| Literature DB >> 35386820 |
Yahan Ju1,2, Xiaochan Dai1,2, Zhimin Tang1,2, Zunzhen Ming3, Ni Ni1,2, Dongqing Zhu1,2, Jing Zhang1,2, Bo Ma1,2, Jiajing Wang1,2, Rui Huang1,2, Siyu Zhao1,2, Yan Pang1,2, Ping Gu1,2.
Abstract
Choroidal vascular diseases, such as age-related macular degeneration, are the leading cause of vision impairment and are characterized by pathological angiogenesis. Verteporfin-mediated photodynamic therapy is a current strategy that selectively occludes choroidal neovasculature. However, the clinically used large-dose systemic administration increases the risk of systemic adverse events, such as phototoxicity to superficial tissues. In this study, we developed an in situ verteporfin delivery system with a photoswitching synergistic function that disassembles in response to intraocular inflammatory enzymes. Under light-on conditions, verteporfin-mediated photodynamic therapy effectively occurs and this leads to vascular occlusion. Under light-off conditions, non-photoactive verteporfin negatively regulates vascular endothelial growth factor-induced angiogenesis as a yes-associated protein inhibitor. Taken together, our system serves as an intraocular verteporfin reservoir to improve the bioavailability of verteporfin by innovatively exploiting its photochemical and biological functions. This work provides a promising strategy with synergistic antiangiogenic effects for the treatment of choroidal vascular diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Bio-responsive release; In situ drug delivery; Pathological neovascularization; Photodynamic therapy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35386820 PMCID: PMC8964818 DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.01.028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioact Mater ISSN: 2452-199X
Fig. 1Preparation and characterization of the VP-loaded TGMS hydrogel. (a) Schematic illustration of VP-TGMS hydrogel self-assembly and enzyme-responsive VP release for treating CVDs. (b) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of the Blank-TGMS and VP-TGMS hydrogels. Scale bars: 10 μm. (c) Photographs showing the injectable behavior of the Blank-TGMS and VP-TGMS hydrogels. (d) Strain-dependent oscillatory measurements of the VP-TGMS hydrogel. (e) Step–strain measurements of the VP-TGMS hydrogel by rheology analysis. (f) Swelling ratio of the VP-TGMS hydrogel in PBS at determined time points.
Fig. 2Enzyme-responsive release of VP from VP-TGMS hydrogels in vitro. (a, b) The mean concentrations of (a) MMP-2 and (b) MMP-9 in the vitreous samples determined by ELISA (n = 4). **P < 0.01 by Student's t-test. (c–e) In vitro release kinetics of VP from VP-TGMS hydrogels in PBS at 37 °C with or without (c) lipase (Thermomyces Lanuginosus lipase, 500 U/mL or 1000 U/mL), (d) MMP-2 (100 ng/mL), (e) MMP-9 (15 ng/mL). VP-TGMS hydrogels were incubated with lipase, MMP-2, MMP-9 and an MMP-2/9 inhibitor at the indicated time points (arrows) (n = 3). **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test (PBS versus enzyme-treated groups on day 28).
Fig. 3In vitro biocompatibility and photodynamic effects of VP-TGMS. (a) Viability of ARPE-19 cells, 661W cells and Müller cells treated with Blank-TGMS or VP-TGMS hydrogels as detected by CCK-8 assay (n = 3), n.s.: no statistical significance. (b) Protein expression levels of the inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and MCP-1 in ARPE-19 cells, 661W cells and Müller cells treated with Blank-TGMS or VP-TGMS hydrogels. (c) Detection of 1O2 generation using singlet oxygen fluorescent probes which reacted with 1O2 to generate green fluorescence substance. Scale bar: 50 μm. (d) Representative images by live/dead staining of HUVECs incubated in medium or medium with VP, Blank TGMS or VP-TGMS hydrogels added to the culture inserts. Live cells were stained with calcein AM and dead cells were stained with PI. Scale bar: 200 μm.
Fig. 4In vivo biocompatibility and photodynamic effects of VP-TGMS. (a) Representative retinal images after injection of Blank-TGMS and VP-TGMS hydrogels by H&E staining. Scale bar: 50 μm. (b) Representative retinal images after injection of Blank-TGMS and VP-TGMS hydrogels by TUNEL staining. Scale bar: 50 μm. (c) IOP measurement one day after injection (n = 6). (d) Scotopic ERG responses of mice 7 days after each treatment. (e) Diagram of the schedule for laser injury, different therapeutic treatments and FA analyses/IB4 staining. (f) Representative infrared (IR) fundus images and FA images presenting choroidal neovascular leakage of eyes pre- and post-injection. (g) Quantification of the fluorescence pixel intensity of the neovascular leakage area (n = 9–11). **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test, n.s.: no statistical significance. (h) Representative IB4-stained CNV lesions in eyes with different treatments. Scale bars: 200 μm (upper panel), 100 μm (lower panel). (i) Quantification of the CNV area (n = 14–16 lesions). **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test, n.s.: no statistical significance.
Fig. 5VEGF-induced angiogenic responses were inhibited by non-photoactive VP-TGMS. (a) Vertical migration of HUVECs in response to each treatment by Transwell assay. Scale bar: 100 μm. (b) The number of migrated cells on the lower surface of the culture inserts was counted, and the data were normalized according to the control group (n = 3). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test. (c) Lateral migration of HUVECs was determined by a scratch assay after 24 h. Scale bar: 100 μm. (d) The migration rate was quantified by calculating the wound healing (% closure) of the scratch area (n = 3). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test. (e) Representative images of HUVEC network formation after different treatments from the Matrigel tube formation assay. Scale bar: 200 μm. (f) Quantification of nodes, branches and tube numbers from three independent tube formation experiments (n = 3). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test.
Fig. 6Non-photoactive VP-TGMS inhibits CNV formation and vascular leakage. (a) Diagram of the schedule for laser injury, the different therapeutic treatments and FA analysis/IB4 staining. (b) Representative IR fundus images and FA images presenting eye choroidal neovascular leakage post-administration. (c) Quantification of the fluorescence pixel intensity of the neovascular leakage area (n = 6–7). **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test, n.s.: no statistical significance. (d) Representative IB4-stained CNV lesions in eyes after different treatments. Scale bars: 200 μm (upper panel), 100 μm (lower panel). (e) Quantification of CNV area (n = 13–15 lesions). Error bars represent the means ± SD. **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test, n.s.: no statistical significance.
Fig. 7VP inhibits VEGF-induced VEGFR2-YAP signaling. (a) Heatmap showing RNA-seq expression of the top 40 marker genes identified from VEGF-treated HUVECs and VEGF + VP-treated HUVECs. Green box: genes that negatively regulate angiogenesis, yellow box: genes that positively regulate angiogenesis. (b) Reactome enrichment analysis of downregulated genes in HUVECs treated with VEGF + VP compared with VEGF-treated cells. The red arrowhead indicates biological processes related to VEGF-VEGFR2 signaling. (c) Western blotting detection and quantification of VEGFR2 phosphorylation and YAP phosphorylation in HUVECs incubated with VEGF (200 ng/mL) for the indicated time points (n = 3). (d) VEGFR2 phosphorylation and YAP phosphorylation in HUVECs pretreated with or without SU5408 (a VEGFR2 kinase inhibitor) and then incubated with VEGF for the indicated lengths of time (n = 3). **P < 0.01 by Student's t-test. (e) Subcellular localization and quantification of YAP in HUVECs pretreated with SU5408 for 2 h and then stimulated with VEGF for 6 h, as illustrated by immunofluorescence (n = 3). N: nucleus, C: cytosol. Scale bar: 10 μm **P < 0.01 by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test. (f) qPCR validation of the mRNA expression of genes related to the VEGF receptor signaling pathway identified by RNA-seq in HUVECs (n = 3). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 by Student's t-test. (g) Schematic depiction of VP inhibition of the VEGFR2-YAP signaling axis.