| Literature DB >> 33828619 |
Yongdong Su1, Maitsetseg Bayarjargal1, Tracy K Hale1,2, Vyacheslav V Filichev1,2.
Abstract
Two phosphate modifications were introduced into the DNA backbone using the Staudinger reaction between the 3',5'-dinucleoside β-cyanoethyl phosphite triester formed during DNA synthesis and sulfonyl azides, 4-(azidosulfonyl)-N,N,N-trimethylbutan-1-aminium iodide (N+ azide) or p-toluenesulfonyl (tosyl or Ts) azide, to provide either a zwitterionic phosphoramidate with N+ modification or a negatively charged phosphoramidate for Ts modification in the DNA sequence. The incorporation of these N+ and Ts modifications led to the formation of thermally stable parallel DNA triplexes, regardless of the number of modifications incorporated into the oligodeoxynucleotides (ONs). For both N+ and Ts-modified ONs, the antiparallel duplexes formed with complementary RNA were more stable than those formed with complementary DNA (except for ONs with modification in the middle of the sequence). Additionally, the incorporation of N+ modifications led to the formation of duplexes with a thermal stability that was less dependent on the ionic strength than native DNA duplexes. The thermodynamic analysis of the melting curves revealed that it is the reduction in unfavourable entropy, despite the decrease in favourable enthalpy, which is responsible for the stabilisation of duplexes with N+ modification. N+ONs also demonstrated greater resistance to nuclease digestion by snake venom phosphodiesterase I than the corresponding Ts-ONs. Cell uptake studies showed that Ts-ONs can enter the nucleus of mouse fibroblast NIH3T3 cells without any transfection reagent, whereas, N+ONs remain concentrated in vesicles within the cytoplasm. These results indicate that both N+ and Ts-modified ONs are promising for various in vivo applications.Entities:
Keywords: DNA; Staudinger reaction; cell uptake; charge neutral modification; modified phosphates
Year: 2021 PMID: 33828619 PMCID: PMC8022206 DOI: 10.3762/bjoc.17.65
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Beilstein J Org Chem ISSN: 1860-5397 Impact factor: 2.883
Figure 1Illustration of H-bonding in a DNA duplex and a parallel triplex. A) Depiction of Watson–Crick base-paring (left: T-A and right: C-G); B) parallel triple helices: pyrimidine-rich third strand interactions are stabilised by Hoogsteen hydrogen bonds (the duplex is in black, TFO is in blue, Watson–Crick base-paring is shown with dashed bonds, and Hoogsteen base-paring is shown with hashed bonds). The relative orientation of phosphodiester backbones is indicated by the symbols "" and "".
Scheme 1The synthesis of ONs with Ts and N+ modification using the Staudinger reaction during the solid-phase DNA synthesis. Conditions: (i) 0.5 M TsN3, MeCN, 37 °C, 30 min for Ts modification; 0.7 M 4-(azidosulfonyl)-N,N,N-trimethylbutan-1-aminium iodide, DMF, 37 °C, 30 min for the N+ modification; (ii) DNA synthesis; (iii) conc. aq NH3, 55 °C, 12 h; Bp/B: protected/deprotected heterocyclic base; DMTr: 4,4'-dimethoxytrityl.
Names of the ONs synthesised, their sequences, retention times on the ion-exchange columna, compositions, and isolated yields.
| sequence | retention time (min) | calculated MW | observed MWb | isolated yield (%) | |
| 5'-CCCCTTTCTTTTTTc | 31.53 | 4121.7 | – | ||
| 5'-C | 27.76 | 4296.7958 | 4297.7588d | 9e | |
| 5'-CCCCTTT | 27.43 | 4296.7958 | 4297.7455d | 11e | |
| 5'-CCCCTTTCTTTTT | 27.74 | 4296.7958 | 4297.7466d | 20f | |
| 5'-C | 23.42 | 4473.9012 | 4473.8248d | 8e | |
| 5'-C | 20.77 | 4649.0067 | 4650.1412d | 10e | |
| 5'-C | 17.09 | 4826.0965 | 4826.0516d | 23f | |
| 5'-C | –g | 5396.4012 | 5396.1460h | 20 | |
| 5'-C | 32.80 | 4272.7151 | 4274.6664d | 4e | |
| 5'-CCCCTTT | 32.75 | 4272.7151 | 4273.4728d | 5e | |
| 5'-CCCCTTTCTTTTT | 32.81 | 4272.7151 | 4273.4694h | 8e | |
| 5'-C | 35.67 | 4425.7398 | 4427.7401h | 6e | |
| 5'-C | 36.76 | 4578.7646 | 4578.6076i | 30f | |
| 5'-C | 40.07 | 4731.7893 | 4731.7620j | 39f | |
| 5'-C | –g | 5301.2398 | 5302.8380h | 26 | |
| 5'-CCCCTTTCTTT | 27.50 | 4296.7958 | 4296.7520d | 19f | |
| 5'-CCCCTTT C | 27.43 | 4296.7958 | 4296.7300d | 16f | |
| 5'-CCCC | 27.45 | 4296.7958 | 4296.7440d | 17f | |
| 5'-CC | 27.62 | 4296.7958 | 4296.7350d | 21f | |
| 5'-C | 20.44 | 4649.0067 | 4649.937d | 17f | |
aIE-HPLC was performed on an IE-column (TSKgel Super Q-5PW) using a gradient of NaCl concentration (0 → 0.5 M) in 20 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, pH 9.0 over 30 min; bbased on ESIMS in the negative mode; cobtained from Integrated DNA Technologies; dcalculated for [M − 6H]6−; esynthesised in a 1 µmol scale using a previously reported procedure with transferring the solid support from a column into a vial for reaction with sulfonyl azide for 30 min at room temperature. Afterwards, the solid support was transferred back to the column to continue DNA synthesis [39]. Some amount of the solid support was lost during the transfer and washing steps, especially for multiple modifications, which was the main reason for the low yields of these ONs. fsynthesised in a 1 µmol scale following a modified procedure using a microtube pump to deliver the sulfonyl azide solution onto the column with CPG-support at 37 °C [38]; gsynthesised in a 3–4 µmol scale, purified by 20% denaturing PAGE (7 M urea), followed by extraction from the gel and desalting. hfor [M − 7H]5−; ifor [M + K+ − 9H]8−; jfor [M − 4H]4−; the ESIMS spectra are provided in Supporting Information File 1.
Tm [°C, ± 0.5 °C] data for triplex and duplex melting, taken from UV melting curves (λ = 260 nm).
| entry | antiparallel duplex | triplexc | ||||
| RNAa | DNAb | |||||
| pH 7.0 | pH 5.0 | pH 7.0 | pH 5.0d | pH 6.0 | ||
| 1 | 46 | 48 | 50 | 45 | 28 | |
| 2 | 53 (+ 7.0) | 44 (−4.0) | 51 (+1.0) | 40 (−5.0) | 25 (−3.0) | |
| 3 | 47 (+ 1.0) | 43 (−5.0) | 48 (−2.0) | 55 (+10.0) | 28 | |
| 4 | 58 (+ 12.0) | 46 (−2.0) | 52 (+2.0) | 56 (+11.0) | 29 (+1.0) | |
| 5 | 53 (+ 7.0) | 44 (−4.0) | 52 (+2.0) | 56 (+11.0) | 28 | |
| 6 | 41 (− 5.0) | 45 (−3.0) | 51 (+1.0) | 48 (+3.0) | <15 | |
| 7 | 55 (+ 9.0) | 48 (0.0) | 51 (+1.0) | 48 (+3.0) | 28 | |
| 8 | 54 (+ 8.0) | 39 (−9.0) | 46 (−4.0) | 51 (+6.0) | 24 (−4.0) | |
| 9 | 44 (−2.0) | 31 (−17.0) | 37 (−13.0) | 51 (+6.0) | <15 | |
| 10 | 57 (+11.0) | 44 (−4.0) | 49 (−1.0) | 54 (+9.0) | 27 (−1.0) | |
| 11 | 56 (+10.0) | 43 (−5.0) | 51 (+1.0) | 53 (+8.0) | 25 (−2.0) | |
| 12 | 38 (−8.0) | 40 (−8.0) | 45 (−5.0) | 49 (+4.0) | <15 | |
| 13 | 53 (+7.0) | 39 (−9.0) | 44 (−6.0) | 47 (+2.0) | 20 (−8.0) | |
| 14 | 54 (+8.0) | –e | 51 (+1.0) | – | – | |
| 15 | 56 (+10.0) | – | 51 (+1.0) | – | – | |
| 16 | 54 (+8.0) | – | 55 (+5.0) | – | – | |
| 17 | 56 (+10.0) | – | 52 (+2.0) | – | – | |
| 18 | 54 (+8.0) | – | 51 (+1.0) | – | – | |
aThe RNA sequence for the antiparallel duplex formation is ON19: 3'-rGGGGAAAGAAAAAA; c = 1.0 µM of each strand in 20 mM sodium cacodylate, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, pH 7.0; the Tm values for the ON/RNA duplexes were confirmed by CD melting experiments (Figures S7 and S8, and Table S2 in Supporting Information File 1); bthe DNA sequence for the antiparallel duplex formation is ON20: 3'-GGGGAAAGAAAAAA; c = 1.0 µM of each strand in 20 mM sodium cacodylate, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, pH 5.0 and pH 7.0; cc = 1.5 µM of ON1–13 and 1.0 µM of each strand of dsDNA (D1: 3'-CTGCCCCTTTCTTTTTT/5'-GACGGGGAAAGAAAAAA) in 20 mM sodium cacodylate, 100 mM NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, pH 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0; duplex Tm = 56.5 °C (pH 5.0), 58.5 °C (pH 6.0), and 57.0 °C (pH 7.0); triplex formation was confirmed by size-exclusion HPLC (SE-HPLC) in sodium cacodylate buffer (pH 5.0 and pH 6.0, Figure S15 in Supporting Information File 1), no triplex was formed at pH 7.0; dthe Tm for triplex melting was determined by subtraction of the duplex melting curve from the overlaid melting curve (Figure S6 in Supporting Information File 1); enot performed.
The Tm [°C] and thermodynamic data at 298 K for the antiparallel duplexes at different NaCl concentrations, taken from UV melting curves (λ = 260 nm).a
| antiparallel duplex | NaCl (mM) | Δ | Δ | |||
| ON/DNA | 25 | 19 | −430 (±20) | −400 (±20) | −30 (±28) | |
| 50 | 37 | −400 (±9) | −350 (±8) | −50 (±12) | ||
| 100 | 50 | −368 (±8) | −305 (±7) | −63 (±10) | ||
| 25 | 41 (+22.0) | −388 (±9) | −334 (±8) | −54 (±12) | ||
| 50 | 44 (+7.0) | −322 (±15) | −266 (±14) | −56 (±20) | ||
| 100 | 51 (+1.0) | −320 (±8) | −260 (±7) | −60 (±10) | ||
| 25 | 29 (+10.0) | −382 (±14) | −340 (±14) | −42 (±19) | ||
| 50 | 34 (−3.0) | −372 (±12) | −326 (±11) | −46 (±16) | ||
| 100 | 45 (−5.0) | −354 (±7) | −297 (±7) | −57 (±10) | ||
| ON/RNA | 25 | 44 | −390 (±10) | −332 (±9) | −58 (±13) | |
| 100 | 46 | −306 (±17) | −248 (±17) | −58 (±24) | ||
| 25 | 45 (+1.0) | −419 (±7) | −359 (±6) | −60 (±9) | ||
| 100 | 55 (+9.0) | −329 (±13) | −264 (±12) | −66 (±17) | ||
| 25 | 38 (−6.0) | −420 (±20) | −370 (±20) | −50 (±28) | ||
| 100 | 53 (+7.0) | −407 (±13) | −337 (±12) | −70 (±17) | ||
aOne µM of each strand in 20 mM sodium cacodylate buffer (pH 7.0, supplemented with 25, 50, or 100 mM NaCl, respectively); bTm values are reported with ±0.5 °C uncertainties as determined from several experiments; values in parentheses are ΔTm values calculated as Tm (sample) − Tm (unmodified duplex) at the same salt concentration; cthermodynamic parameters are calculated as described in Supporting Information File 1 (see also Figures S9–S14) at 298 K, errors were calculated as described in reference [44].
Figure 2Percentage of intact ONs after 120 min. A) N+ONs; B) Ts-ONs. Percentage of intact ONs was determined by the ratio of full-length ONs at individual time in comparison with the sample at 0 min.
Figure 3Representative images of mouse NIH 3T3 fibroblasts incubated with either (A–C) no oligo or 20 µM of (D–F) 4Ts, (G–I) 4N+, and (J–L) N+TG4T FAM labelled ONs. Asynchronously growing NIH3T3 cells were incubated for 12 hours with 20 µM of the stated FAM-labelled ONs or without ON, then fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde before staining with Hoechst 3342 to identify nuclear DNA. The images were collected with a Leica SP5 DM6000B scanning confocal microscope. Individual panels, nucleus/Hoechst 3342 and oligo/FAM are shown for each section, along with merge where pseudo-coloured panels are overlaid, nucleus (blue) and oligo (magenta). Scale bar: 40 μm.
Figure 4Representative confocal microscopy section showing the FAM vesicles inside the cell. Mouse NIH 3T3 fibroblasts were incubated with 20 µM of the FAM-labelled 4Ts-ON for 12 hours, then stained with CellBrite Fix 640 (Biotium) to identify the cell membrane before fixation with 4% paraformaldehyde. Nuclear DNA was then stained with Hoechst 3342 and images collected with a Leica SP5 DM6000B scanning confocal microscope. Overlaid pseudo-coloured panels of a section are shown: nuclear DNA (blue), 4Ts-FAM/ON (magenta), cell membrane (yellow). Scale bar: 20 μm.