αVβ6 Integrin plays a fundamental role in the activation of transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β), the major profibrotic mediator; for this reason, αVβ6 ligands have recently been forwarded to clinical phases for the therapy of fibrotic diseases. Herein, we report the synthesis and in vitro biological evaluation as antifibrotic agents of three new covalent conjugates, constituted by c(AmpLRGDL), an αVβ6 integrin-recognizing small cyclopeptide, and nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) treatment. One of these conjugates recapitulates optimal in vitro antifibrotic properties of the two active units. The integrin ligand portion within the conjugate plays a role in inhibiting profibrotic stimuli, potentiating the nintedanib effect and favoring the selective uptake of the conjugate in cells overexpressing αVβ6 integrin. These results may open a new perspective on the development of dual conjugates in the targeted therapy of IPF.
αVβ6 Integrin plays a fundamental role in the activation of transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β), the major profibrotic mediator; for this reason, αVβ6 ligands have recently been forwarded to clinical phases for the therapy of fibrotic diseases. Herein, we report the synthesis and in vitro biological evaluation as antifibrotic agents of three new covalent conjugates, constituted by c(AmpLRGDL), an αVβ6 integrin-recognizing small cyclopeptide, and nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) treatment. One of these conjugates recapitulates optimal in vitro antifibrotic properties of the two active units. The integrin ligand portion within the conjugate plays a role in inhibiting profibrotic stimuli, potentiating the nintedanib effect and favoring the selective uptake of the conjugate in cells overexpressing αVβ6 integrin. These results may open a new perspective on the development of dual conjugates in the targeted therapy of IPF.
Fibrosis denotes an
excessive deposition of collagen and other
extracellular matrix (ECM) components in a tissue. Deposition of collagen
is part of physiological wound healing, but when this process becomes
abnormal, connective tissue replaces normal parenchyma, leading to
tissue destruction and impairment of organ function. This pathologic
process can affect several organs, causing diverse chronic diseases
such as, for example, liver cirrhosis, systemic sclerosis, end-stage
kidney disease, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).[1] Persistent injurious stimuli including chronic
infections and immunological reactions are often triggering events
that cause fibrosis disorders. The major profibrotic mediator is the
transforming growth factor β (TGF-β),[2,3] which
is released by macrophages and stimulates the migration and proliferation
of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts, as well as the deposition of collagen
and other ECM proteins. An intricate network of noncovalent and covalent
connections lies behind this key growth factor (Figure ); TGF-β is expressed in a latent form
(L-TGF-β)[4] and remains associated
by noncovalent bonds with the latency-associated peptide (LAP), forming
the small latent complex (SLC), until it is activated. SLC, on the
other hand, is covalently linked to another protein (the latent TGF-β
binding protein, LTBP), to constitute the large latent complex (LLC).[5]
Figure 1
Schematic representation of fibrotic cells carrying GF,
TGF-β,
and αVβ6 integrin receptors. The
small molecules GSK3008348 and PLN-74809 are αVβ6 integrin antagonists that inhibit integrin binding to LAPm
thus preventing the active TGF-β release and profibrotic signaling
events; nintedanib inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of GF receptors
and prevents downstream intracellular signaling events.
Schematic representation of fibrotic cells carrying GF,
TGF-β,
and αVβ6 integrin receptors. The
small molecules GSK3008348 and PLN-74809 are αVβ6 integrin antagonists that inhibit integrin binding to LAPm
thus preventing the active TGF-β release and profibrotic signaling
events; nintedanib inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of GF receptors
and prevents downstream intracellular signaling events.The αV-integrins[6] are
major activators of L-TGF-β;[7,8] in particular,
αVβ6 integrins exhibit strong affinity
toward the LAP-TGFβ1 complex (Kd = 10.3 nM) by recognizing the key RGD motif present on the LAP moiety.[9] The way TGF-β is activated by αVβ6 integrins has been fully elucidated: upon
RGD-mediated binding, the actin cytoskeleton generates the force necessary
for the elongation of LAP, ultimately allowing for TGF-β release
(Figure ).[10]The fact that αVβ6 integrins
play such a crucial role in TGF-β activation and exhibit low
levels of expression in normal tissues[11] but are upregulated in pulmonary tissues of IPF patients has led
them to be identified as a therapeutic target for IPF treatment.[12−14] GlaxoSmithKline discovered an RGD-mimetic small molecule, GSK3008348
(Figure ), that binds
to αVβ6 integrins with a high affinity
in human IPF lungs, and reduces downstream profibrotic TGF-β
signaling to normal levels.[15,16] This compound has been
forwarded to clinical phase 1 on IPF patients and is administered via inhalation. Pliant Therapeutics has developed another
small molecule, namely, PLN-74809,[17] a
dual ligand of both αVβ6 and αVβ1 integrins,[18] and in 2020, this compound entered clinical phase 2 for IPF treatment.[19] While clinical results from these small-molecule
integrin antagonists are expected to have a beneficial outcome, further
research in this field is urgent, given the seriousness of IPF disease,
the poor prognosis, and the absence of a cure.[20]Other growth factors, including platelet-derived
growth factor
(PDGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), and vascular endothelial
growth factor (VEGF), are profibrotic mediators[21] that stimulate the uncontrolled proliferation of fibroblasts
and differentiation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts, with excessive
deposits of ECM components. On these bases, the small molecule nintedanib
(Figure ) has been
clinically approved for the treatment of IPF[22] since it acts as a multityrosine kinase inhibitor capable of impairing
the signaling of PDGFR, bFGFR, and VEGFR by competing with ATP for
their intracellular binding sites.[23]If the cell surface-exposed αVβ6 integrin on the one hand and the intracellular TK domain of the
above growth factors on the other hand are promising therapeutic targets
for IPF, then the possibility of tackling both targets with one dual
conjugate molecule constitutes uncharted territory worth exploring.Furthermore, it has been proved that cross-talk between growth
factor receptors and αV integrins exerts a critical
role in different oncological and nononcological diseases.[24] Cross-talk between VEGFR2 and αVβ3 integrins, for example, plays a pivotal role
in the development of solid tumors, contributing to tumor progression,
metastatic dissemination, and resistance to pharmacological treatment.[25,26] In the emerging field of dual-purpose molecules,[27] we recently synthesized a series of dual conjugates incorporating
both the αVβ3 integrin-targeting
cyclopeptidomimetic c(AmpRGD) (Amp being a cis-4-amino-l-proline residue) and the known TKI
sunitinib, joined together by covalent and robust linkers. One of
these conjugates showed very interesting antiangiogenesis and antitumor
activity in melanoma and ovarian carcinomas in vitro and in vivo, demonstrating improved efficacy compared
to sunitinib alone and the combined administration of sunitinib and
the integrin ligand. On that occasion, cooperation of the two active
units within the conjugate was claimed to be operative, with perturbation
of cross-talk between the αVβ3 integrin
and the VEGFR targets.[28−30]Based on these precedents in the dual-targeting
strategy, we have
herein designed and constructed three new covalent conjugates of general
formula I (compounds 1–3, Figure ) connecting
a previously developed Amp-based αVβ6 integrin-targeting cyclohexapeptidomimetic[31] namely, c(AmpLRGDL), with a nintedanib portion.
These compounds are meant to concomitantly antagonize the αVβ6 integrin overexpressed in fibrotic tissue
and inhibit the kinase activity of growth factors, as well as possibly
perturbing cross-talk between these two receptors, with the final
aim of being used as potential antifibrotic drugs.
Figure 2
Structure of the dual
conjugates 1–3 of general formula I (integrin ligand in red, nintedanib
unit in blue, and linker moiety in black).
Structure of the dual
conjugates 1–3 of general formula I (integrin ligand in red, nintedanib
unit in blue, and linker moiety in black).Considering the localization of the biological targets—outside
the cell for the recognition domain of αVβ6 integrins and inside the cell for the TK domain of growth
factors—one crucial issue consists in the putative localization
of the conjugates. Ideally, after selective interaction of the conjugate
with the fibrotic cell via αVβ6 integrin recognition and inhibition of TGF-β release,
selective cell internalization via integrin-mediated
endocytosis should follow, eventually permitting the nintedanib portion,
in the intracellular space, to exert the TKI activity. The chemical
synthesis of compounds 1–3 and their
biological evaluation on fibroblasts in vitro are
herein reported; accordingly, analogies and differences in the structure
and biological behavior of the three compounds are underlined.
Results
and Discussion
Design of c(AmpLRGDL)-Nintedanib
Conjugates
One key step in designing a dual molecular conjugate
is the identification
of suitable sites on the active units for attaching the linker. These
anchoring residues ought to have a negligible impact on biological
activity, and therefore they must not be directly involved in the
act of drug–target binding. Of course, synthetic feasibility
is another indispensable requirement to be kept in mind during design.As for the integrin ligand, we were aware of the fact that the Nα-nitrogen of the Amp residue was a good
anchoring site since in several previous instances the use of similar
integrin ligands bearing Nα alkyl
or acyl chains of different lengths did not modify the integrin-binding
ability of the ligand.[28]For the
nintedanib portion, we relied on the reported X-ray crystal
structure of nintedanib bound to the active site of the FGFR-1 kinase
domain, which reveals the N-methyl-piperazinyl moiety
of nintedanib pointing outward from the receptor pocket and interacting
only weakly with the receptor.[23] Moreover,
nintedanib analogues lacking the N-methyl-piperazinyl
tail were seen to maintain the TK inhibitory activity.[32] Thus, the piperazine nucleus was judged to be
a good anchoring point, and the substitution of the original methyl
chain for a longer alkyl chain was deemed to affect the TK inhibitory
activity of the nintedanib unit only marginally.The three designed
conjugates 1–3 differ from each other
in the nature of their linkers. Indeed, they
all share robust triazole-based linkages, but these differ in chain
length, polarity, and monomeric vs dimeric presentation
of the integrin ligands. In previous works, we used similar linkers
for the construction of sunitinib-carrying dual conjugates and observed
how these three types of linkers could profoundly influence both integrin
binding and internalization into cells.[28] Repurposing such linkers in this new series of conjugates offers
us the possibility of comparing the results of this study with our
previous ones and elucidating better the linker/activity relationship
of the whole conjugate.
Synthesis of Conjugates 1–3
The
synthesis began with the preparation of the protected integrin ligand,
namely, the c(AmpLRGDL)-azide 5 (Scheme ). Briefly, the linear
precursor 4 was synthesized using the Fmoc-based solid-phase
peptide synthesis (SPPS) protocol starting from the preloaded H-Gly-2-ClTrt
resin. Each amino acid was sequentially added to the growing sequence,
by alternating coupling steps (HATU, HOAt, and collidine) and Fmoc-cleavage
procedures (piperidine, DMF). The azide-carrying aminoproline residue 7 was in turn prepared as previously reported by reductive
amination using N(4)-Fmoc protected aminoproline
and 4-azidobutanal.[28] Cleavage from the
resin under acidic conditions (AcOH/TFE/DCM) gave linear peptide 4 in a 90% global yield. The cyclization reaction was carried
out in-solution (15:1 DCM/DMF) under diluted conditions (2 mM) with
HATU, HOAt as coupling reagents, and furnished the protected cyclic
peptidomimetic 5 in a 50% yield. Overall, c(AmpLRGDL)-azide 5 was obtained in a 12-step sequence
in a 45% overall yield from aminoproline 7. Also, acidic
treatment of protected cyclopeptide 5 consigned deprotected
cyclohexapeptide c(AmpLRGDL) 6, which
was used as a reference compound in the biological assays (vide infra).
Scheme 1
Synthesis of Cyclopeptide 6, and Structure of the Aminoproline
Nucleus 7 Used in the SPPS
Synthesis of Cyclopeptide 6, and Structure of the Aminoproline
Nucleus 7 Used in the SPPS
Reagents and conditions:
Fmoc-SPPS:
(i) Fmoc-Arg(Pmc)-OH, Fmoc-Leu-OH, 7, Fmoc-Leu-OH, Fmoc-Asp(tBu)-OH; HATU, HOAt, collidine, DMF, (ii) piperidine, DMF,
(iii) AcOH, TFE, DCM; (a) HATU, HOAt, collidine, DCM/DMF (15:1), 6
h; (b) TFA/TIS/H2O 95:2.5:2.5, rt, 1 h.The synthesis of compound 12 (Scheme ), a linker portion in conjugate 1, started with tosylation of 4-azidobutanol 8 under
standard conditions to give 9 in a good yield. Nucleophilic
substitution of the tosylate group by Boc-piperazine 10 and subsequent palladium-catalyzed hydrogenation of the azido group
furnished the primary amine 11 (72% yield, two steps).
Finally, the coupling reaction between 11 and 4-pentynoic
acid, promoted by HATU coupling reagent, and subsequent Boc removal
gave the linker motif 12 (76% yield, two steps), ready
for the reaction with chloroacetamide 17.
Reagents and conditions: (a) p-TsCl, TEA, DMAP, DCM dry, rt, 22 h; (b) Cs2CO3, ACN dry, N2, 60 °C, 18 h - 3 days;
(c) H2, Pd/C, EtOAc, CH3CO2Na, rt,
3 h; (d) HATU, TEA, DCM dry, N2, rt, 3 h; (e) TFA/DCM 1.7:10,
rt, 1 h.The other two piperazine-alkyne moieties 14 and 16, used for the synthesis of compounds 2 and 3, were obtained by nucleophilic substitution
of Boc-piperazine 10 on tosyl derivatives 13 and 15, respectively (Scheme ), which were in turn prepared according
to reported procedures.[28] The products
were obtained in good yields (67
and 75%, respectively), even if the reaction of 10 with 15 required a prolonged reaction time (3 days). Subsequent
treatment with TFA in DCM efficiently removed the Boc group, furnishing
compounds 14 and 16.The synthesis
of 2-chloro-N-methyl-N-(4-nitrophenyl)acetamide
(17) (Scheme ) was performed by acylation of p-nitroaniline
with 2-chloroacetic pivalic anhydride, generated in situ by the reaction of chloroacetic acid with pivaloyl
chloride. After methylation of the amide nitrogen (Me2SO4 in acetone), acetamide 17 was recovered in a
40% yield (two steps), which was coupled in parallel with the previous
piperazine-carrying compounds 12, 14, and 16 to furnish, after selective reduction of the nitro group
(Zn, NH4Cl), aniline derivatives 18, 19, and 20, respectively.
Scheme 3
Synthesis of Acetamide 17 and Aniline Derivatives 18, 19, and 20
Reagents and conditions: (a)
pivaloyl chloride, DCM dry, N2, from 0 °C to rt, 5
h; (b) K2CO3, Me2SO4,
acetone, 60 °C, 16 h; (c) K2CO3, acetone,
rt, 16–35 h; (d) Zn, NH4Cl, 10% water in MeOH, 70
°C, 5–7 h.
Synthesis of Acetamide 17 and Aniline Derivatives 18, 19, and 20
Reagents and conditions: (a)
pivaloyl chloride, DCM dry, N2, from 0 °C to rt, 5
h; (b) K2CO3, Me2SO4,
acetone, 60 °C, 16 h; (c) K2CO3, acetone,
rt, 16–35 h; (d) Zn, NH4Cl, 10% water in MeOH, 70
°C, 5–7 h.To conclude the construction
of the nintedanib portion, oxindole 21 was synthesized
from methyl 3-nitrobenzoate and methyl
2-chloroacetate (21% yield, 4 steps), according to procedures published
in the literature (not shown).[32] All that
remained was the assemblage of the three linker-nintedanib portions
and subsequent click-mediated anchorage of the RGD-cyclopeptides.
Thus, aniline-terminating compounds 18, 19, and 20 reacted with (E)-configured
oxindole 21 (Scheme ) through a stereospecific conjugated nucleophilic
substitution, giving the three different linker-nintedanib portions 22, 23, and 24 in moderate to good
yields as single (Z)-stereoisomers. Azide-alkyne
cycloaddition between protected cyclopeptide 5 and compounds 22, 23, and 24 was performed in
parallel according to standard conditions (Cu(OAc)2, sodium
ascorbate) in a DMF/water mixture (Scheme ), providing the corresponding triazole products.
The protecting groups of the cyclopeptides were removed by acidic
treatment, providing the final conjugates 1–3, which were purified by reversed-phase HPLC and fully characterized
by NMR and HRMS.
Scheme 4
Synthesis of the Linker-Nintedanib Nuclei 22, 23, ad 24 and Final Click Reaction/Deprotection
Steps for the Synthesis of Covalent Conjugates 1–3
Reagents and conditions: (a)
DMF, 80 °C, then piperidine, 24 h; (b) Cu(OAc)2, sodium
ascorbate, DMF/H2O 3:7, rt, 12–16 h; (c) TFA/TIS/H2O 95:2.5:2.5, rt, 1 h.
Synthesis of the Linker-Nintedanib Nuclei 22, 23, ad 24 and Final Click Reaction/Deprotection
Steps for the Synthesis of Covalent Conjugates 1–3
Reagents and conditions: (a)
DMF, 80 °C, then piperidine, 24 h; (b) Cu(OAc)2, sodium
ascorbate, DMF/H2O 3:7, rt, 12–16 h; (c) TFA/TIS/H2O 95:2.5:2.5, rt, 1 h.
Biological
Studies
Kinase Inhibition Activity
To verify whether the tyrosine
kinase inhibition activity is retained when the nintedanib moiety
is covalently attached within conjugates 1–3, these compounds were tested against human recombinant VEGFR2
by enzymatic radiometric assay, and their activity compared with that
of free nintedanib.[33] As shown in Table , a good TKI activity
is maintained in the three conjugates, with IC50 in the
nM concentration range, comparable to that of the free drug (for compound 2) or only slightly lowered (for compounds 1 and 3).
Table 1
Tyrosine Kinase Inhibition Activity
of Compounds 1–3 and Nintedanib against
Human Recombinant VEGFR2a
compound
IC50 (nM)
nintedanib
7
1
18
2
10
3
35
Reported IC50 values
were determined by enzymatic radiometric assay (using [γ-33P]-ATP) and are the average of two independent experiments.
Reported IC50 values
were determined by enzymatic radiometric assay (using [γ-33P]-ATP) and are the average of two independent experiments.It was concluded that the introduction
of varied and bulky linker-cyclopeptide
cargoes onto the terminal piperazine nitrogen of nintedanib did not
significantly perturb the binding ability of the drug to the receptor
kinase, as originally hypothesized in the design step.
Inhibition
of Cell Adhesion
With regard to the binding
ability of the cyclopeptide portion of conjugates 1–3 to αVβ6 integrins, important
preliminary information was taken into account. First, the recognition
sequence of the cyclopeptide was chosen based on previous recent work
by our group, where a c(AmpLRGDL) cyclopeptide closely
related to 6 (in which case, an amide linkage at the Nα-proline was present instead of an amine)
was shown to possess both good αVβ6 integrin affinity and good αVβ6vs αVβ3 selectivity
in cell-free assays on isolated receptors (IC50 αVβ6 = 8.3 nM; inhibition of biotinylated fibronectin;
IC50 αVβ3 = 2120 nM,
inhibition of biotinylated vitronectin).[31] Second, as stated above, the integrin-binding ability of these Amp-based
cyclopeptidomimetics is generally demonstrated not to be affected
by the type of connection (amine vs amide) of the
alkyl chain to the proline nitrogen.[28,31,34] The choice here of using amine-based connections
to the proline nitrogen as in 6 was dictated by previous
experience on similar TKI drug-peptidomimetic conjugates,[28,29] suggesting a possible beneficial influence of basic amine sites
on both the cell internalization of the overall construct and the
endosomal escape ability into the cytoplasm.For the new series
of nintedanib-based conjugates 1–3, we sought confirmation of good binding affinity/selectivity toward
αVβ6 integrins on a cellular level,
which could also provide insights into the agonist or antagonist behavior
of the constructs. Thus, the ability of conjugates 1–3 and the unconjugated ligand 6 to bind to αVβ6 integrins on the L929 fibroblast cell
surface was investigated, through an inhibition cell adhesion assay.
L929 cells were proven to express both αVβ6 and αVβ3 integrins as well
as αVβ5 albeit to a lesser extent
(see Supporting Information Figure S2).
L929 fibroblast cell suspensions were exposed to increasing concentrations
of compounds 1–3 and 6 for 30 min (at 37 °C in 10% CO2 atmosphere), before
plating on a fibronectin-coated surface. Inhibition of adhesion was
evaluated after 1 h incubation, under the same conditions, and normalized
to that of untreated control cells. The three conjugates and ligand 6 decrease integrin-dependent cell adhesion promoted by fibronectin
and therefore they can be referred to as antagonists. In particular,
ligand 6 inhibits cell adhesion to fibronectin in a dose-dependent
manner, and a concentration of 6 comprised between 1
and 10 μM is necessary for a 50% inhibition (Figure A). Conjugate 1 was significantly more potent than ligand 6 in cell
adhesion inhibition; indeed, 50% of inhibition was found at doses
lower than 1 μM. The inhibition of adhesion of L929 cells exposed
to conjugate 2 was clearly dose-dependent, resembling
the same trend shown by ligand 6. Interestingly, it seems
that at 1 μM, the inhibitory effect of conjugate 2 reaches a sort of plateau. Compound 3 behaves similarly
to compound 1, reaching 50% of inhibition at a dose lower
than 1 μM and, quite surprisingly, it loses most of its activity
at 10 μM, probably because of aggregation phenomena at high
concentrations.
Figure 3
(A) Inhibition of L929 adhesion to fibronectin (FN) in
the presence
of conjugates 1–3 and c(AmpLRGDL) 6 (0.05−10 μM concentration range). The inhibitory
activity was calculated as the percentage of cell adhesion to FN in
untreated cells and was expressed as mean ± SD. Experiments were
carried out in triplicate. (B) Cytofluorimetric assay of L929 cells,
K562 cells, and MDA-MB-231 cells treated for 24 h with free nintedanib
and conjugates 1–3 at 5 μM. Percentages
of cellular populations showing a fluorescence intensity higher than
the threshold value (cellular autofluorescence) are reported. Representative
images of at least three independent experiments. (C) Mean fluorescence
intensity of L929 cells treated for 24 h with conjugates 1–3 at 5 μM. **p < 0.0001 untreated vs compounds 1 and 2, *p < 0.01 untreated vs compound 3. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison
test.
(A) Inhibition of L929 adhesion to fibronectin (FN) in
the presence
of conjugates 1–3 and c(AmpLRGDL) 6 (0.05−10 μM concentration range). The inhibitory
activity was calculated as the percentage of cell adhesion to FN in
untreated cells and was expressed as mean ± SD. Experiments were
carried out in triplicate. (B) Cytofluorimetric assay of L929 cells,
K562 cells, and MDA-MB-231 cells treated for 24 h with free nintedanib
and conjugates 1–3 at 5 μM. Percentages
of cellular populations showing a fluorescence intensity higher than
the threshold value (cellular autofluorescence) are reported. Representative
images of at least three independent experiments. (C) Mean fluorescence
intensity of L929 cells treated for 24 h with conjugates 1–3 at 5 μM. **p < 0.0001 untreated vs compounds 1 and 2, *p < 0.01 untreated vs compound 3. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison
test.In conclusion, these data confirm
our hypothesis formulated during
design, revealing that not only does the integrin ligand unit in the
conjugates not lose the binding capacity towards αVβ6 but that conjugates 1–3 are also even better antagonists than 6 in
the adhesion process.
Cell Internalization Studies of Conjugates 1–3 and Nintedanib
According to our plan,
it is the c(AmpLRGDL) portion within the conjugates
that should selectively
deliver them to αVβ6 integrin-overexpressing
cells such as fibroblasts and activated epithelial cells in a fibrotic
lesion, inhibit profibrotic integrin-promoted signaling, and exploit
integrin-mediated cell internalization to accumulate the conjugates
within the target cells. In fact, nintedanib targets the intracellular
kinase domain of growth factor receptors, and it may block signaling
transduction after cell internalization.The propensity of conjugates 1–3 toward cellular internalization was
evaluated vis-à-vis that of nintedanib in L929 fibroblasts via cytofluorimetric analysis, which drew on the intrinsic
fluorescence of the nintedanib moiety (λexc = 405
nm, λem = 421 nm) (Figure B). L929 cells were exposed for 24 h to treatment
with compounds 1–3 or nintedanib
at 5 μM concentration; next, the percentage of positive cells
of different treatment populations was determined and compared with
the fluorescence intensity of untreated cells (Figure B). Differences in compound internalization
were also quantified as the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of the
global population (Figure C).About 83% L929 cells exposed to nintedanib were
positive, with
MFI higher than 104 (not shown in the figure); as expected,
due to its physicochemical properties, the small molecule nintedanib
can easily cross the cell membrane and accumulate in the cytoplasm.
Compounds 1 and 2 behave similarly to L929
positive cells ranging between 54 and 60% and MFIs of these populations
comprised between 250 and 280. Quite surprisingly, compound 3, bearing a dimeric presentation of the cyclopeptide, is
much less efficiently internalized, with only 19% of cells positive
after 24 h incubation, and MFI markedly reduced. These results diverge
from those observed with previously reported sunitinib-RGD conjugates,[29] where the dimeric presentation of the integrin
ligand increased compound internalization. A possible explanation
of the lower cell uptake of conjugate 3 is that its larger
size could favor a tendency to aggregate at higher concentrations,
as observed in the binding assay (vide supra).These same experiments were repeated with both K562 and MDA-MB-231
cells. The former cell line expresses neither αVβ6 nor αVβ3 integrins; therefore,
it was used as a negative control; the latter cell line, however,
expresses low levels of αVβ3 but
does not express αVβ6 integrins.
The assay showed that nintedanib is efficiently internalized even
in these two cell lines, irrespective of integrin expression. On the
other hand, the fluorescence of K562 and MDA-MB-231 cells exposed
to conjugates 1–3 was very weak in
all instances, resembling that of untreated cells.It was concluded
that dual conjugates 1–3 were able
to be internalized in L929 fibroblast cells to
various extents depending on their structural features, with monomeric
compounds 1 and 2 behaving better than the
dimeric counterpart 3; in any case, internalization was
αVβ6 integrin-mediated. Conversely,
nintedanib alone was cell internalized to a large extent in all of
the cell types tested, showing no cell selectivity.
Effects of
Conjugates 1-3 and Nintedanib on ERK1/2
Phosphorylation
Extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERKs)
are key components of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)
pathway, the downstream signaling pathway of many different growth
factor receptors, as bFGFR, PDGFR, and VEGFR.[35] Upregulation of the ERK1/2 phosphorylation cascade promotes cell
survival, migration, and proliferation and leads to the fibroblast-to-myofibroblast
transition (FMT).[36] The concomitant fibroblast
proliferation and migration, FMT, and deposition of extracellular
matrix proteins are hallmarks of fibrosis.[37] Moreover, the MAPK pathway is intertwined with the outside-in αV integrin signaling cascade.[24] Accordingly,
we reasoned that evaluation of the inhibition of ERK1/2 phosphorylation
in the presence of dual conjugates 1–3 would have been indicative of the downstream effect of these molecules
on fibroblast signaling promoted by either the integrin ligand or
the nintedanib component, or both.To this end, inhibition of
ERK1/2 phosphorylation was assayed in L929 cells exposed to compounds 1–3, nintedanib alone, integrin ligand 6 alone, or nintedanib in combination with ligand 6 (Figure A).
Figure 4
(A) Expression
of phosphorylated and total ERK1/2 and vinculin
in L929 cells exposed to compounds 1–3, nintedanib (N), c(AmpLRGDL) 6, or 6+nintedanib (N/6) for 24 h (5 μM). Bottom panels show immunoblots, and top
panels display respective mean densitometric values ± SEM of
three independent experiments of phosphorylated proteins normalized
to total protein content. *p < 0.0001 untreated vs treatments, except for compound 6, **p < 0.005 compound 3vs compounds 1, 2, N, and N/6, ***p < 0.0001 N/6vs compounds 1–3 and N by
one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
(B) Expression of N-Cadherin in L929 cells exposed
for 24 h to compounds 1–3, nintedanib
(N), c(AmpLRGDL) 6, and 6+nintedanib (N/6) at 5 μM.
Bottom panels show the representative immunoblots, and top panels
display mean densitometric values ± SEM (three independent experiments
of N-Cadherin normalized to corresponding total protein contents).
*p < 0.05 in comparison with untreated by ANOVA
followed by the Newman–Keuls test.
(A) Expression
of phosphorylated and total ERK1/2 and vinculin
in L929 cells exposed to compounds 1–3, nintedanib (N), c(AmpLRGDL) 6, or 6+nintedanib (N/6) for 24 h (5 μM). Bottom panels show immunoblots, and top
panels display respective mean densitometric values ± SEM of
three independent experiments of phosphorylated proteins normalized
to total protein content. *p < 0.0001 untreated vs treatments, except for compound 6, **p < 0.005 compound 3vs compounds 1, 2, N, and N/6, ***p < 0.0001 N/6vs compounds 1–3 and N by
one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
(B) Expression of N-Cadherin in L929 cells exposed
for 24 h to compounds 1–3, nintedanib
(N), c(AmpLRGDL) 6, and 6+nintedanib (N/6) at 5 μM.
Bottom panels show the representative immunoblots, and top panels
display mean densitometric values ± SEM (three independent experiments
of N-Cadherin normalized to corresponding total protein contents).
*p < 0.05 in comparison with untreated by ANOVA
followed by the Newman–Keuls test.As expected, the TKI nintedanib efficiently inhibits ERK1/2 phosphorylation;
interestingly, a similar inhibition is observed with conjugates 1 and 2, even though they are internalized to
a lesser extent than free nintedanib (vide supra).
Compound 3, the conjugate that was minimally internalized
and that exhibited a drop of binding ability at the observed concentration,
was also less efficient in ERK1/2 inhibition. Of particular interest
is the role of the integrin ligand: when the cells were incubated
with c(AmpLRGDL) 6 alone, no inhibition
of ERK1/2 phosphorylation was registered, but when 6 was
given in combination with nintedanib, maximal inhibition was found,
as though occupation of the integrin receptor could potentiate the
nintedanib effect. This could also explain the similar inhibition
behavior observed for nintedanib and compound 2, irrespective
of their different intracellular content (see the different uptake
of nintedanib vs2, Figure B,C). According to a possible
explanation, the integrin ligand portion of the noninternalized fraction
of 2 could engage the integrin αVβ6 and enhance the phosphorylation inhibition given by the nintedanib
portion of the internalized fraction of 2.The
MTT assay was carried out to evaluate L929 viability after
24 h treatment with conjugates 1–3, nintedanib, compound 6, and a combination of nintedanib
with compound 6 (see Supporting Information Figure S3). In the 1–10 μM concentration
range, nintedanib and compound 6 showed a mild antiproliferative
effect; conjugates 1–3 showed an
even lower cytostatic effect.
Fibroblast-to-Myofibroblast
Transition
Myofibroblasts,
the key components of fibrotic lesions, derive from different cell
types, such as circulating mesenchymal cells, endothelial cells, and
mainly resident fibroblasts. It was shown that FMT, one of the critical
steps in fibrosis, is affected by cell–cell contacts, which
in turn depend on N-cadherin surface expression;
in fact, blockage of N-cadherin resulted in the inhibition
of FMT.[38]To examine the possible
inhibiting role of profibrotic signaling exerted by nintedanib conjugates
of this study, we investigated the ability of compounds 1–3, nintedanib, ligand 6, or the
nintedanib/6 combination, to inhibit N-cadherin expression on L929 cells, as a hallmark of FMT inhibition
(Figure B). N-Cad expression was normalized as a percentage compared
to untreated cells. Nintedanib inhibits N-Cad expression
on cell surface almost by half; a stronger inhibitory effect is observed
after the treatment with free ligand 6, whereas the coadministration
of nintedanib and 6 does not give an improved inhibition
of N-Cad expression. As for the conjugates, treatment
with compound 2 gives a strong inhibition of N-Cad expression, comparable to that of the free integrin
ligand, whereas compounds 1 and 3 do not
seem to interfere in this mechanism.
Conclusions
Three
novel nintedanib-clicked conjugates, compounds 1–3, were efficiently synthesized and characterized,
consisting of a nintedanib-like portion, which was joined to one or
two cyclic aminoproline-based LRGDL moieties targeting αVβ6 integrins by means of three different
and robust covalent linkages. The dual nature of the conjugates as
both αVβ6 integrin binders and TKI
inhibitors was shown, demonstrating that the covalent conjugation
of the two active units within the final constructs did not disturb
their respective targeting properties. Cell uptake experiments demonstrated
good αVβ6 integrin-mediated internalization
properties in fibrotic cells mainly for compounds 1 and 2, while poor uptake was observed for dimeric compound 3 at the tested concentration.The use of conjugates 1–3 as antifibrotic
drugs was investigated in vitro. Both compounds 1 and 2 were able to inhibit ERK1/2 phosphorylation;
in addition, conjugate 2 could inhibit fibroblast-to-myofibroblast
transition of L929 fibroblasts. The overall biological results indicate
that compound 2 seems to better recapitulate optimal in vitro antifibrotic properties; the two active units,
namely, the integrin ligand portion and the nintedanib TK inhibiting
portion, potentiate each other with favorable synergy. Of note, the
simple combination of the two independent active units, namely, ligand 6 and nintedanib, proved beneficial in inhibiting the downstream
fibroblast signaling. On the other hand, the covalent association
of the two modules as presented in compound 2 could be
likewise effective, with the added advantage of being selective toward
fibrotic cells, in the context of targeted drug delivery. These results
hold promise for future work on the development of selective dual
conjugates in the targeted therapy of IPF.
Experimental Procedures
Chemistry
General
All chemicals were of the highest commercially
available quality and were used without other purification. Dry solvents
were prepared by standard procedures. Anhydrous reactions were performed
under N2 or Ar atmosphere. H-Gly-2-ClTrt resin (glycine
loading 0.58 mmol/g) was from Novabiochem, and (2S,4S)-Fmoc-4-amino-1-Boc-pyrrolidine-2-carboxylic
acid was purchased from PolyPeptide. Silica gel 60 F254 precoated plates were used for analytical TLC, visualized under
UV light and/or by dipping in molybdate reagent solution (aqueous
H2SO4 solution of Ce(SO4)2(H2O) and ammonium molybdate)
followed by heating. Flash column chromatography was performed using
40–63 μm silica gel. Automated flash column chromatography
was performed with the Biotage Isolera One system using Biotage KP-Sil
cartridges (direct phase) and KP-C18-HS cartridges (reversed-phase).
HPLC purifications were carried out on a Prostar 210 apparatus (UV
detection) using C18-10 μm columns (Discovery BIO Wide Pore
10 mm × 250 mm). Purity of the final compounds was checked by
HPLC and was in the 96–99% range. ESI-mass spectra were collected
on UHPLC/ESI-MS system (ACQUITY ultraperformance LC; ESI, positive
ions, single quadrupole analyzer) and are reported in the form of
(m/z). High-resolution mass analysis
was performed on an LTQ ORBITRAP XL Thermo apparatus. NMR spectra
were recorded on an AV400 (Bruker) spectrometer. Chemical shifts (δ)
are reported in ppm. Multiplicities of signals are reported as s (singlet),
d (doublet), t (triplet), q (quartet), m (multiplet), and b (broad).
Coupling constants, J, are in hertz. 1H assignments are corroborated by 1H–1H COSY and 1H–1H TOCSY.
Materials
H-Gly-2-ClTrt resin, Fmoc-Asp(tBu)-OH; Fmoc-Arg(Pmc)-OH,
Fmoc-Leu-OH, 2,4,6-collidine, glacial acetic
acid, DIPEA, HATU, HOAt, 4-azidobutanol, 3-aminopropanol, and N-Boc-piperazine were commercially available and were used
as such without further purification. Nintedanib was purchased by
MedChemExpress. Nα-(4-azidobutyl)-4-N-(Fmoc)aminoproline (7), tosyl derivatives 13 and 15, and oxindole nucleus 21 were prepared according to reported procedures.[28,32]
General Method for HPLC Purification
The final conjugates
were purified by reversed-phase HPLC equipped with a preparative column
(C18-10 μm, 21.2 mm × 250 mm column), with the solvent
system H2O + 0.1% TFA (solvent A) and ACN (solvent B),
using a linear gradient from 5% B to 50% B over 23 min, 50% B for
3 min, from 50% B to 5% B over 3 min, (flow rate 8.0 mL/min; detection
at 220 nm).
Experimental Synthetic Procedures and Characterization
Data
Synthesis of the Covalent Conjugate 1
To a solution of compound 22 (7.7 mg, 0.011 mmol, 1
equiv) and cyclopeptide 5 (16.5 mg, 0.013 mmol, 1.1 equiv)
in DMF (1.57 mL), a solution of Cu(OAc)2 (0.64 mg, 0.003
mmol, 0.3 equiv) and sodium ascorbate (1.3 mg, 0.007 mmol, 0.6 equiv)
in water (0.67 mL) was added. The reaction was left under stirring
under argon atmosphere, after three cycles of argon/vacuum. After
6.5 h, the solvent was removed under reduced pressure and the residue
was washed with water (3×) and diethyl ether (3×). The protected
intermediate was checked by MS analysis (MS (ESm/z 1762.9 [M + H]+) and then deprotected using a solution of TFA:TIS:H2O 95:2.5:2.5 (0.57 mL). The reaction was kept under stirring for
1 h, then the solvent was removed under reduced pressure, and the
crude was purified by reversed-phase HPLC, using the described general
method (Rt = 22.9 min), giving the final
conjugate 1 (13.0 mg, 60% yield). δ 7.77 (s, 1H, CH triazole), 7.67 – 7.56 (m, 5H, ArH),
7.53 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.30 (dd, J =
8.4, 1.9 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.16 (m, 2H, ArH), 6.97 (m, 2H, ArH), 5.97 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 1H, ArH), 4.67 (m, 1H, H4Amp), 4.46 – 4.38 (m, 6H, αAsp
+ αLeu), 4.37 – 4.32 (m, 2H, H2Amp),
4.29 (d, J = 17.1, 1H αGly),
3.86 (s, 3H, CH3), 3.76 (d, J = 17.1, 1H αGly), 3.61 (m, 1H, H5Amp), 3.52 (m, 1H, H5Amp), 3.30-3.09 (m, 16H, δArg + βAsp + CH2), 3.03 –
2.84 (m, 7H, H3Amp + CH2), 2.57 (t, J = 7.1 Hz, 2H, CH2), 2.16 (m,
1H, H3Amp), 2.02 – 1.81 (m, 3H), 1.80 – 1.51 (m, 16H, βLeu + γLeu
+ βArg + γArg + CH2), 1.01 (d, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, δLeu), 0.96 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 6H, δLeu), 0.89 (d, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, δLeu). HRMS(ES+) C72H101N19O13 calcd
for [M + H]+ 1440.7826, found 1440.7854. HRMS(ES+) C72H101N19O13 calcd
for [M + H]+ 1440.7826, found 1440.7854.
Synthesis
of the Covalent Conjugate 2
Conjugate 2 was synthesized as described for compound 1, using compound 23 (6.9 mg, 0.009 mmol, 1 equiv)
and cyclopeptide 5 (14.4 mg, 0.011 mmol, 1.1 equiv).
The protected intermediate was checked by MS analysis (MS (ESm/z 1717.9 [M + H]+), and then it was deprotected using a
solution of TFA/TIS/H2O 95:2.5:2.5 (0.65 mL). The reaction
was kept under stirring for 1 h, then the solvent was removed under
reduced pressure, and the crude was purified by reversed-phase HPLC,
using the described general method (Rt = 22.5 min), giving the final conjugate 2 (9.7 mg,
54% yield). ) δ
8.01 (s, 1H, CH triazole), 7.76 – 7.57 (m,
4H, ArH), 7.53 (m, 2H, ArH), 7.30
(dd, J = 8.3, 1.9 Hz, 1H, ArH),
7.17 (m, 2H, ArH), 6.96 (m, 2H,
ArH), 5.97 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 1H, ArH),
4.68 (m, 1H, αAsp), 4.62 (bs, 2H, OCH2-triazole), 4.57 – 4.47 (m, 8H, H2Amp + CH2 + H4Amp + 2αLeu + H5Amp + αArg),
4.28 (d, J = 17.4 Hz, 1H, αGly),
3.86 (bs, 3H, CH3), 3.82 (m, 2H, CH2), 3.76 (d, J = 17.4 Hz,
1H, αGly), 3.67 (s, 10H, CH2), 3.56 (m, 1H, H5b Amp), 3.28 – 3.15
(m, 11H, 2CH2 + δArg + H4′
+ CH3), 3.00 – 2.79 (m, 7H, βAsp
+ H3a Amp + CH2-CON + CH2), 2.17 (d, J = 14.8 Hz, 1H, H3b Amp), 2.03 –
1.57 (m, 18H, H2′ + H3′ + βArg
+ γArg + γLeu + βLeu + 2CH2), 1.01 (d, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, δLeu), 0.96 (m, 6H, δLeu), 0.89 (bd, J = 6.1 Hz, 3H, δLeu). HRMS(ES+) C72H103N18O15 calcd for [M + H]+ 1458.7772, found 1459.7800.
Synthesis of the Covalent
Conjugate 3
Covalent conjugate 3 was synthesized as described for
compound 1 starting from compound 24 (10.0
mg, 0.0115 mmol, 1 equiv) and cyclopeptide 5 (33.4 mg,
0.0253 mmol, 2.3 equiv). The protected intermediate was checked by
MS analysis (MS (ESm/z 3040.7 [M + H]+), and it was deprotected
using a solution of TFA/TIS/H2O 95:2.5:2.5 (0.58 mL). The
reaction was kept under stirring for 1 h, then the solvent was removed
under reduced pressure, and the crude was purified by reversed-phase
HPLC, using the described general method (Rt = 22.1 min), giving the final conjugate 3 (20.1 mg,
56% yield). δ 8.09 (s, 2H, CH triazole), 7.66 –
7.57 (m, 5H, ArH), 7.51 (m, 2H,
ArH), 7.29 (dd, J = 8.3, 1.6 Hz, 1H, ArH), 7.12 (m, 4H, ArH), 6.94 (m, 2H, ArH), 5.97 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 1H, ArH), 5.19 (bs, 4H, Ar-OCH2-traziole),
4.69 (m, 2H, αAsp), 4.50 – 4.31 (m,
14H, H4Amp + αLeu + H2Amp + CH2),
4.28 (d, J = 17.5 Hz, 2H, αGly),
3.86 (s, 3H, CH3), 3.82 – 3.79
(m, 2H, αArg), 3.76 (d, J =
17.5 Hz, 2H, αGly), 3.72 – 3.63 (m,
8H, CH2), 3.62 – 3.51 (m, 4H, H5Amp), 3.29 – 3.08 (m, 16H,
δArg + CH2), 2.95 (m, 2H, CH2), 2.85 (m, 4H, βAsp), 2.77 (m, 4H, CH2), 2.18 (m, 2H, H3Amp),
2.05 – 1.94 (m, 4H, CH2), 1.93
– 1.84 (m, 2H, H3Amp), 1.80 – 1.58
(m, 24H, βLeu + βArg + γArg + γLeu
+ CH2), 1.01 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 6H, δLeu), 0.96 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 12H, δLeu), 0.89 (bd, J = 6.1 Hz, 6H, δLeu). HRMS(ES+) C115H167N32O25 calcd for [M + H]+ 2396.2702, found 2395.2753.
Biology
In
Vitro Kinase Assay
Evaluation of
the effects of compounds 1–3 and
nintedanib on the kinase activity of human recombinant VEGFR2 was
performed at Eurofins Cerep laboratories, by measuring inhibition
of receptor phosphorylation by a radiometric detection method. IC50 values for select inhibitors were calculated from a nine-point
dose–response curve generated using the standard assay conditions
for the target as described: KDR (Kinase insert domain receptor, Flk-1/VEGFR2,
activated by VEGF) was incubated with 8 mM MOPS pH 7.0, 0.2 mM EDTA,
0.33 mg/mL myelin basic protein, 10 mM Mg acetate, and [γ-33P]-ATP. The reaction was initiated by the addition of the
Mg/ATP mix. After 40 min incubation at 22 °C with the inhibitor,
the reaction was stopped by the addition of phosphoric acid to a concentration
of 0.5%. An aliquot of the reaction was spotted onto a filter and
washed four times for 4 min in 0.425% phosphoric acid and once in
MeOH prior to drying and scintillation counting. https://www.eurofinsdiscoveryservices.com/catalogmanagement/viewItem/KDR-VEGFR2-KDR-Human-RTK-Kinase-Enzymatic-Radiometric-Assay-10-uM-ATP-KinaseProfiler/14-630KP10 (December 22, 2021).
Cell Culture
Murine and human cell
lines were obtained
from ATCC in this study were used: murine normal fibroblast cell line
(L929); human breast cancer cell line (MDA-MB-231), and human erythroleukemia
cell line (K562). Dulbecco’s modified Eagle medium, containing
4500 mg/L glucose (Euroclone, MI Italy) supplemented with 10% fetal
bovine serum (FBS) was used for L929 and MDA-MB-231. The cells were
maintained at 37 °C in a humidified incubator containing 10%
CO2. K562 cells were maintained at 37 °C in RPMI-1640
(Euroclone, MI Italy) supplemented with 5% FBS in T25 culture flasks
(Sarstedt) in a humidified incubator with 5% CO2. Murine
fibroblasts or human breast carcinoma cells (1 × 106) were seeded in 100 mm Sarstedt dishes, and the cells were propagated
every 3 days by treatment with trypsin–EDTA solution. K562
cell line was propagated by dilution in warm fresh media reaching
a cell density of 2 × 105 cells/mL. L929, MDA-MB-231,
and K562 cultures were monitored periodically for mycoplasma contamination.[39]
Inhibition of Cell Adhesion to Vitronectin
The inhibition
of adhesion was determined on integrin αVβ6-positive L929 cells. Briefly, a 96-well plate was coated,
at 4 °C, overnight with fibronectin (FN, 2 μg/mL) (sc-29011
Santa Cruz). The plate was washed with PBS solution and incubated
at 37 °C for 1 h with 1% bovine serum albumin (BSA) solution
in PBS. L929 cells were centrifugated and suspended in serum-free
medium (6.0 × 105 cells/mL). The cells were preincubated
with different concentrations of compounds 1–3, or c(AmpLRGDL) 6 (ranging
from 10 μM to 50 nM) at 37 °C for 30 min to allow reaching
ligand–receptor equilibrium. Subsequently, the cells were plated
on FN-coated substrata (at 5–6 × 104 cells/well
density). Incubation was performed at 37 °C for 1 h. MnCl2 (2 mmol/L) was used to provide a full integrin activation
during the experiment. At the end of the incubation, PBS washing was
used to remove the nonadherent cells. Adherent cells were fixed, permeabilized,
and colored using 200 μL/well of a solution of 0.5% crystal
violet in 20% methanol. After 2 h of incubation (4 °C), the plates
were washed. Dimethyl sulfoxide (100 μL) was added to each well
for dye solubilization. The plates were examined in a counter ELX800
(540 nm) (Bio TEK Instruments). The percentage of cell adhesion inhibition
was expressed as a percent of inhibition ± SEM of L929 adhesion
compared to that of L929 cells exposed to PBS. Experiments were repeated
at least three times and done in triplicate.
Western Blotting Analysis
Subconfluent L929 cell cultures
in p100 plates were exposed for 24 h to compounds 1–3, nintedanib (N), c(AmpLRGDL) 6, and 6+nintedanib (N/6) at 5 μM
in serum-free medium. After incubation, the cells were washed with
ice-cold PBS (1 μM Na4VO3). Cell lysates
were obtained using cell RIPA lysis buffer (from Merck Millipore).
The inhibitor PMSF (1 μM), sodium orthovanadate (100 μM),
and protease inhibitor cocktail set III (Sigma-Aldrich) were mixed
with RIPA buffer. Equal amounts of protein (40–60 μg)
were prepared in Laemmli buffer and separated on Bolt Bis-Tris Plus
gels 4–12. Fractionated proteins were transferred to a PVDF
membrane (iBlot-2 system). Membrane blocking was performed for 1 h
(RT) with Odyssey blocking buffer. Next, the membranes were probed
with primary antibodies (4 °C O/N). Following primary antibodies
(1:1000 dilution) were used: rabbit anti-human/mouse/rat phospho-p44/42
(ERK1/2) polyclonal antibody (Cell Signaling #9101), rabbit anti-h/m/r
p44/42 (ERK1/2) polyclonal antibody (Cell Signaling #9102), and rabbit
anti-h/m/r N-Cadherin polyclonal antibody (Cell Signaling
#4061, 140 kDa). After probing, the membranes were washed with T-PBS
buffer and then incubated for 1 h (RT) with goat anti-rabbit IgG Alexa
Fluor 750 or with goat anti-mouse IgG Alexa Fluor 680 antibodies (Invitrogen,
Waltham, MA, 1:10000). Corresponding bands were visualized using Odyssey
Infrared Imaging System (LI-COR Bioscience, Lincoln, NE). Monoclonal
antibody against vinculin was used to assess an equal amount of protein
loaded in each lane (rabbit anti-h/m/r mAb, Cell Signaling #13901,
145 kDa, 1:1000).
Authors: Xiaoxia Z West; Nahum Meller; Nikolay L Malinin; Lalit Deshmukh; Julia Meller; Ganapati H Mahabeleshwar; Malory E Weber; Bethany A Kerr; Olga Vinogradova; Tatiana V Byzova Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Pauline T Lukey; Christopher Coello; Roger Gunn; Christine Parker; Frederick J Wilson; Azeem Saleem; Nadia Garman; Maria Costa; Stuart Kendrick; Mayca Onega; Arthur R Kang'ombe; Allan Listanco; James Davies; Joaquim Ramada-Magalhaes; Sara Moz; William A Fahy; Toby M Maher; Gisli Jenkins; Jan Passchier; Richard P Marshall Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Martin L Decaris; Johanna R Schaub; Chun Chen; Jacob Cha; Gail G Lee; Megi Rexhepaj; Steve S Ho; Vikram Rao; Megan M Marlow; Prerna Kotak; Erine H Budi; Lisa Hooi; Jianfeng Wu; Marina Fridlib; Shamra P Martin; Shaoyi Huang; Ming Chen; Manuel Muñoz; Timothy F Hom; Paul J Wolters; Tushar J Desai; Fernando Rock; Katerina Leftheris; David J Morgans; Eve-Irene Lepist; Patrick Andre; Eric A Lefebvre; Scott M Turner Journal: Respir Res Date: 2021-10-19
Authors: Alison E John; Rebecca H Graves; K Tao Pun; Giovanni Vitulli; Ellen J Forty; Paul F Mercer; Josie L Morrell; John W Barrett; Rebecca F Rogers; Maryam Hafeji; Lloyd I Bibby; Elaine Gower; Valerie S Morrison; Yim Man; James A Roper; Jeni C Luckett; Lee A Borthwick; Ben S Barksby; Rachel A Burgoyne; Rory Barnes; Joelle Le; David J Flint; Susan Pyne; Anthony Habgood; Louise A Organ; Chitra Joseph; Rochelle C Edwards-Pritchard; Toby M Maher; Andrew J Fisher; Natasja Stæhr Gudmann; Diana J Leeming; Rachel C Chambers; Pauline T Lukey; Richard P Marshall; Simon J F Macdonald; R Gisli Jenkins; Robert J Slack Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 14.919