secretion
upon Stimulation with the Mannoside
Clusters
Day 5 moDCs (approximately 50 × 105 per condition) were stimulated for 24 h with the trifunctional conjugates.
Cytokines IL-6, IL-10, IL-12p40, and TNFα in the supernatant
were measured by sandwich ELISA according to manufacturer’s
protocol (Biosource). The capture antibody was coated in NUNC MaxiSorp
plates (Nunc, Roskilde, Denmark) overnight at 4 °C in PBA-0.05%
BSA. The plates were blocked for 30 min at 37 °C, using PBS supplemented
with 1% BSA. Samples were added for 2 h at RT to allow binding and
subsequently washed, and cytokine levels were detected using a peroxidase-conjugated
cytokine-specific detection antibody. After extensive washing, the
binding was visualized with 3,3′,5,5′-tetramethylbenzidine
(Sigma-Aldrich) and measured by spectrophotometry at 450 nm on the
iMark Microplate Absorbance Reader (Bio-RAD).
CD4+ and CD8+ Antigen Presentation
Day 5 moDCs of HLA-A2 and HLA-DR4
double positive donors (approximately
40 × 103 per condition) were incubated with the different
trifunctional conjugates (20 μM) for 30 min at 37 °C. A
short gp100 peptide (gp100280–288) and a long gp100
peptide (gp100280–288,40–59) were used as
controls. The moDCs were washed and separated into two plates (30
× 103 for CD8+ and 10 × 103 for CD4+ T lymphocyte coculture). Either a CD8+ HLA-A2.1 restricted T cell clone transduced with the TCR specific
for the gp100280–288 peptide[49] (approximately 105 cells per condition, E/T
ratio 1:3) or a CD4+ HLA-DR4.1 restricted T cell clone
transduced with the TCR specific for the gp10044–59 peptide (approximately 105 cells per condition, E/T ratio
1:10) was added for overnight coculture. The interferon γ cytokine
secretion was measured by sandwich ELISA, according to the manufacturer’s
protocol (Biosource), and measured by spectrophotometric analysis
at 450 nm on the iMark Microplate Absorbance Reader (Bio-RAD).
Statistics
Unless otherwise stated, data are presented
as the mean ± SD of at least three independent experiments or
healthy donors. Statistical analyses were performed in GraphPad Prism
v7.04. Statistical significance was set at P <
0.05, and it was evaluated by the Mann–Whitney U test.
Authors: Gerty Schreibelt; Kalijn F Bol; Harm Westdorp; Florian Wimmers; Erik H J G Aarntzen; Tjitske Duiveman-de Boer; Mandy W M M van de Rakt; Nicole M Scharenborg; Annemiek J de Boer; Jeanette M Pots; Michel A M Olde Nordkamp; Tom G M van Oorschot; Jurjen Tel; Gregor Winkels; Katja Petry; Willeke A M Blokx; Michelle M van Rossum; Marieke E B Welzen; Roel D M Mus; Sandra A J Croockewit; Rutger H T Koornstra; Joannes F M Jacobs; Sander Kelderman; Christian U Blank; Winald R Gerritsen; Cornelis J A Punt; Carl G Figdor; I Jolanda M de Vries Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-12-28 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Sonja I Gringhuis; Jeroen den Dunnen; Manja Litjens; Michiel van der Vlist; Teunis B H Geijtenbeek Journal: Nat Immunol Date: 2009-08-30 Impact factor: 25.606
Authors: Marek Wieczorek; Esam T Abualrous; Jana Sticht; Miguel Álvaro-Benito; Sebastian Stolzenberg; Frank Noé; Christian Freund Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Michael M Boyiadzis; Madhav V Dhodapkar; Renier J Brentjens; James N Kochenderfer; Sattva S Neelapu; Marcela V Maus; David L Porter; David G Maloney; Stephan A Grupp; Crystal L Mackall; Carl H June; Michael R Bishop Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Michael Chan; Tomoko Hayashi; Crystal S Kuy; Christine S Gray; Christina C N Wu; Maripat Corr; Wolfgang Wrasidlo; Howard B Cottam; Dennis A Carson Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.774
Authors: Shixian Lv; Kefan Song; Albert Yen; David J Peeler; Dinh Chuong Nguyen; Audrey Olshefsky; Meilyn Sylvestre; Selvi Srinivasan; Patrick S Stayton; Suzie H Pun Journal: Adv Healthc Mater Date: 2021-11-07 Impact factor: 11.092
Authors: Qi-Ting Zhang; Ze-Dong Liu; Ze Wang; Tao Wang; Nan Wang; Ning Wang; Bin Zhang; Yu-Fen Zhao Journal: Mar Drugs Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 5.118