| Literature DB >> 36159696 |
Arjen Weller1,2, Morten B Hansen1,2, Rodolphe Marie1,2, Adam C Hundahl1,2, Casper Hempel1,2, Paul J Kempen2,3, Henrik L Frandsen4, Ladan Parhamifar1,2, Jannik B Larsen1,2, Thomas L Andresen1,2.
Abstract
Unsuccessful clinical translation of orally delivered biological drugs remains a challenge in pharmaceutical development and has been linked to insufficient mechanistic understanding of intestinal drug transport. Live cell imaging could provide such mechanistic insights by directly tracking drug transport across intestinal barriers at subcellular resolution, however traditional intestinal in vitro models are not compatible with the necessary live cell imaging modalities. Here, we employed a novel microfluidic platform to develop an in vitro intestinal epithelial barrier compatible with advanced widefield- and confocal microscopy. We established a quantitative, multiplexed and high-temporal resolution imaging assay for investigating the cellular uptake and cross-barrier transport of biologics while simultaneously monitoring barrier integrity. As a proof-of-principle, we use the generic model to monitor the transport of co-administrated cell penetrating peptide (TAT) and insulin. We show that while TAT displayed a concentration dependent difference in its transport mechanism and efficiency, insulin displayed cellular internalization, but was restricted from transport across the barrier. This illustrates how such a sophisticated imaging based barrier model can facilitate mechanistic studies of drug transport across intestinal barriers and aid in vivo and clinical translation in drug development.Entities:
Keywords: drug development; drug transport; fluorescence live cell imaging; high through put screening platform; organ-on-a-chip
Year: 2022 PMID: 36159696 PMCID: PMC9500407 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.965200
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
FIGURE 2Verification of a differentiated and polarized epithelial monolayer using direct in-chip immunostaining. (A) Tight junction formation depicted by maximum intensity projection (MIP) from confocal z-stack of ZO-1 (green) and DAPI (blue) (scale bar is 100 µm). (B) Bottom, brush borders are visualized as MIP from confocal z-stack of ezrin (red) and DAPI (blue) (scale bar is 100 µm). Top, the apical orientation of ezrin expression is depicted as a vertical cross-section of the cell-tubule (Scale bar is 10 µm). (C) Bottom, BCRP efflux transporter (white) and DAPI (blue) are visualized as MIP from confocal z-stack (scale bar is 100 µm). Top, A vertical cross section of the BCRP stained cell-tubule. (D) Bottom, MIP of cell-tubule stained for the efflux transporter MRP2 (yellow) (scale bar is 100 µm). Top, vertical cross section of the MRP2 stained cell-tubule. (E) Brightfield microscopy images showing Alcian Blue staining of acidic mucins in mono- (top) and coculture (bottom) tubules (scale bar is 200 µm). (F) Micrograph of single z-slice of the cell layer along the ECM interface for mono- and coculture depicting Muc2 (green) and DAPI (blue) (scale bar is 100 µm).
FIGURE 1Mono- and coculture systems produce leak-tight epithelial monolayer tubules after 4 days. (A) Design of the 3-lane OrganoPlate system with a top view (left) and side view (right) illustrated in 2d. (B) 3D-schematic of the one chip after the formation of an epithelial monolayer tubule stained for tight junctions (green) and cell nuclei (blue) in the seeding channel. (C) Micrographs displaying TD distribution in cell free control (left) and in perfused mono-and coculture chips at days 1, 2, 4 post seeding (right). (D) Quantifying the BI of mono- and coculture tubules by depicting the BI determined as the ratio between the TD intensity in the ECM channel (FECM) and seeding channel (Fcell) (see C) as a function of days post cell seeding. Error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 3). Scale bar in all micrographs is 500 µm.
FIGURE 3Formation of microvilli in coculture tubules identified by TEM. (A) Micrograph of a monolayer cell tubule with the lumen top left (marked by L) and the ECM located towards the bottom right (marked by ECM). Clear microvilli formation towards the luminal side of the coculture tubule, but a complete lack of microvilli on the side facing the ECM demonstrating the correct apicobasal morphological differentiation after 4 days of culture. (B) Zoom (A) represents the organization of dense microvilli. Scale bar is 1 µm in all images.
FIGURE 4Identification of active intestinal metabolic enzyme and P-gp transporter in mono-and coculture tubules. (A) Brush border enzyme aminopeptidase N quantification in cell free (black), monoculture (grey) or coculture (red) systems measured as the absorbance of the cleavage product 4-Nitroanailide. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean (SEM) of at least three biological replicates per condition (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.005). (B) Left, micrographs depicting the non-inhibited calcein (green) and DAPI (blue) fluorescence intensities after 1 h incubation for monoculture (top) and coculture (bottom). Right, micrographs depicting the Verapamil-inhibited calcein (green) and DAPI (blue) fluorescence intensity after 1 h incubation for monoculture (top) and coculture (bottom). Scale bar is 100 µm. (C) Quantification of the relative intracellular fluorescence (Irelative) in non-inhibited monoculture (light grey), Verapamil-inhibited monoculture (dark grey), non-inhibited coculture (light red) and Verapamil-inhibited coculture (dark red). Error bars represent the SEM of at least three biological replicates per condition. (*p = 0.047, **p = 0.0019, ***p = 0.0004, ****p < 0.0001).
FIGURE 5Correlation between fractions absorbed in human and apparent permeability coefficient of twelve model drugs in mono- and coculture tubules as well as standard Transwells. (A–C) The FA for each drug plotted against the average log Papp obtained from (A) Transwell (blue) (B) monoculture tubules (black) and (C) coculture tubules (red). All fits represent non-linear regression analysis using a two-tailed non-parametric Spearman’s correlation function, generating Spearman’s coefficients (R). Compounds 1–12 are listed in Supplementary Table S4. (D) The average P found for either the monoculture (black) or the coculture (red) tubules plotted for each individual drug tested. (E) The relative difference of the average P for paracellular transported drugs (top) and transcellular transported drugs (bottom). Error bars represent the SEM for each drug transport measured for at least three biological replicates (n = 3).
FIGURE 6Live cell imaging-based uptake and transport quantification of TAT for determining high-temporal resolution kinetic transport profiles reveals a strong concentration dependent TAT transport in coculture tubules. (A) Live cell micrographs depicting TAT (green) and Hoechst (blue) intensities in coculture tubules treated with (left) low concentration of TAT (2 µM) or (right) high concentrations of TAT (24 µM). Scale bar is 10 µm. (B) Representative fluorescence surface intensity plot after 130 min incubation with the low TAT (left) and high TAT (right) concentrations. The surface intensity plots are taken from time series acquired using high-temporal resolution live cell imaging of TAT transport. The field of view was set as a z-plane in the middle of each chip-system, including all three connected channels as depicted. The fluorescence intensity summed along the red dotted line at the center of the ECM-channel was selected for quantification of transport. (C) Image-based quantification of kinetic transport profile plotted as the average TAT concentration within the red square in (B) as a function of time for both the low (green) and high concentration (purple) of TAT (n = 4). Dashed lines represent the SEM of each condition. (D) Comparison of the average rate of TAT transport for low and high TAT concentration systems. (n = 7) (***p = 0.0002). (E) Comparison of the relative TAT transport after 130 min of incubation (n = 4) (*p = 0.01). (F) Determination of BI kinetic quantified using the TD concentration for the low (grey) and high (blue) TAT concentration systems (n = 4). Dashed lines in the figure represent the SEM. All error bars in the figure represent the SEM of each condition.
FIGURE 7Multiplexed live cell imaging for assessing the intracellular localization and quantitative transport of Insulin. (A) Normalized intensities of INS (yellow) and TAT (purple) transport over 3 h. Data reflect the average of three independent biological replicates depicted with the SEM in dashed lines (n = 3). (B) Live cell micrographs showing the intracellular distribution of INS (red) with (bottom) and without (top) co-incubation of TAT for 3 h in coculture tubules. Tubules were stained with CellMask-green (green) for representation of the plasma membrane and Hoechst (blue) as nuclei staining. Scale bar is 500 µm. (C) The uptake and intracellular localization of INS with (left) and without the addition of TAT after 3 h of incubation. Scale bar is 10 µm.