Siyavash Mirzaei1, Hamid Mobedi2, Hamid Gourabi1, Mohammad Hosein Sanati3, Sakine Khezli4, Masoume Ighaeie5, Hamid Omidian6. 1. Department of Genetics, Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. 2. Department of Novel Drug Delivery Systems, Iran Polymer and Petrochemical Institute, Tehran, Iran. Electronic Address: H.Mobedi@ippi.ac.ir. 3. Medical Genetics Department, National Institute of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (NIGEB), Tehran, Iran. 4. Department of Novel Drug Delivery Systems, Iran Polymer and Petrochemical Institute, Tehran, Iran. 5. Computational Nano Physical Chemistry Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Azerbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran. 6. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nova Southeastern University, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Davie, Florida, USA.
The protein of human growth hormone (hGH) has 191
amino acids and a molecular weight of 22 KDa. This
protein is secreted and stored by somatotropic cells in the
side section of the pituitary gland (1). Patients who suffer
from GH deficiency, Prader-Willi, and Turner syndrome,
receive a daily injection of this hormone (2). So, there is a
strong need for new dosage forms that can facilitate hGH
delivery, reduce the number of injections, and increase
treatment efficacy and patients’ compliance (2-4).
However, hGH instability in new drug delivery systems
(NDDSs), aqueous solutions remain a major hurdle. So
far, many studies have been done to increase the stability
of hGH in solutions.The most suitable stability for hGH in solution
and NDDSs, is generally provided by the addition of
antioxidants, osmolytes, acid neutralizers and biological
buffers (5-9). In aqueous media, hGH stability is affected
by buffer species, concentration, temperature, pH, ionic
strength, and physical stress. These factors can produce
unwanted crosslinking, oxidation, deamination, and
consequently aggregation. An appropriate buffer for
protein media, should preferably release its components
from the protein domain (to enhance water surface
tension), remove free radical, reduce the mobility of the
water molecules, and suppress nucleophilic substitution
on disulfide bonds (5, 10).Biological buffers such as tris(hydroxymethyl)
aminomethane (Tris) (C4H11NO3) and other tris derivatives
are among additives used to stabilize proteins (11). Tris
is a biocompatible weak base (molecular weight 121 Da)
(12) that protects proteins against chemical degradation,
denaturation, unfolding, and ultimately, aggregation by
interacting with the protein, or similar to osmolytes, it
induces proteins stabilization (10, 12).In the previous studies, the stability of some proteins
such as bovine serum albumin (BSA) and interleukin
was increased in aqueous solutions at high temperatures in the presence of Tris (11, 13). It has become evident
that the hydroxyl groups in Tris form hydrogen bond with
glutamic acid, aspartic acid, alanine, glycine, tryptophan
and cysteine amino acids in proteins and peptides, and
protect them against chemical degradation (14). It was
also shown that a greater hydrogen bonding can be
achieved by increasing concentrations of Tris (11, 14).
Changes in protein stability in the presence of Tris, at least
in part, depend on intermolecular interactions that can be
studied by empirical experiments as well as computer
modeling. Intermolecular interactions that can be studied
by empirical experiments as well as computer modeling.
Molecular docking is a computer modeling approach used
to predict the preferred orientation of binding to provide a
stable conformation. The preferred orientation knowledge
is utilized for prediction of the binding affinity between
two molecules using scoring functions. Two approaches
are commonly employed within the docking modeling
association. One approach is to simulate the ligand and the
protein as complementary surfaces. The second approach
describes the docking process in which the energies of
interaction in the ligand-protein pair are calculated (15).
Investigation of the Tris effects on hGH stability and
intermolecular interactions between hGH and Tris, was
the aim of this study.
Materials and Methods
Materials
hGH was purchased in the form of powder with
excipient ratio of 1:6 from GeneScience Pharmaceuticals
(China). Tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (Tris) was
purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA), and n-propyl
alcohol (analytical grade) was obtained from Merck,
Germany.
Sample preparation
In this experimental study, to compare hGH stability
in phosphate and Tris buffers (0.05 M, pH=7.4), hGH
solutions (1 mg/ml) were prepared and kept at two
temperatures 5 ± 2℃ (refrigerator temperature) and 37 ±
1℃ (body temperature). The solutions were sampled and
analyzed by High-performance liquid chromatography
(HPLC) and enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay
(ELISA), for 5 days and 24 hours, respectively. To
investigate the effects of Tris on hGH stability in
phosphate buffer, the hGH solutions (1 mg/ml) were
prepared in phosphate buffer at the concentration of 0.05
M and pH=7.4, containing 0.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 6.0 mM of
Tris and kept at 37 ± 1℃. The samples’ turbidity was
tested after 48 hours. The hGH solutions (1 mg/ml) in Tris
buffers (0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, 0.09 M and pH=7.4) and
phosphate buffers (0.05 M, pH=7.4) containing of 0.00,
0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, 0.09 M Tris were prepared and kept
at 37℃ for 24 hours. to investigate the effects of Tris on
hGH hydrodynamic size, DLS test was performed.To detect potential interactions between hGH and Tris,
reference standard hGH solutions 1(mg/ml) containing
0.00, 0.05, and 0.1 M of Tris were prepared in distilled
water and analyzed by UV spectrophotometry.
Experimental analysis and evaluation
ELISA Kit: hGH concentration in solutions was
measured using an ELISA Kit (Accubind, Monobind,
USA). The absorbance was measured at the wavelength
of 450 nm using a microplate photometer (Rodon, Titertek
Multiskan, Netherlands).HPLC: Analysis was performed according to the
United State Pharmacopeia (USP) 40 by HPLC (smart
line manager 5050, Knauer, Germany) with column C4
(4 mm×25 cm, 5 μm, 300 A°) (phenomenex, China), at
45℃ with mobile phase containing a mixture of 71% Tris
buffer (0.05 M, pH=7.5) and 29% n-propyl alcohol and
the flow rate was set at 0.5 ml/minute.Dynamic light scattering (DLS): hGH aggregation
and agglomeration was investigated using DLS (Omni,
Brookhaven, USA) and turbidity tests.UV spectrophotometer: hGH structural changes were
tracked using a UV analyzer (UV-1650PC, Shimadzu,
Japan).
Computational analysis and evaluation methods
Density functional theory calculation
In the computational study, a full geometric optimization of
the electronic ground state of Tris was obtained by applying
the DFT (16, 17) using the Becke’s three-parameter hybrid
exchange functional (B3) (18) and the Lee-Yang-Parr
correlation functional (LYP) (19). A fairly large basis set with
two sets of polarization functions denoted the 6-311G (2p,
2d) basis was used (16). All calculations were carried out
using Gamess-US Package (20)
Molecular docking
Computational docking can be used to predict bound
conformation and free energies for a small ligand molecule
binding a macromolecular target. Docking is used to study
intermolecular interactions and their mechanisms (21).The interaction of Tris, as a ligand, with hGH, as a
macromolecule, was investigated. The Auto dock 4.2
was used to locate the appropriate conformations and
binding orientations of one molecule of Tris into the hGH
binding pocket. The lamarckian genetic algorithm (LGA)
implemented in the Auto Dock program, was employed
(22). The ligand (Tris) structure was optimized by DFT
calculations. This optimized structure and hGH protein
data bank [PDB code: 1Hgu (N-Hydroxyguanidine)] (23)
were subjected to docking analysis. By adding the polar
hydrogen atoms, the Kollman united atom charges, atomic
solvation parameters, and fragmental volumes were
assigned to the protein, using Auto Dock Tools (24). The
grid spacing was 0.375Å, and each grid map consisted
of 50×36×52 grid points. Lennard-Jones parameters
12- 6 and 12-10, supplied by the program, were used to
model vander Waals interactions and hydrogen bonds,
respectively. For ligand, random starting positions,
random orientations, and torsions were used. The
docking was performed with an initial 150 individuals’
population, a maximum of 270,000 generations,
and maximum of 25 million energy evaluations. A
maximum of 300 conformers was considered in the
docking modeling process. Using a root mean square
deviation (RMSD) less than 0.2 nm as a threshold,
the resulting conformations were clustered. After the
simulation was completed, the docked structure was
analyzed and the interaction was investigated. The
binding distance between the donors and acceptors
and the hydrogen bond interactions were measured for
the best conformers. Interactions, position, spacing of
amino acids with each other within the complex of Tris
and hGH, were also studied using a PyMOL package
(25).
Statistical analysis
In statistical analysis, to compare the data obtained from
different samples, a t test (Paired Two Sample for Mean
values) was performed using Microsoft Office Excel version
2016. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
Human growth hormone stability in the phosphate
and Tris buffers
hGH chemical degradation such as oxidation and
deamidation, and physical degradation (e.g. aggregation,
agglomeration or unfolding), which lead to biological
deactivation of hGH, in Tris and phosphate buffers (0.05
M, pH=7.4) at two temperatures of 5 ± 2˚C and 37 ± 1˚C,
were investigated by HPLC (26, 27) and ELISA analysis
(28), respectively (Fig.1).
Fig.1
hGH stability in Tris and phosphate buffers (0.05 M, pH=7.4) analyzed by HPLC and ELISA tests. A. At 5 ± 2℃ and B. At 37 ± 1℃.
hGH; Human growth hormone, HPLC; High performance liquid chromatography, and ELISA; Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
hGH stability in Tris and phosphate buffers (0.05 M, pH=7.4) analyzed by HPLC and ELISA tests. A. At 5 ± 2℃ and B. At 37 ± 1℃.
hGH; Human growth hormone, HPLC; High performance liquid chromatography, and ELISA; Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assayHPLC analysis of hGH stability in phosphate buffer
at 5 ± 2℃, showed that the stability of hGH in the
phosphate buffer remained unchanged for four days;
however, the results of ELISA analysis showed a
decrease in the stability following the second day. In
other words, hGH chemical degradation was found
insignificant for four days, so decreased stability
detected by ELISA test can be attributed to the physical
degradation.In Tris buffer, both HPLC and ELISA results
confirmed that hGH stability remained unchanged for
four days at 5 ± 2℃. Therefore, the difference in hGH
stability between phosphate buffer and Tris buffer
confirmed that Tris could enhance hGH stability twice
as much. By comparison of the results of hGH stability
study at 5 ± 2℃ in Tris and phosphate buffers, it was
demonstrated that hGH stability remained unchanged
for two days and then, significantly decreased in
phosphate buffer (P≤0.035, Fig.1A).The 24-hour physical and chemical stability data
obtained by HPLC and ELISA analysis at 37 ± 1˚C,
showed that hGH remained stable in phosphate buffer for
1 hour. hGH stability in this buffer decreased after one
hour due to initiation of chemical degradations; however,
after 2 hours, physical degradation also increased hGH
instability as shown by ELISA results (Fig.1B).The obtained HPLC and ELISA results in terms
of hGH stability in Tris buffer showed that hGH
chemical degradation was suppressed for 24 hours
and hGH degradation after 3.5 hours, was related to
physical degradation. Therefore, comparison of hGH
stability between Tris buffer and phosphate buffer (37
± 1˚C) in 3.5 hours, demonstrated a greater chemical
stability for hGH in Tris buffer, and showed that hGH
physical degradation rate in Tris buffer was lower than
that in phosphate buffer (Fig.1B). Statistical analysis
showed differences in hGH stability between Tris
and phosphate buffer at 37 ± 1℃ from hour 2 to 24
(P=0.0209).
Effect of Tris on human growth hormone stability in
aqueous solution
Since chemical and physical degradations can
lead to protein aggregation, changes in the stability
of a protein can be evaluated by monitoring protein
aggregation. For this purpose, the effect of Tris on
hGH stability was studied by adding Tris to phosphate
buffer containing hGH. Aggregated hGH’s size and
percent in phosphate buffer solution of hGH, was
evaluated using qualitative turbidity and DLS tests
performed at 37 ± 1℃. Following the addition of
Tris, the color of the solution was changed from offwhite to completely transparent at Tris concentration
of 3.0 up to 6.0 mM at 37 ± 1˚C after 48 hours. This
color change was due to reductions in hGH physical
degradation, such as unfolding, and aggregation, and
chemical degradation (Fig.2).
Fig.2
Human growth hormone (hGH) solution in phosphate buffer
(pH=7.4), after 48 hours at 37 ± 1˚C. A. Solution containing 0.0 mM Tris, B.
Solution containing 3.0 mM Tris, C. Solution containing 4.0 mM Tris, and
D. Solution containing 6 mM Tris.
Human growth hormone (hGH) solution in phosphate buffer
(pH=7.4), after 48 hours at 37 ± 1˚C. A. Solution containing 0.0 mM Tris, B.
Solution containing 3.0 mM Tris, C. Solution containing 4.0 mM Tris, and
D. Solution containing 6 mM Tris.The DLS test results indicated that adding Tris at the
optimum concentration to the hGH solutions (Tris buffer
and phosphate buffer containing Tris), increased the
stability of this protein and prevented its aggregation
(Fig.3). Based on these results, hydrodynamic size of
hGH was in the range of 4 to 5 nm (in dimer form, hGH
size is 8-10 nm) in both Tris and phosphate buffers (0.05
M, pH=7.4) at t=0 (Fig.3A). In Tris buffers (pH=7.4) of
different concentrations, the average of aggregated protein
diameter size decreased with increasing concentrations
(0.01 to 0.05 M) of Tris from. Although hGH has the
minimum average diameter size in Tris buffer 0.05 M, but
with increasing concentration (from 0.05 to 0.09 M) of
Tris, hGH aggregation and diameter size was increased
(Fig.3B-F).
Fig.3
Particle size distribution of human growth hormone (hGH) protein in different phosphate and Tris buffer solutions,
pH=7.4. A. At t=0, B-F. In Tris
buffer 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, and 0.09 M, G-L. In phosphate buffer containing 0.00, 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, 0.09 M Tris after 24 hours at 37˚C.
In phosphate buffer containing hGH and Tris, by
increasing Tris concentration from 0 up to 0.03 M
in solutions, the aggregated hGH diameter decreased
to the diameter of the dimeric protein. However, by
increasing Tris concentration from 0.03 up to 0.09
M, the aggregated protein diameter increased again
(Fig.3G-L). Therefore, the minimum diameter of
aggregated hGH was observed in Tris buffer 0.05 M,
and phosphate buffer 0.05 M containing 0.03 M Tris,
after 24 hours at 37˚C.
Investigation of Tris and human growth hormone
interaction
Chemical interactions between hGH and Tris were
investigated using UV spectrometry and molecular
modeling. The preliminary results confirmed the
interactions between the two molecules (Fig.4A-C). The
amino acids of hGH that can potentially create hydrogen
bonds with Tris, are introduced by Molecular Docking
modeling in Table 1.
Fig.4
Interactions between human growth hormone (hGH) and Tris. A. Interaction from the close view
(structure of the first conformation from the first
cluster). B. Interactions between Tris (blue) and hGH amino acids involved in hydrogen bonds (red) and tryptophan
(purple) at 3 different positions. C.
Ultra violet (UV) spectrums related to hGH solutions containing 0, 0.05 and 0.1 M Tris.
Particle size distribution of human growth hormone (hGH) protein in different phosphate and Tris buffer solutions,
pH=7.4. A. At t=0, B-F. In Tris
buffer 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, and 0.09 M, G-L. In phosphate buffer containing 0.00, 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, 0.07, 0.09 M Tris after 24 hours at 37˚C.Interactions between human growth hormone (hGH) and Tris. A. Interaction from the close view
(structure of the first conformation from the first
cluster). B. Interactions between Tris (blue) and hGH amino acids involved in hydrogen bonds (red) and tryptophan
(purple) at 3 different positions. C.
Ultra violet (UV) spectrums related to hGH solutions containing 0, 0.05 and 0.1 M Tris.Some results of Docking simulationIn addition to performed these tests by the present team,
Studies by other researchers were suggested, Tris as an
osmolyte can increase the hGH stability by changing in
folded and unfolded hGH levels of Gibbs free energy
(Fig.5).
Fig.5
Transfer of natural protein to unfolded protein in buffer solution
(∆G1); the reaction of unfolded protein in aqueous solution to the
unfolded protein in buffer with stabilizer (∆G2); the transfer of natural
protein to unfolded protein in buffer with stabilizer (∆G3); and the reaction
of natural protein in aqueous solution to natural protein in solution with
stabilizer (∆G4).
Transfer of natural protein to unfolded protein in buffer solution
(∆G1); the reaction of unfolded protein in aqueous solution to the
unfolded protein in buffer with stabilizer (∆G2); the transfer of natural
protein to unfolded protein in buffer with stabilizer (∆G3); and the reaction
of natural protein in aqueous solution to natural protein in solution with
stabilizer (∆G4).
Discussion
With increasing concentrations of Tris, at lower
concentrations (to 0.05 M in Tris buffer and to 0.03 M in
phosphate buffer), the stability of hGH increased and at
higher salt concentrations, increasing Tris concentrations
led to decreasing hGH’s stability. Increases in hGH stability
at low Tris concentration can be potentially attributed to
the following three mechanisms: i. Interactions between
Tris and hGH, ii. Salting-in effect of Tris, and/or iii.
Preferential exclusion of Tris from protein domain in
aqueous solutions.Tris-hGH interactions: Tris could delay oxidation,
deamidation, denaturation and ultimately, aggregation
of hGH through electrostatic interactions and hydrogen
bonding with hGH’s amino acids that are prone to
degradation (10, 14).Possibility of Tris-hGH electrostatic interactions can
be explained by hGH and Tris net charge in solutions
(29, 30). In solutions with pH=7.4, PI 5.12 and pKa 8,
the protein could be negatively charged and Tris could be
mainly ionized with the positive charges. Thus, probably,
there were hGH-Tris electro-static interactions which
could be regarded as the reasons for the increase in hGH
stability in the solutions (31).To investigate the possibility of hydrogen bonding
between Tris and hGH, as a reason for improved stability
of hGH molecules, the interactions between these two
molecules were evaluated using a molecular modeling
approach and spectrophotometric methods. Molecular
docking is the most common means of analyzing ligandprotein interactions at the molecular level. Therefore,
computational docking was used to obtain more details
on the possible binding mode of Tris and Tris interaction
with hGH residues.Analysis of docking calculations using RMSD-tolerance
of 2.0 Å out of 300 docking implementation, showed that
there were 10 clusters of conformers. This included the
number of conformations in every cluster, the binding
energy of the lowest energy conformation in these
clusters (in kcal/moll), and the residues participating in
hydrogen bonds interactions. The lowest docked energy
value was -6.22 kcal/moll, implying that Tris had affinity
towards hGH. The residues participating in hydrogen
bonds interactions, were Pro89, Glu88, Asp147, Leo93
and Phe92.In addition to using molecular docking, UV experiment
was also performed to study Tris- hGH interactions. UV
technique is a simple method to study intermolecular
interactions, structural changes and formation of
molecular complexes (26, 32). The UV data confirmed
that peaks of the hGH spectrum (tyrosine and tryptophan
or phenylalanine) were shifted toward the longer
wavelengths in the presence of Tris.The interaction between tyrosin and phenylalanine
with Tris, was proven in the Docking data; however,
tryptophan could not directly interact with the ligand.
The change in the UV peak of tryptophan in the presence
of Tris, was presumably due to the interaction of the
tryptophan amino acids with the neighboring amino acids
in solutions. Consequently, molecular docking modeling
and UV experiments data showed that the possibility of
hydrogen bonding between Tris and the hGH.Previous studies showed that some of the amino acids
such as Asp, can cause hydrolytic degradation in hGH
(33) or similarly, oxidation of Tyr and Leo can cause
hGH degradation (34). Therefore, these electrostatic
interactions and hydrogen bonds can prevent destructive
chemical interactions.Salting-in effect of Tris: Changes in hGH stability
observed in different concentrations of Tris can be related
to the Salting-in and Salting-out effects. In aqueous protein
solutions, with increasing salt ions at low concentrations,
the protein solubility increases due to the creation of
charge-charge bonds between ions and the protein surface.
This effect of salt is called salting-in. Salting-in effects
are observed up to the optimum concentration, and then,
with increasing ions concentration, protein solubility
decreases (called salting-out). Salting-in phenomena in
Tris buffer happened at concentrations lower than 0.05 M,
and in phosphate buffer containing Tris, due to existence
of phosphate ions, these phenomena happened at lower
Tris concentration (0.03 M).Increase in hGH’s physical stability, at low
concentrations of Tris in solutions, is related to prevent
protein aggregation (35).Preferential exclusion from protein domain: Preferential
exclusion of Tris from hGH’s domain in aqueous
solutions, is the third mechanism underlying the increased
hGH stability in solutions containing the optimum
concentration of Tris like osmolyts molecules (36, 37).Tris as an osmolyte can increase the hGH stability by
changing in folded and unfolded hGH levels of Gibbs free
energy (38).The Gibbs free energy of native and unfolded protein
in the aqueous solution containing an osmolyte, may
be increased as much as ∆G4 and ∆G2, respectively.
Since the ∆G2 is increasing more than ∆G4, the
thermodynamic stability of the native protein is
increased. In other words, unfolded protein in the
solution containing a stabilizer is more unstable than
in the solutions without any stabilizer (∆G3 is more
than ∆G1). Therefore, the increased hGH’s stability
could be mainly due to the decreased stability of the
unfolded protein in the presence of Tris at the optimum
concentration (38). In spite of increased hGH stability
at low concentrations of Tris, its stability decreased
at high concentration of this salt, from 0.05 to 0.09 in
the Tris buffer and from 0.03 to 0.09 in the phosphate
buffer. In these ionic strength, it seems that the net
charge of protein was neutralized with near zero,
and this increased the hydrophobic protein-protein
interactions, leading to hGH aggregation. Also,
salting-out effect at high salt concentrations in the
protein solutions, leads to protein aggregation; in this
phenomenon, salts ions could compete with the water
molecules needed to solvate the proteins, that leads to
protein aggregation (39).Finally, it can be claimed that adding Tris to aqueous
hGH solutions increases chemical and physical stability
of this protein due to creation of Tris-hGH bonds, saltingin effect and Preferential exclusion of Tris, that prevents
hGH aggregation. It can be also claimed that stabilization
occurs at the optimum tris concentration, pH and
appropriate ionic strength.
Conclusion
The main finding of this study was that Tris as a weak
base, increased the stability of hGH in aqueous solution
at the body and refrigerator temperatures. The chemical
degradation of hGH’s amino acids was decreased due
to hydrogen bonding and electrostatic interactions with
Tris in the proper pH and ionic strength. By changing the
Gibbs free energy between the native and unfolded hGH,
Tris prevented hGH from the aggregation. Therefore,
as a stabilizer, Tris can enhance hGH physicochemical
stability in solutions.
Authors: Teddy J Zbacnik; Ryan E Holcomb; Derrick S Katayama; Brian M Murphy; Robert W Payne; Richard C Coccaro; Gabriel J Evans; James E Matsuura; Charles S Henry; Mark Cornell Manning Journal: J Pharm Sci Date: 2016-11-26 Impact factor: 3.534
Authors: Matthew Auton; Jörg Rösgen; Mikhail Sinev; Luis Marcelo F Holthauzen; D Wayne Bolen Journal: Biophys Chem Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 2.352
Authors: Stefano Forli; Ruth Huey; Michael E Pique; Michel F Sanner; David S Goodsell; Arthur J Olson Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Maximilian Bielohuby; Sayyed Hamid Zarkesh-Esfahani; Jenny Manolopoulou; Elisa Wirthgen; Katja Walpurgis; Mohaddeseh Toghiany Khorasgani; Zahra Sadat Aghili; Ian Robert Wilkinson; Andreas Hoeflich; Mario Thevis; Richard J Ross; Martin Bidlingmaier Journal: Dis Model Mech Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 5.758