| Literature DB >> 35058478 |
Yi Sun1, Yuen-Kee Tsui1, Mengqi Yu1,2, Minmin Lyu3, Kenneth Cheung1, Richard Kao4, Victor Leung5.
Abstract
Defective biosynthesis or function of proteoglycans causes pathological conditions in a variety of tissue systems. Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative joint disorder characterized by progressive cartilage destruction caused by imbalanced proteoglycan synthesis and degradation. Identifying agents that regulate proteoglycan metabolism may benefit the development of OA-modifying therapeutics. High-throughput screening (HTS) of chemical libraries has paved the way for achieving this goal. However, the implementation and adaptation of HTS assays based on proteoglycan measurement remain underexploited. Using primary porcine chondrocytes as a model, we report a miniaturized dimethyl-methylene blue (DMMB) assay, which is commonly used to quantitatively evaluate sulfated glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content, with an optimized detection range and reproducibility and its integration with HTS. Treatment with TGF-β1 and IL1-α, known as positive and negative proteoglycan regulators, respectively, supported the assay specificity. A pre-test of chemical screening of 960 compounds identified both stimulators (4.48%) and inhibitors (6.04%) of GAG production. Fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis validated the activity of selected hits on chondroitin sulfate expression in an alginate culture system. Our findings support the implementation of this simple colorimetric assay in HTS to discover modifiers of OA or other diseases related to dysregulated proteoglycan metabolism.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35058478 PMCID: PMC8776954 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-04805-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Optimizing GAG detection in a miniaturized DMMB assay. (a) Absorbance profile of the DMMB reaction with a range of chondroitin sulfate concentrations (CS, 2–1128 μg/mL). (b) Effects of different concentrations of DMMB reagent (1× refers to typical concentration) on the linear reading window. (c) Kinetics of the DMMB assay at specific concentrations of chondroitin sulfate using different concentrations of DMMB reagent. Data are expressed as the mean ± SEM from five independent experiments.
Figure 2Performance of miniaturized DMMB assays with primary chondrocyte culture. (a) Primary chondrocytes from porcine costal cartilage showed polygonal morphology and reached full confluence at Day 5. (b) DMMB assay with chondrocytes at different seeding densities (1–6 × 104/cm2) and culture periods. Dotted lines indicate the linear reading range (0.37–0.69). Values are presented as the mean ± SEM. DMMB (n = 5); scale bar, 50 µm.
Figure 3Detection of cytokine-mediated activity. Proteoglycan production in primary chondrocytes treated with TGF-β1 (10 ng/mL) or IL1-α (10 ng/mL) for 3 days was evaluated by the miniaturized DMMB assay. Readouts were recorded as the average of six reactions (wells) from three independent plates.
Figure 4Performance of 960 compounds in the HTS DMMB assay. (a) Scatter plot of DMMB assay readouts from 960 compounds. The median of each plate was used for subtraction normalization. The primary screen activities were identified with readings greater or lower than the plate median + 3 SD. Each batch contained 320 compounds and was performed in triplicate. Hits were highlighted by black dots. (b) Array of hits compounds in MTT assay. Insert: chemical structures of an enhancer (E1, upper) and a repressor (R1, lower) compound. (c) E1 and R1 were tested in primary chondrocytes cultured in a 3D alginate culture system. Analysis of compositional disaccharides by fluorophore-assisted carbohydrate electrophoresis (20% acrylamide) indicated regulation of chondroitin sulfate GAG expression. Standards are shown in the margins (arrow). S1: ΔDi4S, ΔDiSE; S2: ΔDi6S, ΔDi2S, ΔDiSE.
Statistics of culture controls in the chemical screening.
| Statistics calculation based on | Mean | SD | % CV | S–W | Midpoint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Readings from the same well position of nine plates (15 wells from marginal area were deployed), n = 9 | 0.506 | 0.017 | 3.3 | 0.646 | 0.4985 |
| 0.521 | 0.010 | 1.8 | 0.047 | 0.527 | |
| 0.519 | 0.014 | 2.7 | 0.679 | 0.5165 | |
| 0.535 | 0.012 | 2.2 | 0.059 | 0.539 | |
| 0.522 | 0.017 | 3.3 | 0.901 | 0.518 | |
| 0.514 | 0.010 | 1.9 | 0.464 | 0.509 | |
| 0.506 | 0.014 | 2.8 | 0.208 | 0.507 | |
| 0.509 | 0.010 | 1.9 | 0.609 | 0.5135 | |
| 0.506 | 0.012 | 2.3 | 0.870 | 0.502 | |
| 0.498 | 0.006 | 1.3 | 0.866 | 0.498 | |
| 0.495 | 0.012 | 2.5 | 0.631 | 0.4875 | |
| 0.520 | 0.008 | 1.5 | 0.526 | 0.517 | |
| 0.516 | 0.013 | 2.5 | 0.071 | 0.5125 | |
| 0.522 | 0.009 | 1.7 | 0.879 | 0.521 | |
| 0.513 | 0.010 | 1.9 | 0.916 | 0.512 | |
| Readings from the same well position of nine plates (15 wells from middle area), n = 9 | 0.496 | 0.012 | 2.5 | 0.941 | 0.4955 |
| 0.499 | 0.011 | 2.2 | 0.874 | 0.502 | |
| 0.493 | 0.013 | 2.7 | 0.943 | 0.493 | |
| 0.506 | 0.015 | 2.9 | 0.781 | 0.5115 | |
| 0.498 | 0.019 | 3.7 | 0.774 | 0.4985 | |
| 0.498 | 0.011 | 2.1 | 0.636 | 0.5005 | |
| 0.488 | 0.015 | 3.1 | 0.319 | 0.485 | |
| 0.495 | 0.013 | 2.5 | 0.774 | 0.5 | |
| 0.485 | 0.016 | 3.2 | 0.747 | 0.4875 | |
| 0.487 | 0.009 | 1.9 | 1 | 0.4875 | |
| 0.486 | 0.016 | 3.3 | 0.220 | 0.4805 | |
| 0.510 | 0.009 | 1.8 | 0.526 | 0.5095 | |
| 0.508 | 0.009 | 1.7 | 0.952 | 0.509 | |
| 0.518 | 0.006 | 1.1 | 0.476 | 0.52 | |
| 0.516 | 0.010 | 2 | 0.126 | 0.521 | |
| Readings from 30 wells in each plate, n = 30 | 0.522 | 0.013 | 2.5 | 0.68 | 0.528 |
| 0.506 | 0.017 | 3.4 | 0.779 | 0.528 | |
| 0.506 | 0.014 | 2.8 | 0.548 | 0.528 | |
| 0.514 | 0.013 | 2.6 | 0.722 | 0.528 | |
| 0.491 | 0.019 | 3.8 | 0.548 | 0.528 | |
| 0.501 | 0.017 | 3.5 | 0.28 | 0.528 | |
| 0.505 | 0.011 | 2.2 | 0.785 | 0.528 | |
| 0.508 | 0.015 | 3 | 0.628 | 0.528 | |
| 0.504 | 0.013 | 2.7 | 0.461 | 0.528 |
Culture controls were allocated to 30 wells covering marginal and middle areas of the plate and were repeated on nine plates. Assay readings were recorded (Supplementary Table S2), and standard statistics were calculated using IBM SPSS 25.