| Literature DB >> 32099761 |
Norbert Imre1, Anasztázia Hetényi1, Enikő Szabó2, Brigitta Bodnár1,3, Abel Szkalisity4, Ilona Gróf5,6, Alexandra Bocsik5, Mária A Deli5,7, Peter Horvath8, Ágnes Czibula2, Éva Monostori2, Tamás A Martinek1,3.
Abstract
There is a pressing need to develop ways to deliver therapeutic macromolecules to their intracellular targets. Certain viral and bacterial proteins are readily internalized in functional form through lipid raft-mediated/caveolar endocytosis, but mimicking this process with protein cargoes at therapeutically relevant concentrations is a great challenge. Targeting ganglioside GM1 in the caveolar pits triggers endocytosis. A pentapeptide sequence WYKYW is presented, which specifically captures the glycan moiety of GM1 (K D = 24 nm). The WYKYW-tag facilitates the GM1-dependent endocytosis of proteins in which the cargo-loaded caveosomes do not fuse with lysosomes. A structurally intact immunoglobulin G complex (580 kDa) is successfully delivered into live HeLa cells at extracellular concentrations ranging from 20 to 160 nm, and escape of the cargo proteins to the cytosol is observed. The short peptidic WYKYW-tag is an advantageous endocytosis routing sequence for lipid raft-mediated/caveolar cell delivery of therapeutic macromolecules, especially for cancer cells that overexpress GM1.Entities:
Keywords: cell delivery; endocytosis; glycan; immunoglobulin; peptides
Year: 2020 PMID: 32099761 PMCID: PMC7029632 DOI: 10.1002/advs.201902621
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Sci (Weinh) ISSN: 2198-3844 Impact factor: 16.806
Figure 1Structure of the targeted ganglioside GM1 and its truncated derivatives and sequence, and structure of the lead peptide sequence WYKYW. Binding affinities (K D) and stoichiometries (n) for ganglioside–WYKYW interactions were measured by ITC. Parameters were obtained by nonlinear least squares fitting against the two‐independent‐binding‐site and the single‐binding‐site models for GM1 and GM3, respectively. For asialo‐GM1, the ITC enthalpogram did not exhibit fittable features.
Figure 2ITC enthalpograms for a) WYKYW, b) NA(biotinyl‐PEG‐WYKYW)4, and c) NA(biotinyl‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW)4. Titrations were conducted with GM1:DPC 1:5 bicelles (solid square), and nonlinear least squares fitting was performed against the two‐independent‐binding‐site model (solid lines).
Figure 3Schematic representation of a) NA(biotinyl‐PEG‐WYKYW)4, b) NA(biotinyl‐Penetratin)4, and c) NA(biotinyl‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW)4. d) Internalization of the constructs at different concentrations by HeLa cells after 6 h as determined by live confocal laser scanning microscopy. FITC‐labeled NA is shown in green, Hoechst 33342‐stained nuclei are shown in cyan, and LysoTracker Red‐stained lysosomes are shown in magenta. e) Internalization of the constructs at 1 µm by HeLa cells after 1 h as determined by flow cytometry. f) Influence of endocytosis inhibitors on cellular uptake as determined by flow cytometry. HeLa cells were preincubated with the inhibitors wortmannin (W), chlorpromazine (CP), or β‐methyl‐cyclodextrin (BMCD) at 37 °C for 30 or 60 min and subsequently incubated with NA(biotinyl‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW)4 at 37 °C for 60 min. A control experiment was also performed at 4 °C. Each data point depicts the mean of three measurements; the error bars show the standard error of the mean. Statistical analysis was performed using one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Tukey honestly significant difference test. *p < 0.1; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 4a) Uptake of fluorescently labeled sequences at 1 µm by HeLa and Jurkat cells after 1 h. b) Uptake of CFU‐Penetratin and CFU‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW at 1 µm in competition with galectin‐1 at 0–10 µm. c) Cell surface expression of GM1 in HeLa and Jurkat cells measured by FITC‐cholera toxin staining. d) Cytotoxicity of CFU‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW, biotinyl‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW, and NA(biotinyl‐Penetratin‐GG‐WYKYW)4 at 10 µm to HeLa cells after 24 h as determined by bioimpedance measurements. Triton X‐100 was used as a toxicity control. Each data point represents the mean of three measurements, and the error bars show the standard error of the mean. The unpaired Student's t‐test was used in the statistical analysis of the data shown in panels (a) and (c): *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001. One‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Tukey honestly significant difference test was used in the statistical analysis of the data shown in panel (d): *p < 0.1; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 5a) Schematic representation of the bottom‐up designed modular carrier–hub–antibody cargo–secondary antibody–r‐phycoerythrin construct. b) Artificial intelligence‐aided quantitative analysis of the live CLSM images. HeLa cells were incubated for 6 h with various concentrations of the IgG complex; at least 75 representative cells were then analyzed at each concentration. The intensity value obtained for the control sample is indicated at zero concentration. c) Delivery of the IgG complex into HeLa cells at various concentrations after 3 h. R‐phycoerythrin‐conjugated secondary antibody is indicated in magenta; green staining defines cell membranes (WGA‐FITC). Nuclei are indicated in cyan. Control cells were treated with r‐phycoerythrin‐labeled secondary antibody at 160 nm for 3 h.