Jakob Cervin1, Andrew Boucher1, Gyusaang Youn2, Per Björklund3, Ville Wallenius3, Lynda Mottram1, Nicole S Sampson2, Ulf Yrlid1. 1. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden. 2. Department of Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, 11794-3400, United States. 3. Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Östra, 416 85 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
A promising strategy to limit cholera severity involves blockers mimicking the canonical cholera toxin ligand (CT) ganglioside GM1. However, to date the efficacies of most of these blockers have been evaluated in noncellular systems that lack ligands other than GM1. Importantly, the CT B subunit (CTB) has a noncanonical site that binds fucosylated structures, which in contrast to GM1 are highly expressed in the human intestine. Here we evaluate the capacity of norbornene polymers displaying galactose and/or fucose to block CTB binding to immobilized protein-linked glycan structures and also to primary human and murine small intestine epithelial cells (SI ECs). We show that the binding of CTB to human SI ECs is largely dependent on the noncanonical binding site, and interference with the canonical site has a limited effect while the opposite is observed with murine SI ECs. The galactose-fucose polymer blocks binding to fucosylated glycans but not to GM1. However, the preincubation of CT with the galactose-fucose polymer only partially blocks toxic effects on cultured human enteroid cells, while preincubation with GM1 completely blocks CT-mediated secretion. Our results support a model whereby the binding of fucose to the noncanonical site places CT in close proximity to scarcely expressed galactose receptors such as GM1 to enable binding via the canonical site leading to CT internalization and intoxication. Our finding also highlights the importance of complementing CTB binding studies with functional intoxication studies when assessing the efficacy inhibitors of CT.
A promising strategy to limit cholera severity involves blockers mimicking the canonical cholera toxin ligand (CT) gangliosideGM1. However, to date the efficacies of most of these blockers have been evaluated in noncellular systems that lack ligands other than GM1. Importantly, the CT B subunit (CTB) has a noncanonical site that binds fucosylated structures, which in contrast to GM1 are highly expressed in the human intestine. Here we evaluate the capacity of norbornenepolymers displaying galactose and/or fucose to block CTB binding to immobilized protein-linked glycan structures and also to primary human and murine small intestine epithelial cells (SI ECs). We show that the binding of CTB to human SI ECs is largely dependent on the noncanonical binding site, and interference with the canonical site has a limited effect while the opposite is observed with murine SI ECs. The galactose-fucose polymer blocks binding to fucosylated glycans but not to GM1. However, the preincubation of CT with the galactose-fucose polymer only partially blocks toxic effects on cultured human enteroid cells, while preincubation with GM1 completely blocks CT-mediated secretion. Our results support a model whereby the binding of fucose to the noncanonical site places CT in close proximity to scarcely expressed galactose receptors such as GM1 to enable binding via the canonical site leading to CT internalization and intoxication. Our finding also highlights the importance of complementing CTB binding studies with functional intoxication studies when assessing the efficacy inhibitors of CT.
Cholera is
a diarrheal disease
caused by infection with Gram-negative bacterium Vibrio cholerae. It affects millions of people every year and is estimated to cause
roughly 100 000 annual deaths worldwide.[1] Poor access to proper sanitation is believed to be the main reason
that cholera persists, with the number of cases usually increasing
dramatically during conflicts that disrupt access to clean drinking
water.[2−4] The current gold standard treatment of severe cases
consists of oral rehydration therapy with a complement of intravenous
fluids. Antibiotics can also sometimes be used to help eliminate the
infection.[2,5] Oral cholera vaccines with an efficacy of
roughly 65% exist, but their efficacy is lower in children in endemic
areas.[6,7] It is thought that unvaccinated populations
in such endemic areas could greatly benefit from additional relatively
low-cost treatments that ameliorate the disease symptoms and diminish
the spread to family members during an outbreak.Cholera toxin
(CT) is the main causative agent of cholera diarrhea.
This is a holotoxin secreted by the bacterium upon colonization of
the small intestine (SI). The toxin is composed of five binding B
subunits (CTB) responsible for cellular uptake and one active subunit
(CTA) that generates the diarrheal symptoms.[8] For CT to intoxicate the host, CTB first binds to the small intestinal
epithelium, resulting in cellular uptake and retrograde CTA transport
to the endoplasmic reticulum. Following transport to the cytoplasm,
CTA then covalently modifies the α-subunit of the G protein
Gsα via ADP-ribosylation, leading to a constant cellular
activated state of Gsα. The consequence is increased
production of intracellular cAMP and activation of protein kinase
A, which in turn phosphorylates the cystic fibrosis transmembrane
conductance regulator. This chloride ion channel then actively transports
ions into the intestinal lumen, generating osmotic pressure and causing
unabated secretion of water from SI epithelial cells (SI-ECs).Each subunit of CTB has a binding site facing the CTA subunit distally.
This site was shown almost 50 years ago to bind the GM1glycosphingolipid
with very high affinity.[9−11] Incorporating GM1 into membranes
greatly increases the sensitivity of the cell to CT-mediated intoxication.[12] Consequently, GM1 has been described as the
main ligand for CTB, and several inhibitors aimed at blocking this
binding to the canonical site of CTB have been generated and reviewed
extensively in Kumar and Turnbull.[13] Some
of these carbohydrates that are mimics of GM1 could, in monovalent
form, block CTB binding to GM1.[14,15] However, the multivalent
display of these mimics or GM1 oligosaccharide (GM1-os) exhibited
a greatly enhanced inhibitive capacity to CTB.[16−20] Indeed, this multimeric display of GM1 or GM1 mimics
has also been shown to result in inhibition of the toxic effect of
CT in vivo in mice and in human colonic cell lines and enteroids.[19−21]However, the level of GM1 is extremely low in the human SI[22] and is also low in cell lines derived from the
human colon that have often been used for the functional assessment
of CTtoxicity.[22−26] HumanSI-ECs instead abundantly express fucosylated structures including
histo-blood group antigens (HBGAs) that, albeit with lower affinity,
bind to an additional site on CTB situated laterally and closer to
the A subunit than the canonical site.[27,28] We have previously
shown that occupying this noncanonical site with fucosylated HBGAs
such as Le or Le or with polymers carrying fucose (Fuc) blocks CTB binding
to primary humanSI-ECs.[29] Furthermore,
preincubating the primary humanSI-ECs with a lectin that cross-links
fucosylated glycans efficiently blocked subsequent CT-induced secretion.[29] Interestingly, a lectin that binds terminal
galactose on humanSI-ECs also inhibited the toxic effects of CT,
although the same lectin showed no detectable block on CTB binding
to SI-ECs, results that may point to an essential role for high-affinity
Gal-terminated receptors such as GM1. Alternatively, the effects of
the Gal-recognizing lectin could stem from its ability to cross-link
structures on SI-ECs as well as the known toxicity of lectins applied
at high concentrations.[30] The expression
of HBGAs differs between individuals, and interestingly, the expression
of only the smallest determinant, the unmodified H antigen with a
terminal fucose, i.e., blood group O individuals, has been shown to
be overrepresented among individuals with severe cholera symptoms.
Interestingly, the differential capacity of CT to bind to a patient’s
variable levels of HBGAs via the noncanonical site has been suggested
to be a potential underlying cause of disease severity.[27]Inhibitors that could interfere with binding
to galactosylated
ligands (including GM1) via the CTB canonical site and simultaneously
effect the binding to fucosylated ligands via the noncanonical site
would be an attractive approach. Polymers can display sugars multivalently,
which increases the avidity of low-affinity interactions between sugars
and CTB. A study has also recently shown that a multimeric mixed display
of fucose and a galactoside also inhibits CTB binding to both GM1
and fucose in an ELISA without a major loss of blocking capacity compared
to that of the homopolymers.[31] This suggests
that dual-site inhibitors could be effective in situations where both
galactosylated and fucosylated ligands are utilized for binding and
subsequent intoxication. An assessment of the efficacy of inhibitors
of CT can be done by blocking the binding of CTB to selected immobilized
ligands in an ELISA or to the surface of immortalized cell lines and
cells from human or experimental animal primary tissues. ELISAs offer
high reproducibility and direct measurements of blocking the CTB binding
to specific ligands, but even so, the glycan display on lipids or
proteins will impact the CTB binding[29] and
could influence the blocking assessment. Immortalized cell lines are
easily accessible and have been used in most studies evaluating CTB
inhibitors, but the cell surface glycosylation pattern is decided
by multiple intracellular transferases that most often are significantly
altered upon tumor transformation. Moreover, cell surface glycosylation
patterns are host- and tissue-specific.[32,33] These latter
points could greatly influence the assessment of the inhibitors capacity
to block CT intoxication that can be done in vitro by measuring an
increase in the intracellular levels of mediators such as cAMP, ion
secretion assessed by alterations in resistance over monolayers/explants,
or in vivo by intestinal fluid accumulation.In this study,
we have created polymers with either only Fuc to
bind the noncanonical site, galactose (Gal) to bind the canonical
site of CTB, or copolymers with a mix of Gal and Fuc aimed at binding
both sites. We tested the ability of these polymers to block CTB binding
to GM1 and fucosylated ligands as well as primary tissues from the
SI of mice and humans as well as enteroids derived from the latter.
Moreover, we assessed the efficacy of these polymers to block CT-induced
ion secretion in the human enteroids and in vivo in
mice. We show that polymers with only Fuc efficiently block the binding
of CTB to humanSI-ECs, while polymers with Gal have a limited capacity
to inhibit. However, their specific capacity to block the binding
to murineSI-ECs is the reverse. On the other hand, polymers carrying
a mix of Gal and Fuc can efficiently inhibit CTB binding to human
and murineSI-ECs as well as partially block CT-mediated intoxication in vivo in mice and in human enteroids. Furthermore, although
preincubating the toxin with free GM1-os did not reduce the detected
binding of CTB to human enteroids, it completely mitigated CT-induced
ion secretion from the same cells. Hence, our results suggest that
the collective binding of CT to humanSI-ECs is vastly dominated by
the noncanonical site, whereas a small amount of binding to the canonical
site is required and sufficient for CT intoxication. In addition,
our finding highlights the importance of complementing CTB binding
studies with functional intoxication studies in clinically relevant
human cells.
Results
Polymers with Fuc Block
CTB Binding to Lewis Antigens but Not
GM1
In this study, we designed sugar polymers to target the
canonical binding site of CTB, the noncanonical binding site of CTB,
both, or neither. We generated polymers containing d-galactose
(Gal100), l-fucose (Fuc100), d-galactose, and l-fucose (Gal50Fuc50) or d-glucose (Glc100), where Gal50Fuc50 is a random copolymer. We then evaluated the capacity
of these polymers to block the binding of CTB to defined sugar structures
and cells as well as to block CT-mediated intoxication. Norbornene
derivatives were chosen for their polymer backbone (Scheme ). Norbornenes undergo ruthenium-catalyzed
ring-opening metathesis polymerization with robust and effective control
over molecular weight. The synthesis of sugar monomers from a racemic
mixture of exo-5-norbornene-2-carboxylic acid and their preparation
has been reported previously.[34] The molecular
weights and dispersities of peracetylated glycopolymer precursors
determined by gel permeation chromatography are presented in Table .
Scheme 1
Norborneyl Glycopolymers
Prepared
Catalyst 2 is
dichloro[1,3-bis(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-2-imidazolidinylidene](benzylidene)bis(3-bromopyridine)ruthenium(II).
Abbreviations used in the text: poly (1a′)100, pGlc100; poly (1b′)100, pGal100; poly (1c′)100, pFuc100; poly (1b′)-ran-poly(1c′), pGalFuc; poly (1a)100, Glc100; poly (1b)100 Gal100; poly (1c)100, Fuc100; and poly (1b)-ran-poly(1c),
GalFuc,
where n = DP.
Table 1
Molecular Weights of Polymersa
polymer
M/C ratiob
Mtheorb
Mnb
Mwb
Đb
DPb
pGlc100
100:1
51 300
35 600
44 000
1.28
69
pGal100
100:1
51 300
55 400
61 300
1.11
108
pFuc100
100:1
45 500
59 500
66 300
1.12
131
pGal5Fuc5
10:1
4900
7300
8200
1.12
15
pGal15Fuc15
30:1
14 600
15 500
18 100
1.17
30
pGal50Fuc50c
100:1
48 400
54 800
62 800
1.15
113
55 800
66 500
1.19
115
Polymers were analyzed using GPC
with static light scattering (SLS) and refractive index (RI) detection
in their protected peracetylated form prior to deprotection. Chromatogram
traces are shown in Figures S1 and S2.
Two batches were prepared and characterized
separately.
Norborneyl Glycopolymers
Prepared
Catalyst 2 is
dichloro[1,3-bis(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-2-imidazolidinylidene](benzylidene)bis(3-bromopyridine)ruthenium(II).
Abbreviations used in the text: poly (1a′)100, pGlc100; poly (1b′)100, pGal100; poly (1c′)100, pFuc100; poly (1b′)-ran-poly(1c′), pGalFuc; poly (1a)100, Glc100; poly (1b)100 Gal100; poly (1c)100, Fuc100; and poly (1b)-ran-poly(1c),
GalFuc,
where n = DP.Polymers were analyzed using GPC
with static light scattering (SLS) and refractive index (RI) detection
in their protected peracetylated form prior to deprotection. Chromatogram
traces are shown in Figures S1 and S2.M/C ratio, 1a′–c′ to catalyst 2 ratio; Mtheor, theoretical molecular weight; Mn, number-average molecular weight; Mw, weight-average molecular weight; Đ, dispersity; DP, degree of polymerization.Two batches were prepared and characterized
separately.We next assessed
the capacity of the different polymers to block
the binding of CTB to GM1 or triLe linked
to proteins. GM1 and triLe are known
to bind to the canonical and noncanonical sites of CTB, respectively.[27,35] Therefore, ELISA plates were coated with GM1 or triLe conjugated to humanserum albumin (HSA). Then CTB-HRP
preincubated with titrated amounts of the different sugar polymers
were added to the ELISA plates. We found that both Fuc100 and Gal50Fuc50 readily blocked CTB binding
to triLe, with Gal50Fuc50 showing the greatest efficacy (Figure A). Gal100 had a limited effect
and required much higher concentrations to block CTB binding to triLe (Figure A). However, the blocking of CTB binding to GM1 was
observed only with Gal100, and the blocking remained partial
even at excess concentrations (Figure B). Collectively these results show that the Gal50Fuc50 has the highest capacity to bind CTB. Interestingly,
Fuc100 and Gal50Fuc50polymers block
only the binding to HBGA via the noncanonical triLe site and not to GM1 through the canonical site on CTB.
Figure 1
Polymer block
in ELISA of CTB binding to triLe and
GM1. (A and C) Plates were coated with triLe-HSA and probed with CTB preincubated with the different
polymers. (B and D) Plates were coated with GM1-HSA and probed with
CTB preincubated with the different polymers. In (A) and (B), all
polymers used displayed 100 sugars. In (C) and (D), the length of
the copolymer varies with the number of displayed sugars. Curve fits
were made using a three-parameter fit to eq 1. Dotted lines indicate
unblocked CTB binding. Graphs show a representative experiment out
of three independent experiments, and error bars are the SD of intra-assay
duplicates or quadruplicates.
Polymer block
in ELISA of CTB binding to triLe and
GM1. (A and C) Plates were coated with triLe-HSA and probed with CTB preincubated with the different
polymers. (B and D) Plates were coated with GM1-HSA and probed with
CTB preincubated with the different polymers. In (A) and (B), all
polymers used displayed 100 sugars. In (C) and (D), the length of
the copolymer varies with the number of displayed sugars. Curve fits
were made using a three-parameter fit to eq 1. Dotted lines indicate
unblocked CTB binding. Graphs show a representative experiment out
of three independent experiments, and error bars are the SD of intra-assay
duplicates or quadruplicates.Next, we evaluated if the observed block was dependent on the sugar
proximity and density within the polymers or if the effect of random
copolymerGal50Fuc50 could be mimicked by blending
Gal100 and Fuc100 (Figure A). A very small decrease in the blocking
efficiency of CTB binding to triLe was
detected when using a blend of equimolar Gal100 and Fuc100 as compared to random copolymerGal50Fuc50 (Figure A). Only a small decrease in the signal was observed when blocking
CTB binding to GM1 with the polymer blend compared to Gal50Fuc50 (Figure B). To evaluate the impact of polymer length on CTB blocking,
two shorter lengths were tested: Gal15Fuc15 and
Gal5Fuc5. As shown in Figure C, the shorter polymers had severely reduced
blocking efficacies of CTB binding to triLe compared to Gal50Fuc50 (Figure A,C). Moreover, and in line
with previous experiments (Figure B), no GalFucpolymers of any length had any inhibitory
effect on CTB binding to GM1 (Figure D). We did not test any polymers longer than 100 sugars
because for this type of polymer decreased solubility is observed
with increasing length.Collectively, these experiments show
that fucose-containing polymers
specifically block the binding of HBGA ligands to CTB, while galactosepolymers confer limited blocking of CTB binding to GM1. Furthermore,
shorter versions of the GalFucpolymers are less effective blockers,
but a blend of Gal100 and Fuc100 polymers is
as potent as the Gal50Fuc50copolymer in blocking
the CTB binding to only HBGAs.
Polymers with Gal but Not
with Fuc Block the CTB-Binding Murine
Cells
To assess the capacity and site specificity of the
polymer-mediated blocking of CTB-binding to live cells, single cell
suspensions of murineSI-ECs and mesenteric lymph nodes (MLNs) were
generated. The cells were stained with CTB-biotin preincubated with
the different polymers. Then, levels of CTB binding to the cells were
assessed using flow cytometric techniques (Figures S3 and S4). As expected, CTB did not bind to the KO lymphocytes
from the MLNs, confirming that GM1 or GM1-related glycolipids account
for all CTB binding to murine lymphocytes (Figure S5).[29] Furthermore and as previously
published, we observed that CTB still bound to SI-ECs from the KO,
albeit to a lower extent (Figure A).[29] However, Gal100 blocked CTB binding to WT SI-ECs and lymphocytes with the same efficacy
as the Gal50Fuc50copolymer (Figures B and S5). In contrast, Fuc100 has very little blocking
effect on WT SI-ECs (Figure A,B) and lymphocytes (Figure S5). Moreover, the blocking pattern of CTB binding to KO SI-ECs by
the polymers was similar to that observed with WT SI-ECs, albeit slightly
reduced (Figure C).
This suggests that the canonical site is the sole determinate of CTB
binding to murine cells. This result is also in line with our previously
published data showing that the binding of CTB to these cells is independent
of fucosylated receptors.[29]
Figure 2
Evaluation of glycopolymers’
capacity to block CTB binding
to murine SI enterocytes and intoxication. (A–C) Cells were
isolated from murine SI, stained for common cell markers and with
CTB to analyze the polymer block by flow cytometry. Full gating can
be seen in Figure S4. Panel (A) shows representative
histograms of CTB binding to WT EpCAM+ cells with or without
the polymer block. Panels (B) and (C) show graphs of gMFI for CTB
binding after the polymer block. The values are normalized to the
% of unblocked CTB gMFI. Data is pooled from three independent experiments
with two to three mice in each experiment, and error bars represent
the SD. (D) Representative pictures of ligated loops after 4 h of
CT (10 μg/mL) treatment with or without Gal50Fuc50 polymer (40 μM) or just PBS in vivo. (E) Bar graph showing fluid accumulation as the length/weight ratio
of the ligated loops. In each animal, two loops were created. Statistics
were calculated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey correction. Two stars
represent p < 0.01, and four stars represent p < 0.001. Error bars represent the SD, and each dot
represents a loop.
Evaluation of glycopolymers’
capacity to block CTB binding
to murine SI enterocytes and intoxication. (A–C) Cells were
isolated from murine SI, stained for common cell markers and with
CTB to analyze the polymer block by flow cytometry. Full gating can
be seen in Figure S4. Panel (A) shows representative
histograms of CTB binding to WT EpCAM+ cells with or without
the polymer block. Panels (B) and (C) show graphs of gMFI for CTB
binding after the polymer block. The values are normalized to the
% of unblocked CTB gMFI. Data is pooled from three independent experiments
with two to three mice in each experiment, and error bars represent
the SD. (D) Representative pictures of ligated loops after 4 h of
CT (10 μg/mL) treatment with or without Gal50Fuc50polymer (40 μM) or just PBS in vivo. (E) Bar graph showing fluid accumulation as the length/weight ratio
of the ligated loops. In each animal, two loops were created. Statistics
were calculated using one-way ANOVA with Tukey correction. Two stars
represent p < 0.01, and four stars represent p < 0.001. Error bars represent the SD, and each dot
represents a loop.
Gal50Fuc50 Polymers Block CT-Induced Fluid
Accumulation in Mouse SI
Next, we wanted to assess if Gal50Fuc50 could interfere with intoxication caused
by CT. Hence, murine ligated loops of the proximal SI were made and
injected with CT that had been preincubated with or without the Gal50Fuc50polymer. Four hours later, the mice were
sacrificed, and the loops were weighed and their lengths were recorded.[36−38] We visually detected a partial polymer-mediated block of CT-induced
fluid accumulation in the loops (Figure D). Furthermore, this effect was statistically
significant when assessed in multiple animals where the weight/length
of intestine was measured to account for the difference in size of
the mice (Figure E).
In conclusion, the galactose-containing polymers efficiently block
the binding of CTB to both WT murine lymphocytes and primary SI-ECs,
while the Fuc100 polymer has a very limited effect. Moreover,
the preincubation of CT with the Gal50Fuc50copolymer
partially blocks the toxin-induced fluid accumulation in vivo.
Gal50Fuc50 is a Potent Blocker of CTB
Binding to Human SI-ECs
Having shown that the Gal50Fuc50 random copolymer has the potential to block CT-mediated
intoxication in mice (Figure ), we next tested the capacity of these polymers to block
CTB binding to isolated human primary SI-ECs as assessed by flow cytometry
(Figure S6). In line with our previously
published data[22,28] and in contrast to what we observed
in the murine intestine (Figure ), CTB binding to humanSI-ECs was almost completely
blocked by preincubation with the Fuc100 polymer, whereas
the Gal100 polymer displayed only a partial blocking effect
(Figure A,B). Moreover,
the Gal50Fuc50polymer was more than 10 times
more efficient at blocking CTB binding to humanSI-ECs than the Fuc100 polymer (Figure B). In contrast, the Glc100 polymer showed no blocking
effect, confirming that also with human primary tissues the blocking
observed is sugar-dependent and not an unspecific polymer effect (Figure B).
Figure 3
Flow cytometry evaluation
of glycopolymers’ capacity to
block CTB and LTB binding in human SI enterocytes. Cells were isolated
from human SI and stained for common cell markers and with CTB to
analyze the polymer block by flow cytometry. Full gating can be seen
in Figure S6. Panel (A) shows representative
histograms of CTB binding to EpCAM+ cells with or without a polymer
block. Panels (B) and (C) show graphs of gMFI for CTB binding after
long polymer (B) and short polymer (C) blocks (n =
5–10 donors). (D) Representative (out of five donors) histogram
of LTB binding to EpCAM+ cells with or without a polymer block. (E)
Representative (out of five donors) histogram of CTB and LTB binding
to EpCAM+ cells. The values are normalized to the % of unblocked CTB
gMFI. Error bars represent the SD.
Flow cytometry evaluation
of glycopolymers’ capacity to
block CTB and LTB binding in human SI enterocytes. Cells were isolated
from human SI and stained for common cell markers and with CTB to
analyze the polymer block by flow cytometry. Full gating can be seen
in Figure S6. Panel (A) shows representative
histograms of CTB binding to EpCAM+ cells with or without a polymer
block. Panels (B) and (C) show graphs of gMFI for CTB binding after
long polymer (B) and short polymer (C) blocks (n =
5–10 donors). (D) Representative (out of five donors) histogram
of LTB binding to EpCAM+ cells with or without a polymer block. (E)
Representative (out of five donors) histogram of CTB and LTB binding
to EpCAM+ cells. The values are normalized to the % of unblocked CTB
gMFI. Error bars represent the SD.We next assessed if polymer length was important for blocking CTB
binding in a situation where the fucose-dependent binding is considerable.
Gal5Fuc5 and Gal15Fuc15polymers were tested and compared to Gal50Fuc50. We observed a marked decrease in blocking efficacy when shortening
the polymers both in terms of equimolar amounts of polymer and when
normalizing to the number of polymer-attached sugars (Figure B,C). When comparing equimolar
amounts of polymer-attached sugars, the Gal50Fuc50polymer was roughly 3 times more potent than Gal15Fuc15 and 175 times more potent than Gal5Fuc5 polymers.Heat-labile toxin (LT) secreted by ETEC shows very
high similarity
to CTB and has been shown to bind GM1. However, additional glycoconjugate
ligands have been described.[39−41] We therefore assessed, on a small
subset of donors, the capacity of the Gal50Fuc50polymer to block LTB binding to SI-ECs. We observed the same pattern
of polymer blocking as for CTB, although the SI-ECs tended to bind
more LTB than CTB (Figure D,E), indicating that the Gal50Fuc50polymer is relevant not only for blocking CT binding but also for
blocking LT binding to the human SI. In conclusion, we show that fucose-containing
polymers can efficiently block the binding of CTB and LTB to primary
humanSI-ECs. The Gal50Fuc50polymer has greater
blocking efficacy, although the Gal100 polymer still mediates
the partial blocking of CTB binding at high concentrations. These
results indicate that both the canonical and noncanonical sites are
of importance when generating reagents aimed at blocking the binding
of CT to humanSI-ECs and subsequent intoxication.
CT Intoxication
of Human Enteroids Is Partially Blocked by Gal50Fuc50 and Completely Inhibited by GM1
Finally, to functionally
assess the capacity of polymers to block
the intoxication of human SI, we chose to establish human SI enteroid
cultures, as the great similarity between primary tissue and enteroid
cultures has previously been described.[42] Crypts were isolated from human jejunum tissue and cultured in cell
culture medium promoting Lgr5+ stem cell regeneration.
These enteroid cultures were then differentiated by removing growth
factors for stem cells (Figure A), resulting in the appearance of the mature cell types present
in the human small intestine such as mucus-producing cells, enterocytes
with microvilli, and lysozyme-producing cells (Figure B–D).
Figure 4
Enteroid characterization and functional
evaluation of the polymer
block. (A) Enteroid cells were evaluated using flow cytometry for
the presence of Lrg5+ stem cells. (B–D) Enteroid
cells were cultured on a transwell insert and differentiated into
a non-stem-cell state for 5 days. For all panels, the DAPI stain is
blue and the enterocyte marker phalloidin stain is red (for cell visualization).
Markers were used to identify different cell types (green) such as
goblet cells (B), mature enterocytes (C), and Paneth cells (D). (E)
One representative histogram out of two independent experiments of
polymer and the GM1-os block of CTB binding to enteroid cells (flow
cytometry). Full gating can be seen in Figure S7. One representative analysis out of four donors. (F) Bar
graph showing the % of CTB gMFI on cells from four different donors
after preincubating CTB with GM1-os or polymers. Error bars are SD.
Enteroid characterization and functional
evaluation of the polymer
block. (A) Enteroid cells were evaluated using flow cytometry for
the presence of Lrg5+ stem cells. (B–D) Enteroid
cells were cultured on a transwell insert and differentiated into
a non-stem-cell state for 5 days. For all panels, the DAPI stain is
blue and the enterocyte marker phalloidin stain is red (for cell visualization).
Markers were used to identify different cell types (green) such as
goblet cells (B), mature enterocytes (C), and Paneth cells (D). (E)
One representative histogram out of two independent experiments of
polymer and the GM1-os block of CTB binding to enteroid cells (flow
cytometry). Full gating can be seen in Figure S7. One representative analysis out of four donors. (F) Bar
graph showing the % of CTB gMFI on cells from four different donors
after preincubating CTB with GM1-os or polymers. Error bars are SD.We then performed flow cytometry assessments of
CTB binding (following
preincubation with polymers) to differentiated enteroid cells from
four different donors (Figures S7 and 4E,F). We observed that the differential capacity
of the polymers to block CTB binding to enteroid cells reproduced
the results obtained with primary humanSI-ECs (Figure ), with the copolymer being most efficient,
followed by the Fuc100 and Gal100 polymers (Figure E,F). We have previously
shown that preincubating CTB with GM1-os has a limited capacity to
block the binding of CTB to primary humanSI-ECs and with significant
variability between donors.[29] Consistent
with our previous work, GM1-os showed a very limited, if any, capacity
to block CTB binding to four human enteroid cultures compared to the
copolymer (Figure F). The ABO status and potential variable expression of HBGAs of
these established cultures have not yet been determined.To
evaluate if the polymers block CT-induced ion efflux (intoxication),
the enteroid cells were then seeded into permeable trans-well inserts,
allowing for transmembrane voltage and resistance measurements. Out
of the four enteroid cultures, only one grew to a high level of confluency
required for reliable and consistent measurements. For these experiments,
the enteroids were differentiated for 5 days prior to apical challenge
with CT preincubated with or without our polymers or GM1-os. Then
the voltage and resistance were measured using an ohm meter. These
measurements were used to calculate the short circuit current (Isc) per cm2 where the values were
normalized to the PBS control for each time point. We observed a CT-dependent
effect after 3 h, which lasted throughout the experiment (Figure ). Preincubating
CT with either the Fuc100 or Glc100 polymers
resulted in no blocking effect compared to untreated CT (Figure ), while CT treated
with the Gal100 polymer showed a delayed and minor reduction
in response (Figure ). Furthermore, a partial and sustained block of CT by the Gal50Fuc50polymer was observed (Figure ), although the same concentration of Gal50Fuc50 completely blocked all detectable CTB binding
when measured by flow cytometry (Figure E,F). In contrast, the preincubation of CT
with GM1-os completely blocked all CT-mediated ion secretion, while
using the same concentration of GM1-os had only a minor effect on
CTB binding to enteroids derived from the same donor (Figures E,F and 5). Collectively, these results show that aggregating CT with the
Gal50Fuc50polymer effectively blocks binding
to humanSI-EC and significantly reduces the intoxication of these
cells. Interestingly, preincubating the toxin with GM1-os has a limited
effect on the total binding detected for CTB to SI-ECs but completely
inhibits the secretory response to the holotoxin.
Figure 5
CT challenge of enteroid
cells. Differentiated enteroid cells were
used to evaluate the polymer (5 μM) block of CT (0.1 μg/mL)
intoxication. The graph shows Isc values
pooled from four independent experiments using enteroids from one
donor. Values are normalized to PBS-treated control cells at each
time point. Statistics calculated using two-way ANOVA with Tukey correction
in Prism software. *Represents a significant difference
between the closest data point and CT only. One star represents p < 0.05, three stars represent p <
0.001, and four stars represent p < 0.0001. Error
bars are the SEM.
CT challenge of enteroid
cells. Differentiated enteroid cells were
used to evaluate the polymer (5 μM) block of CT (0.1 μg/mL)
intoxication. The graph shows Isc values
pooled from four independent experiments using enteroids from one
donor. Values are normalized to PBS-treated control cells at each
time point. Statistics calculated using two-way ANOVA with Tukey correction
in Prism software. *Represents a significant difference
between the closest data point and CT only. One star represents p < 0.05, three stars represent p <
0.001, and four stars represent p < 0.0001. Error
bars are the SEM.
Discussion
Improved
vaccines against enterotoxin producing bacteria as well
as complementary strategies to reduce the spread of disease during
outbreaks are needed. Hence, here we show that norbornenepolymers
carrying a mix of Fuc and Gal can effectively block CTB and LTB binding
to primary humanSI-ECs. These polymers also partially inhibit the
CT-mediated intoxication of human SI enteroids as well as CT-induced
fluid accumulation in murine SI. Using our monosugar polymers, we
found that the largely fucose-dependent but galactose-independent
binding of CTB to humanSI-ECs is different from that of the fucose-independent
but galactose-dependent binding of CTB to murineSI-ECs. Moreover,
although the effect of occupying the canonical site with the high-affinity-ligand
GM1 had only a minor effect on the total binding of CTB to humanSI-EC,
this treatment completely inhibits CT-mediated ion secretion by human
SI enteroids.The polymer-induced aggregation of enterotoxins
could be an effective
and relatively low cost therapeutic since the polymer-toxin complexes
have no theoretical size limit and thus readily become too large for
intestinal cellular uptake. This is an effect that cannot be produced
by free sugars or oligosaccharides that occupy only one binding site
per molecule. It has not previously been shown that a fucose- and
galactose-containing polymer can inhibit CT intoxication in human
enteroids or in mice. Our results indicate that using a mixed sugarpolymer has an advantage over inhibitory molecules targeting only
one of the two sites on CTB. A recent study has shown that a mixed
polymer with fucose and a galactoside can block the binding of CTB
to both GM1 and fucosylated structures.[31] However, our study extends this finding as we show the necessity
of complementing the blocking of CTB-binding studies to ligands and
even to primary cells, with functional blocking studies of CT-induced
intoxication when assessing the efficacy of the inhibitors of CT.
The model of confluent monolayers cultured from human intestinal enteroids
combined with the measurement of changes in resistance as the assessment
of ion transport offers a unique possibility to measure CT induced
in secretion in a donor-selective fashion. We show a partial blocking
of CT intoxication by the Gal50Fuc50polymer
and a complete inhibition of toxicity by GM1-os, although the latter
hardly blocks binding to the intestinal enteroids. This pinpoints
that the level of binding of CT via the canonical site to SI-EC is
virtually undetectable to human intestinal cells due to the extensive
presence of fucosylated structures that bind CTB via the noncanonical
site. A complete block of CT-induced intoxication by GM1 or GM1-based
inhibitors has recently been shown in 3-D cultures of colonic human
enteroids and also in mice.[19−21] However, the evaluation of the
influence of CT binding to fucosylated ligands on the apical surface
of humanSI-ECs was not possible in 3-D enteroid cultures as the apical
surface is facing inward and is thus not exposed to CT. In addition,
we have previously shown and confirm in this study that the level
of binding of CTB to fucosylated structures in mice via the noncanonical
site is very limited.We found that the random copolymerGal50Fuc50 was unable to block the binding of CTB to
HSA-linked GM1 in ELISA.
However, CTB binding to primary humanSI-ECs and enteroids was blocked
with either the copolymer or Fuc homopolymer, even at low concentrations.
The Gal homopolymer at higher concentrations also partially blocked
binding. In contrast, the binding of CTB to murineSI-ECs that occurs
in the complete absence of GM1 in the β4GalNAcT KO mice was
blocked by the Gal50Fuc50 and Gal100 polymers, while the Fuc100 polymer had a limited effect.
This indicates that CTB binds to galactosylated ligands remaining
on SI-EC in KO mice. Furthermore, CTB binding to murine lymphocytes
was also inefficiently blocked by the Fuc100 polymer, indicating
that galactose-containing CTB receptors are also present on these
cells. These receptors should therefore be GM1 or GM1-related glycosphingolipids
(GSLs), as no binding of CTB to murine T or B cells can be observed
in β4GalNAcT KO mice. However, the main receptor on murine T
cells is most likely not GM1 but rather other GM1-related GSLs with
lower affinity for CTB as Gal50Fuc50polymers
readily blocked CTB binding to murine T cells.We and others
have previously shown that CT can induce cAMP production
in cells devoid of GM1 and that this is partially due to fucosylated
glycoconjugates.[29,43,44] However, our Fuc100 polymer showed no effect in limiting
the CT-mediated intoxication of human enteroids but instead the copolymerGal50Fuc50 partially inhibited CT-mediated intoxication.
We have also previously shown that the fucose-binding lectin AAL completely
blocks the CT-induced ion secretion in fresh human jejunal tissue.[29] Hence, it was somewhat unexpected that Fuc100 did not block CT intoxication. However, the AAL lectin
has a high affinity for fucose and has a very low off-rate for some
of its ligands.[45] The polymer, on the other
hand, has several CTB interactions, but all have low affinity. The
capacity of GM1-os preincubated with CT to inhibit the CT-mediated
intoxication of human enteroids indicates a complete dependence on
the canonical site and galactosylated receptors for internalization
and subsequent unabated ion secretion. This confirms our previous
findings with primary human SI tissues, where pretreating with the
galactose-binding lectin PNA did not result in a noticeable block
of CTB binding but efficiently blocked CT-mediated intoxication.[29]Our results using primary humanSI-ECs
support a theory that CT
uses the noncanonical site to first bind to a primary glycoprotein
receptor with low affinity. After that, and if present on the cell,
GM1, GM1-related GSL, or other receptors with terminal galactose will
outcompete the low-affinity fucosylated receptor or bind simultaneously
as suggested by others.[46] Then, following
stable binding through the canonical site, CT is internalized. Since
CT would be concentrated close to the cell membrane by the primary
receptors, this could facilitate uptake by receptors that are close
to the membrane, such as GM1. This model could also help to explain
why humans, in contrast to mice, express fucosylated HBGA structures
that can bind CTB and are dramatically more sensitive than mice to
CT intoxication. However, if the fucosylated HBGAs were obligatory
facilitators of subsequent galactosylated receptor-dependent intoxication,
it would be expected that the Fuc100 polymer should have
influenced CT-mediated intoxication of the human enteroids. Despite
this, no reduction in toxicity was observed in the enteroid monolayer
established from one donor when preincubating CT with saturating concentrations
of Fuc100 indicating that binding via the noncanonical
site plays no major role in facilitating CT intoxication. Importantly,
the expression of fucosylated HBGAs varies between individuals and
has been suggested to be linked to the great difference in severity
of disease symptoms among infected individuals.[2,47−50] Hence, in order to determine if fucosylated structures are facilitators
of subsequent intoxication and if so to which extent, a library of
enteroids from humans with characterized HBGA expression needs to
be generated. Furthermore, this assessment needs to be functional
as our results clearly show that the binding of CTB to the cells does
not necessarily correlate with CT-mediated intoxication.
Conclusions
To summarize, we show that random copolymers carrying galactose
and fucose can efficiently aggregate CTB, thereby blocking CTB binding
to human enteroids as well as partially inhibiting CT-mediated intoxication
in human enteroids and mice. Our results also suggest that although
the collective binding of CT to humanSI-ECs is vastly dominated by
low-affinity interactions between the noncanonical site and fucosylated
structures, it is the CTB binding by the canonical site to the comparatively
few structures on the SI-ECs that is required for intoxication. This
suggests that although the aggregation of CT with the Gal50Fuc50polymer is effective and partially blocks intoxication,
in order for complete blocking the affinity of the interaction between
the galactose on the polymer and the canonical site of CT needs to
be increased. Otherwise, the natural ligand(s) on the SI-ECs with
higher affinity for the canonical site will outcompete the polymer-bound
galactose and thereby cause the uptake of CT. Whether the high-affinity
CTB binding ligand in the human intestine is solely the very scarcely
expressed GM1 or other related galactose structures and if binding
via the canonical site of CTB is facilitated by differentially expressed
HBGAs remain to be determined.
Materials and Methods
Polymer Preparation
General
Polymerization Method[1]
Grubbs
third-generation catalyst was prepared as described in the
literature.[51] To a vial containing dichloro[1,3-bis(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)-2-imidazolidinylidene](benzylidene)bis(3-bromopyridine)ruthenium(II)
(2) under Ar was added anhydrous CH2Cl2. The desired volume with respect to the targeted polymerDP of catalyst 2 stock solution (1.0 mM) in anhydrous
CH2Cl2, was transferred into a vial charged
with Ar. The solution was chilled to 0 °C, the desired volume
of peracetylated glycomonomer (1a′, 1b′, 1c′) solution from a CH2Cl2 stock was added, and the solution was stirred for 3 h. The solution
immediately turned light brown upon addition of monomers. The reaction
was quenched with 100 μL of ethyl vinyl ether, and the solution
was stirred for 10 min. The reaction mixture was directly precipitated
into cold diethyl ether to obtain gray precipitate. Repeated precipitations
were performed to improve the purity of the polymer. The resulting
peracetylated glycopolymer was dried in vacuo and analyzed by GPC
and 1H NMR spectroscopy. The level of residual ruthenium
catalyst was tested using ICP-MS and determined to be less than 0.4
ppm.
General Deacetylation Procedure[1]
To a vial charged with peracetylated polymer (52.4 mg) and K2CO3 (107.5 mg) a 1:2 v/v mixture of THF/MeOH (8
mL) was added and the mixture was stirred for 2 h. To the vial was
added 4 mL of H2O, and the mixture was allowed to stir
for an additional 1 h. The solution was acidified with a 1:1 mixture
of 1 M HCl/THF and concentrated in vacuo. The deacetylatedpolymer
solution was further purified by dialysis using a commercially available
dialysis membrane (MWCO 3500) against distilled deionized H2O for 72 h with H2O replaced every 8 h to ensure the complete
removal of inorganic salts and leftover monomers. The dialyzed solution
was lyophilized to obtain deacetylatedpolymer as a white solid (24.9
mg). Complete deacetylation and the absence of small organic molecules
were confirmed by 1H NMR spectroscopy. In the absence of
nonsolvent impurities, we estimated the purity to be >95%.
Polymer
Characterization
Gel permeation chromatography
was performed with a GPC system composed of a Shimadzu SCL-10A controller,
a Shimadzu LC-20AT pump, and a Shimadzu CTO-10AS column oven equipped
with either a Phenomenex Phenogel 5 μm 10E4A, LC column 300
× 7.8 mm2 or a Phenogel 5 μm Linear(2), LC column
300 × 7.8 mm2, a Brookhaven Instruments BI-DNDC refractometer,
and a BI-MwA multiangle laser light scattering (MALLS) detector. HPLC-grade
tetrahydrofuran was filtered through 0.45 μm nylon filter and
used as the eluent with a flow rate of 0.7 mL/min at 30 °C. GPC
chromatograms were calibrated using polystyrene standard calibration
kits. The molecular weights and dispersities of peracetylated glycopolymers
were calculated on the basis of the refractive index and light-scattering
signals. Molecular weights of deacetylatedglycopolymers (Glc100, Gal100, Fuc100, and Gal50Fuc50) were calculated by assuming complete deacetylation
as confirmed via 1H NMR spectroscopy and based on the molar
mass of acetates with respect to DP.
Bioassay Reagents
Recombinant CTB (PDB ID 5ELD) and LTB were produced
in-house.[52] CTB, LTB, and OVA were conjugated
to biotin and/or HRP as previously described.[29] Active CT produced in V. cholerae was purchased
from List Biological Laboratories, azide-free in powder form (product
no. 100B). HSA-linked tri-Le and GM1
(product no. 61/56 and 61/69, IsoSep) were used to coat ELISA plates
for CTB binding. GM1 oligosaccharide was purchased from Elicityl (product
no. GLY096).Krebs ringer solution was prepared by mixing the
following ingredients with distilled water: 118 mM NaCl, 4.69 mM KCl,
2.52 mM CaCl2, 1.16 mM MgSO4, 1.01 mM NaH2PO4, 25 mM NaHCO3, and 12.2 mM d-glucose. R10 medium was prepared from the following ingredients:
RPMI1640 with 10 mM HEPES, 10% FBS, 2 mM l-glutamine, 1 mM
Na-pyruvate, 1% PenStrep, and 10 μg/mL gentamicin (Gibco, Fisher
Scientific).
ELISA
ELISA was performed using
HSA-linked oligosaccharides
(tri-Le and GM1) which were immobilized
in 96-well microplates at RT overnight (MICROLON 600 High Binding,
Greiner, VWR) and subsequently blocked with 0.2% BSA (Sigma-Aldrich)
in PBS at 37 °C. The plates were incubated with CTB-linked to
HRP (conjugated using the Lightning-Link HRP Kit, Expedeon) with or
without polymers in PBS + 0.2% BSA and 0.1% Tween20 (Sigma-Aldrich)
at RT. To detect CTB-HRB binding, we used o-phenylenediamine
dihydrochloride (OPD, Sigma-Aldrich, 1 mg/mL) dissolved
in 0.1 M citrated buffer at pH 4.5 for 15 min, after which the reaction
was stopped with H2SO4. To evaluate the absorbance,
we used Lx800 (BioTek). Background values (absorbance in wells coated
only with BSA but probed with CTB-HRP) were subtracted before graphing
the data.
Equation 1
IC50 was calculated using GraphPad Prism
7 with “Dose-response - Inhibition, log (inhibitor) vs response
(three parameters)”. More information can be found at graphpad.com/guides/prism/7.
Mice
Mice −/–
or +/− for the β4GalNAcT-gene
(C57BL/6 background) were kindly donated by Professor Ronald L. Schnaar
(Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA).
The −/– (KO) mice are deficient in complex (and most
noncomplex) GSLs, as confirmed previously.[53,54] The mice were bred using heterozygous breeding and maintained in
individually ventilated cages in the animal facility at Sahlgrenska
Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. +/− mice express
similar levels of GM1 as +/+ mice and were therefore used as WT together
with normal C57BL/6 mice.[55] All animal
experiments were performed in accordance with approved ethical permits
granted by the regional animal ethics committee (ethics nos. 150/15
and 1092/17).The jejunal section from mouse intestine (both
WT and KO) was excised along with the mesenteric lymph nodes (MLN).
The enterocytes were isolated using the same protocol as seen below
for human intestine but without initial removal of the muscular tissue.
The intestinal cells were stained with mAbs against CD45.2-FITC, EpCAM-APC-Cy7,
CTB, OVA-biotin + SA-BV421, and live/dead marker Zombie Red to evaluate
CTB binding to epithelial cells.MLN cells were isolated by
gently mashing the nodes through a 100
μm mesh filter. The cells were stained with mAbs against CD3-APC
and B220-FITC and with CTB or OVA-biotin, followed by streptavidin-BV421
and live/dead marker Zombie Red to characterize CTB binding to different
cell types. All of the cells were then acquired using a flow cytometer
(Fortessa 20X, BD), and the data was analyzed and visualized using
FlowJo 10 (Tree Star).
Ligated Loops
WT mice were anesthetized
using isoflurane,
and a midline incision was made to expose the intestine. Loops of
about 3–5 cm of proximal and mid/distal small intestine were
tied and injected with 10 μg/mL CT (with or without polymer)
in 100 μL PBS + 3% NaHCO3 or just PBS + 3% NaHCO3. The loops were reinserted into the abdomen, and the wound
was closed to prevent fluid loss. After 4 h under anesthesia, the
mice were sacrificed and the weight to length ratio was calculated
for the loops to determine the fluid accumulation.
Human Tissue
Human jejunum tissue was donated after
informed consent by patients undergoing gastric bypass surgery. The
specimens were obtained without any information about the patients
and experiments on these tissues carried according to approval from
the Ethical Review Board, Gothenburg, Sweden (ethics no. 583-17).
The resected tissue was immediately put in ice-cold Krebs–Ringer
solution. The mucosa was dissected from the muscle and connective
tissue, chopped into small pieces, and incubated 1 × 25 min at
37 °C in HBSS (without Ca2+ and Mg2+, Gibco,
Thermo Scientific) with 5 mM EDTA, 2% FBS (Gibco, Thermo Scientific),
and 15 mM HEPES (Fisher BioReagents). The tissue was then washed with
HBSS without EDTA for 10 min at 37 °C followed by enzymatic degradation
in R10 medium with Liberase (Liberase TM, Roche) and DNase I (Roche,
Sigma-Aldrich) together with 5 mM CaCl2 for 45 min at 37
°C. The resulting fluid was filtered, washed, and stained with
mAbs against EpCAM-FITC, CD45-APC-H7, and Le-BV786 (BD Biosciences) and with CTB/LTB/OVA-biotin (conjugated
with kit from Expedeon), followed by streptavidin-BV421 and live/dead
marker Zombie Red (Biolegend). The blocking of CTB binding was done
as above. The cells were then analyzed using flow cytometry.
Enteroid
Isolation
Fresh tissue from human jejunum
was stripped of muscle and connective tissue using scissors to isolate
the mucosa. Small biopsies were then taken and treated with PBS +
antibiotic-antimyotic (1:100) (Thermo Scientific) for 4 × 2 min
and then PBS + DTT (10 mM) for 3 × 2 min. The tissue was then
incubated in PBS + EDTA (2 mM), 4 °C, on rotation for 1 h and
then violently shaken to isolate the crypts. The crypts were then
seeded into matrigel (hESC-Qualified Matrix, Corning) and cultured
in Intesticult (Stem Cell) to keep the cells in a stem cell state.
If growing well and forming spheres after three passages, the cultures
were considered to be stable enteroid lines and were used for further
expansion and experiments.
CT Challenge of Monolayers
Stable
enteroid lines were
grown in matrigel for 5–7 days before breaking the spheres
using a G27 needle and a syringe. The single cell suspension was then
seeded onto well inserts (Corning Transwell clear polyester membrane
0.4 μm, 0.33 cm2, Sigma-Aldrich) coated with collagen
from human placenta (Sigma-Aldrich) and cultured in Intesticult (components
A and B, Stem Cell) for 5–10 days to form confluent monolayers.
The confluency was assessed using a microscope and measuring trans
epithelial resistance (TER) with a Millicell ERS-2 V/ohm meter (Millipore).
When TER reached above 600 Ω/cm2 (minus the well
background resistance), the cells were grown in equal parts Intesticult
component A + DMEM for 5 days to induce the differentiation of the
cells into a more mature state as previously described.[42] The differentiated monolayer cultures were then
subjected to an apical CT challenge (0.1 μg/mL) where CT had
been pretreated with polymers or oligosaccharides. To monitor the
CT-induced ion efflux from the TER cells, the trans epithelial resistance
and voltage were monitored, where the short circuit current (Isc) per cm2 was calculated. The results
were then normalized to the measurements on PBS-treated cells.
Authors: Amberlyn M Wands; Akiko Fujita; Janet E McCombs; Jakob Cervin; Benjamin Dedic; Andrea C Rodriguez; Nicole Nischan; Michelle R Bond; Marcel Mettlen; David C Trudgian; Andrew Lemoff; Marianne Quiding-Järbrink; Bengt Gustavsson; Catharina Steentoft; Henrik Clausen; Hamid Mirzaei; Susann Teneberg; Ulf Yrlid; Jennifer J Kohler Journal: Elife Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: F Matthew Kuhlmann; Srikanth Santhanam; Pardeep Kumar; Qingwei Luo; Matthew A Ciorba; James M Fleckenstein Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Ji Sun; Nancy L Shaper; Saki Itonori; Marija Heffer-Lauc; Kazim A Sheikh; Ronald L Schnaar Journal: Glycobiology Date: 2004-06-02 Impact factor: 4.313