| Literature DB >> 32854720 |
Yi-An Cheng1,2, Tung-Ho Wu3, Yun-Ming Wang4, Tian-Lu Cheng1,5,6,2, I-Ju Chen1,2, Yun-Chi Lu1,2, Kuo-Hsiang Chuang7, Chih-Kuang Wang8, Chiao-Yun Chen9,10, Rui-An Lin5, Huei-Jen Chen5, Tzu-Yi Liao5, En-Shuo Liu1, Fang-Ming Chen11,12,13,14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Developing a universal strategy to improve the specificity and sensitivity of PEGylated nanoaparticles (PEG-NPs) for assisting in the diagnosis of tumors is important in multimodality imaging. Here, we developed the anti-methoxypolyethylene glycol (mPEG) bispecific antibody (BsAb; mPEG × HER2), which has dual specificity for mPEG and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), with a diverse array of PEG-NPs to confer nanoparticles with HER2 specificity and stronger intensity. RESULT: We used a one-step formulation to rapidly modify the nanoprobes with mPEG × HER2 and optimized the modified ratio of BsAbs on several PEG-NPs (Lipo-DiR, SPIO, Qdot and AuNP). The αHER2/PEG-NPs could specifically target MCF7/HER2 cells (HER2++) but not MCF7/neo1 cells (HER2+/-). The αHER2/Lipo-DiR and αHER2/SPIO could enhance the sensitivity of untargeted PEG-NPs on MCF7/HER2 (HER2++). In in vivo imaging, αHER2/Lipo-DiR and αHER2/SPIO increased the specific targeting and enhanced PEG-NPs accumulation at 175% and 187% on 24 h, respectively, in HER2-overexpressing tumors.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-PEG antibody; Bispecific antibody; Cancer image; Contrast agent; Multimodality image; One-step formulation; PEGylated nanoparticle; Polyethylene glycol; Tumor specificity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32854720 PMCID: PMC7457265 DOI: 10.1186/s12951-020-00680-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Fig. 1Humanized Bispecific Antibody (mPEG × HER2) Rapidly Confers PEG-NPs Tumor Specificity for Multimodality Imaging in Breast Cancer anti-mPEG BsAbs (mPEG × markers) provide an easy, universal and one-step formulation for any naive PEG-NPs to accelerate the development of targeted PEG-NPs for multimodality imaging in the clinic
Fig. 2The HER2 binding ability of αHER2/PEG-NPs. Different BsAb:mPEG ratios of (a) αHER2/Lipo-DiR, (b) αHER2/SPIO, (c) αHER2/Qdot and (d) αHER2/AuNP were incubated with MCF7/HER2, and then anti-PEG antibody was added to detect PEG-NPs via ELISA (n = 3, triplicate). Bars, SD
Fig. 3Specificity of αHER2/PEG-NPs for HER2++ cancer cells. MCF7/HER2 (HER2++) (circle shape) and MCF7/neo1(HER2+/−) (square shape) cancer cells in 96-well plates were incubated with mPEG × HER2 (solid shape) and mPEG × DNS (hollow shape) modified with different contrast agents. After washing, bound contrast agents were detected by ELISA (n = 3, triplicate). Bars, SD
Fig. 4In vitro sensitivity image of αHER2/PEG-NPs. MCF7/HER2 (HER2++) cancer cells incubated with HER2 targeted-contrast agent with serial dilution concentrations. a αHER2/Lipo-DiR, αDNS/Lipo-DiR and Lipo-DiR were added to cells. Fluorescence images were obtained by the IVIS spectrum system. b Calculations of average radiant efficiency of (a). c αHER2/SPIO, αDNS/SPIO and SPIO were added to cells. MR imaging was performed with a 7.0 T MR imaging scanner. d The result from (c) was calculated by [treated SI-untreated SI]/untreated SI*100. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001 (unpaired t test)
Fig. 5In vivo IVIS imaging of αHER2/Lipo-DiR and αDNS/Lipo-DiR. The delivery of αHER2/Lipo-DiR in HER2-overexpressing tumors. a αHER2/Lipo-DiR, Lipo-DiR and αDNS/Lipo-DiR were intravenously injected in mice bearing HER2++ (right m.f.p) and HER2+/− (left m.f.p) tumors. The fluorescence intensity of DiR was detected at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h after injection by IVIS. The radiant efficiency of color bar was calculated by [p/s/cm2/sr]/[µW/cm2]. b Quantification of average radiant efficiency in HER2++ tumor and HER2+/− tumor at 24 h and 72 h
Fig. 6In vivo MR imaging of αHER2/SPIO and αDNS/SPIO. Nude mice bearing MCF7/HER2 (right m.f.p) and MCF7/neo1 (left m.f.p) tumors were intravenously injected with αHER2/SPIO and αDNS/SPIO (10 mg/kg). a Mice were sequentially imaged at pre-treatment and 24 h with a MR imaging scanner. b The result was calculated as the percentage of negative signal enhancement by [pretreated signal intensity (SI0)-treated signal intensity (SI24)]/SI0 * 100