Negar Mirzazadeh Dizaji1, Yi Lin1, Thomas Bein1,2, Ernst Wagner1,2, Stefan Wuttke2,3,4, Ulrich Lächelt1,2,5, Hanna Engelke2,6. 1. Faculty for Chemistry and Pharmacy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Butenandtstr. 5-13, 81377 Munich, Germany. 2. Center for NanoScience, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Schellingstr. 4, 80799 Munich, Germany. 3. Basque Center for Materials (BCMaterials), UPV/EHU Science Park, 48940 Leioa, Spain. 4. Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, 48009 Bilbao, Spain. 5. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Vienna, Josef-Holaubek-Platz 2, 1090 Vienna, Austria. 6. Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Graz, Humboldtstr. 46, 8010 Graz, Austria.
Abstract
Biomimetic mineralization of proteins and nucleic acids into hybrid metal-organic nanoparticles allows for protection and cellular delivery of these sensitive and generally membrane-impermeable biomolecules. Although the concept is not necessarily restricted to zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIFs), so far reports about intracellular delivery of functional proteins have focused on ZIF structures. Here, we present a green room-temperature synthesis of amorphous iron-fumarate nanoparticles under mildly acidic conditions in water to encapsulate bovine serum albumin (BSA), horseradish peroxidase (HRP), green fluorescent protein (GFP), and Cas9/sgRNA ribonucleoproteins (RNPs). The synthesis conditions preserve the activity of enzymatic model proteins and the resulting nanoparticles deliver functional HRP and Cas9 RNPs into cells. Incorporation into the iron-fumarate nanoparticles preserves and protects the activity of RNPs composed of the acid-sensitive Cas9 protein and hydrolytically labile RNA even during exposure to pH 3.5 and storage for 2 months at 4 °C, which are conditions that strongly impair the functionality of unprotected RNPs. Thus, the biomimetic mineralization into iron-fumarate nanoparticles presents a versatile platform for the delivery of biomolecules and protects them from degradation during storage under challenging conditions.
Biomimetic mineralization of proteins and nucleic acids into hybrid metal-organic nanoparticles allows for protection and cellular delivery of these sensitive and generally membrane-impermeable biomolecules. Although the concept is not necessarily restricted to zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIFs), so far reports about intracellular delivery of functional proteins have focused on ZIF structures. Here, we present a green room-temperature synthesis of amorphous iron-fumarate nanoparticles under mildly acidic conditions in water to encapsulate bovine serum albumin (BSA), horseradish peroxidase (HRP), green fluorescent protein (GFP), and Cas9/sgRNA ribonucleoproteins (RNPs). The synthesis conditions preserve the activity of enzymatic model proteins and the resulting nanoparticles deliver functional HRP and Cas9 RNPs into cells. Incorporation into the iron-fumarate nanoparticles preserves and protects the activity of RNPs composed of the acid-sensitive Cas9 protein and hydrolytically labile RNA even during exposure to pH 3.5 and storage for 2 months at 4 °C, which are conditions that strongly impair the functionality of unprotected RNPs. Thus, the biomimetic mineralization into iron-fumarate nanoparticles presents a versatile platform for the delivery of biomolecules and protects them from degradation during storage under challenging conditions.
Biomacromolecules such as RNA and proteins
are of great importance
for a wide range of applications in the life sciences. The utilization
and the exploitation of their potential, however, face several challenges,
particularly with respect to their stability and delivery into cells.
Unlike many small molecules, they are not readily internalized by
cells and most of them have to be delivered, also in in vitro settings.[1] Thus, even for in vitro applications, suitable
carrier systems have to be designed. Furthermore, the large size of
many biomacromolecules impedes loading into the small pores of most
common porous nanomaterials. Additionally, most of the employed biomolecules
are fragile and need to be protected from harsh conditions as well
as hydrolytic, enzymatic, or other degradation mechanisms. The accommodation
of biomolecules in larger pores of inorganic nanoparticles or in polymeric
nanoparticles has been achieved.[2,3] Similarly, delivery
of various proteins and nucleic acids has been achieved via lipid[4] or polymer nanoparticles,[5] large-pore inorganic[6,7] or hybrid nanoparticles,[8,9] as well as by addition of cell-penetrating peptides[10,11] and other modifications that facilitate intracellular delivery.
However, protection of the sensitive cargo from degradation still
remains a major challenge.A seminal work on the biomimetic
mineralization of proteins into
metal−organic framework (MOF) nanoparticles has revealed a
solution for protecting biomolecules from very harsh conditions.[12,13] In this approach, MOFs are synthesized in presence of the protein,
incorporating it into the structure and releasing it upon MOF degradation.[12,14] Incorporation into the MOF structure protects the proteins from
heat and other harsh conditions.[12] This
technique of MOF-based biomimetic mineralization has been successfully
applied to generate nanobiocomposites, which deliver a variety of
proteins into cells, such as antibodies,[15] caspases,[16] and Cas9.[14,17] These applications were mainly based on the zinc imidazolate framework
(ZIF) materials ZIF-8 and ZIF-90, which consist of Zn and imidazole
derivatives.[18] A reason for selecting these
ZIF structures is that they can be synthesized under aqueous conditions,
at room temperature, and physiological pH. The imidazoles within the
ZIF structures get protonated at slightly acidic pH,[19] which is favorable for disassembly and cargo release within
endo- and lysosomes.[14] However, the characteristic
of being readily degradable can cause issues for storage. Furthermore,
Zn ions are important signaling messengers and can be very toxic to
cells.[20] Therefore, nanoparticles alternative
to ZIF-8 and ZIF-90 are needed for biomimetic mineralization under
conditions that preserve proteins and their function.Iron-fumarate
nanoparticles, such as MIL-88A, have shown great
promise for drug delivery.[21,22] They can be imaged
via MRI[23,24] and have been used to deliver small molecules
to cells.[21,25] Both building blocks—fumaric acid
and iron—are naturally present in the human body and therefore
relatively well tolerated.[26,27] A study on cytotoxicity
of MOF nanoparticles based on Fe, Zn, and Zr showed that Fe-based
MOFs were less toxic to HeLa and J774 cells than Zn and Zr MOFs.[28] Iron-fumarate nanoparticles can be synthesized
via biomimetic mineralization to include BSA.[12] However, so far, the synthesis procedure was performed at acidic
pH 2.5 that is not tolerated by many proteins. For example, Cas9,
which receives much attention as a highly flexible gene editing tool,
has been reported to irreversibly loose its bioactivity upon exposure
to acidic pH < 4.[29] Here, we introduce
a biomimetic mineralization of proteins with iron-fumarate nanoparticles
at pH 4.8, which preserves and shields pH-sensitive protein structures.
We show that iron-fumarate nanoparticles can be used as an alternative
to ZIF nanoparticles for delivery of proteins, such as Cas9. Importantly,
the iron-fumarate platform preserves protein functionality during
synthesis, delivery, release, and even under harsh conditions such
as storage at acidic pH or in ethanol (Figure ).
Figure 1
Overview of synthesis and protective properties
of Fe-fum nanoparticles,
as well as their use for intracellular delivery of functional proteins,
such as Cas9/sgRNA RNPs for genome editing.
Overview of synthesis and protective properties
of Fe-fum nanoparticles,
as well as their use for intracellular delivery of functional proteins,
such as Cas9/sgRNA RNPs for genome editing.
Results
Synthesis
and Characterization of Biomimetically Mineralized
Iron-Fumarate Nanoparticles
In previous protocols, spherical
iron-fumarate nanoparticles were synthesized via room-temperature
precipitation from water-based solutions of fumaric acid and iron
chloride.[21,25,26] Due to the
fumaric acid, this occurs at a pH of 2.5. To accommodate proteins
and preserve their structure and function, we developed a synthesis
protocol at less acidic pH. Increasing the pH decreases protonation
of fumaric acid and thus its reactivity with iron and subsequent nanoparticle
formation. Therefore, the pH had to be balanced to preserve protein
function and at the same time allow for nanoparticle formation, yielding
pH 4.8 as best compromise. To compensate for the reduced reactivity
of fumaric acid, the molar ratio of fumaric acid to iron was increased
from 1:1 to 10:1. Briefly, nanoparticle formation was initiated by
incubation of proteins with fumaric acid at pH 4.8, followed by addition
of iron chloride (Figure a). Subsequently, the resulting iron-fumarate nanoparticles
(Fe-fum NPs) were washed with ethanol. For cell experiments, the particles
were loaded with calcein and coated with a lipid layer via a fusion
method as described previously.[21] The coencapsulated
calcein enabled visualization by fluorescence microscopy and additionally
stabilized the lipid layer.[30] As observed
previously, lipid coating facilitates cellular uptake of iron-fumarate-based
nanoparticles and thereby contributes to successful delivery.[21] To confirm that Fe-fum NPs can serve as a versatile
platform for protective encapsulation and intracellular delivery of
proteins, different proteins were encapsulated: bovine serum albumin
(BSA), horseradish peroxidase (HRP), green fluorescent protein (GFP),
and Cas9/sgRNA ribonucleoproteins (RNPs).
Figure 2
Preparation and characterization
of Fe-fum NPs and protein@Fe-fum.
(a) Schematic of biomineralization of Fe-fum NPs. (b) SEM images (scale
bar: 400 nm) and (c) size distribution obtained via dynamic light
scattering (DLS) measurements of Fe-fum NPs, BSA@Fe-fum without lipid
coating, and lipid-coated BSA@Fe-fum, respectively. (d) ζ potential
of Fe-fum NPs and protein@Fe-fum dispersed in water; proteins include
BSA, HRP, and Cas9/sgRNA RNP. (e) Quantification of encapsulated proteins
(BSA, HRP, and Cas9/sgRNA RNP) assessed by disintegration of uncoated
NPs and a subsequent BCA assay.
Preparation and characterization
of Fe-fum NPs and protein@Fe-fum.
(a) Schematic of biomineralization of Fe-fum NPs. (b) SEM images (scale
bar: 400 nm) and (c) size distribution obtained via dynamic light
scattering (DLS) measurements of Fe-fum NPs, BSA@Fe-fum without lipid
coating, and lipid-coated BSA@Fe-fum, respectively. (d) ζ potential
of Fe-fum NPs and protein@Fe-fum dispersed in water; proteins include
BSA, HRP, and Cas9/sgRNA RNP. (e) Quantification of encapsulated proteins
(BSA, HRP, and Cas9/sgRNA RNP) assessed by disintegration of uncoated
NPs and a subsequent BCA assay.A detailed materials characterization was carried out with BSA
biomimetically mineralized into Fe-fum NPs (BSA@Fe-fum). Scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) reveals a spherical morphology and an average
size of 30 nm (Figures b and S1). As displayed in the SEM images
in Figure b, morphology
and size of Fe-fum NPs did not change upon incorporation of BSA nor
upon lipid coating. Dynamic light scattering (DLS, Figure c) of the Fe-fum NPs without
incorporated proteins shows a homogeneous size distribution around
a hydrodynamic diameter of 220 nm, which is within a suitable range
for drug delivery purposes. After incorporation of BSA, the majority
of Fe-fum NPs showed a size distribution around 200 nm. However, a
second population with larger sizes appeared, indicating a certain
degree of aggregation. DLS of lipid-coated Fe-fum NPs resulted in
a size distribution of the main fraction of nanoparticles around 70
nm. All lipid-coated Fe-fum NPs exhibited a negative ζ potential.
The ζ potential of lipid-coated Fe-fum NPs without protein was
−33 mV, which was slightly increased upon incorporation of
proteins as displayed in Figure d.X-ray diffraction (XRD, Figure S2) and
infrared spectroscopy (IR) data (Figure S3) are consistent with data found in the literature for other iron-fumarate
nanoparticles.[26] Particularly, the amorphous
nature revealed by XRD has been described for iron(III) fumarate nanoparticles
with similarly spherical shape.[26] IR was
further used to assess the incorporation of HRP and Cas9 RNP into
the Fe-fum NPs. In the IR spectra, the peak in the range of 1600–1710
cm–1 represents a typical protein signal (corresponding
to the amide I band, mainly from C=O stretching vibrations).[31] It is present in the spectra of Fe-fum NPs incorporating
HRP and Cas9 RNP, and it is absent in the spectrum of Fe-fum NPs without
incorporated proteins. This confirms that HRP and Cas9 RNP were successfully
incorporated in the Fe-fum NPs (SI, Figure S3).Protein encapsulation was further quantified with a BCA
(bicinchoninic
acid) assay of Fe-fum NPs degraded with citrate buffer. The protein
loading efficiency was calculated as the percentage of protein incorporated
in Fe-fum NPs relative to the total initial protein provided during
synthesis, and the protein loading capacity was quantified as the
weight percentage of the incorporated protein per mg Fe-fum NPs. For
BSA and HRP, loading efficiencies of 84 and 86%, respectively, and
loading capacities of 15 and 15.7%, respectively, were obtained. The
same initial concentration of Cas9 RNP yielded a lower loading efficiency
of 38% and lower loading capacity of 7.8% (Figure e). The reduced loading efficiencies and
capacities for Cas9 may be attributed to its physical and chemical
characteristics, which differ from BSA and HRP. Most likely, it is
a result of its much larger size (160 kDa) compared to BSA (69 kDa)
and HRP (44 kDa), which might lead to steric effects reducing the
packing efficiency. Nevertheless, compared to Cas9 loading into ZIF
nanoparticles reported in the literature[14] (1.2%), the loading capacity of 7.8% that we achieve with Fe-fum
NPs is considerably higher.To assess whether Fe-fum NP synthesis
preserves protein function,
we initially used GFP fluorescence as a marker. While GFP fluorescence
was strongly reduced during synthesis at pH 2.5, the synthesis at
pH 4.8 described here preserved GFP fluorescence (Figure S4).
Intracellular Delivery of BSA
Next,
we studied the
potential of the Fe-fum NPs to deliver proteins into cells using three
different proteins of increasing complexity. First, we used BSA fluorescently
labeled with Atto633 as a model protein to assess intracellular release
and effects on cell viability. The metabolic activity of HeLa cells
was determined by MTT assay after 48 h incubation with various amounts
of lipid-coated, calcein-loaded BSA@Fe-fum (0–240 μg/mL).
Up to a concentration of 30 μg/mL BSA@Fe-fum, no obvious reduction
of cell viability could be observed compared to untreated controls.
Even at the highest dose of 240 μg/mL, the effect on cell viability
was less than 50% (Figure a). We then used fluorescence microscopy to monitor the intracellular
localization and release of the fluorescent cargos calcein and Atto633-BSA.
To observe significant intracellular release, we applied a brief osmotic
shock by exposing the cells to 1 M glucose for 6 mins followed by
replacement with fresh medium. While the glucose shock may be a limitation
for therapeutic applications, it also provides the advantage of temporal
control of endosomal release and intracellular activity for applications
in biotechnology or research on cell biology. The homogeneous distribution
of both calcein and Atto633-BSA in the cells after glucose shock suggests
intracellular degradation of the Fe-fum NPs and release of the contained
fluorescent cargos (Figure b).
Figure 3
Cell viability and release of BSA@Fe-fum. (a) Viability of HeLa
cells treated with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded BSA@Fe-fum for 48
h measured with an MTT assay. (b) Confocal images of HeLa cells incubated
with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded Atto633-BSA@Fe-fum for 3 days. Green:
calcein, red: Atto633-labeled BSA. Scale bar:10 μm.
Cell viability and release of BSA@Fe-fum. (a) Viability of HeLa
cells treated with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded BSA@Fe-fum for 48
h measured with an MTT assay. (b) Confocal images of HeLa cells incubated
with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded Atto633-BSA@Fe-fum for 3 days. Green:
calcein, red: Atto633-labeled BSA. Scale bar:10 μm.
Intracellular Delivery and Activity of HRP
To observe
protein function after intracellular delivery, we investigated the
delivery of horseradish peroxidase (HRP). HRP is a widely used enzyme
that catalyzes the oxidation of a variety of organic substrates by
means of hydrogen peroxide. To assess the functionality of HRP, we
therefore used Amplex UltraRed as a substrate, which is a nonfluorescent
molecule that is converted to fluorescent resorufin upon HRP-catalyzed
oxidation by hydrogen peroxide (Figure a).[32,33] Before cell experiments, we tested
the activity of HRP after incorporation into the Fe-fum NPs. To this
end, Fe-fum NPs with biomimetically incorporated HRP (HRP@Fe-fum)
were disintegrated by incubation in citrate buffer. Subsequently,
the disintegrated HRP@Fe-fum were incubated in a solution of Amplex
UltraRed and hydrogen peroxide. As shown in Figure b, fluorescence emission was detected in
the disintegrated HRP@Fe-fum, but not in controls of Fe-fum NPs without
HRP. Comparing the enzyme kinetics between HRP released from degraded
HRP@Fe-fum and free HRP added to degraded Fe-fum NPs, we found that
the Michaelis–Menten constant KM, i.e., the substrate–enzyme binding rates, is comparable
within errors (182 ± 73 μM for free HRP and 127 ±
39 μM for HRP from HRP@Fe-fum). These values are similar to KM values for HRP reported in the literature.[34] However, the catalytic rate of the enzyme kcat is reduced in HRP released from degraded
HRP@Fe-fum to about 2.5% of the value of free HRP. This is in accordance
with reports in the literature on interactions of carboxylic acids
with the heme group of the active site of horseradish peroxidase,
which lead to a reduction of the enzyme activity rate to a similar
extent as we observe for HRP released from Fe-fum NPs.[35] Thus, the activity of HRP was reduced but still
clearly detectable after synthesis, encapsulation, and release. Therefore,
we next studied its enzymatic activity after intracellular delivery
using the same assay of Amplex UltraRed oxidation to fluorescent resorufin.
HeLa cells were incubated with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded HRP@Fe-fum
and treated with hydrogen peroxide and Amplex UltraRed. The widespread
green fluorescent signal in Figure c suggests an efficient release of calcein after glucose
shock. Importantly, we observed a red fluorescent signal resulting
from resorufin formation in cells incubated with HRP@Fe-fum, but not
in control cells treated with Fe-fum NPs without HRP. The resorufin
signal was also observed in positive controls employing HRP transfected
with lipofectamine. Cell morphology changed in cells incubated with
HRP@Fe-fum and in positive controls, but not in negative controls
without HRP. Lipid oxidation is known to induce such morphology and
can ultimately lead to cell death. The morphology changes may thus
result from HRP-catalyzed oxidation of lipids or other important cell
constituents. All in all, the observed fluorescence signal and cell
morphology suggest active HRP to be successfully delivered into cells
with HRP@Fe-fum.
Figure 4
Intracellular activity of HRP delivered by HRP@Fe-fum.
(a) Catalytic
reaction of HRP with Amplex UltraRed resulting in the formation of
fluorescent resorufin. (b) Fluorescence emission after exposure of
Amplex UltraRed to disintegrated Fe-fum NPs and HRP@Fe-fum shows activity
of HRP after release from HRP@Fe-fum (orange), while controls without
HRP do not show activity (blue). (c) Confocal microscopy images of
HeLa cells after incubation with lipofectamine (LF) and HRP as a positive
control for HRP-induced Amplex UltraRed fluorescence signal; lipid-coated,
calcein-loaded Fe-fum NPs without HRP as a negative control; and lipid-coated,
calcein-loaded HRP@Fe-fum showing that HRP@Fe-fum NPs release calcein
(green channel) and deliver active HRP inducing formation of fluorescent
resorufin (red channel). Scale bar: 20 μm.
Intracellular activity of HRP delivered by HRP@Fe-fum.
(a) Catalytic
reaction of HRP with Amplex UltraRed resulting in the formation of
fluorescent resorufin. (b) Fluorescence emission after exposure of
Amplex UltraRed to disintegrated Fe-fum NPs and HRP@Fe-fum shows activity
of HRP after release from HRP@Fe-fum (orange), while controls without
HRP do not show activity (blue). (c) Confocal microscopy images of
HeLa cells after incubation with lipofectamine (LF) and HRP as a positive
control for HRP-induced Amplex UltraRed fluorescence signal; lipid-coated,
calcein-loaded Fe-fum NPs without HRP as a negative control; and lipid-coated,
calcein-loaded HRP@Fe-fum showing that HRP@Fe-fum NPs release calcein
(green channel) and deliver active HRP inducing formation of fluorescent
resorufin (red channel). Scale bar: 20 μm.
Intracellular Delivery, Activity, and Preservation of Cas9/sgRNA
RNPs
CRISPR/Cas technology is emerging as a key tool for
applications in therapy and biotechnology.[36,37] For this technology to work, ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes of
Cas9 protein and single-guide RNA (sgRNA) have to act in concert inside
cells.[38] Within this complex, Cas9 is a
programmable endonuclease, which cleaves DNA at a target site as guided
by the sgRNA. Cas9/sgRNA RNPs,[39] however,
are very sensitive to pH and hydrolysis, complicating storage and
thus their application. Therefore, we next tested the potential of
Fe-fum NPs to protect and deliver active Cas9/sgRNA RNPs into cells.
As for the investigations with HRP, we assessed the preservation of
RNP activity during Fe-fum NP synthesis, encapsulation, and release
before cell experiments. To this end, an in vitro cleavage assay was
carried out, which allows for the determination of the sequence-specific
nuclease activity of Cas9/sgRNA RNPs (Figure a). Briefly, in this assay, a linearized
plasmid containing the EGFP gene (pEGFPLuc) was incubated with the
RNP comprised of Cas9 and an EGFP-specific sgRNA (sgGFP). In case
of active RNPs, the endonuclease Cas9 cleaves the plasmid into two
fragments (SI, Figure S5a), which can be
separated and detected by gel electrophoresis. The relative band intensities
of the linearized plasmid versus the resulting fragments can be used
as a measure of RNP activity. As shown in Figure S5b, incubation in fumaric acid at pH values down to pH 4.8—a
pH that is not tolerated by Cas9 RNPs in absence of fumaric acid—did
not reduce RNP activity suggesting that fumaric acid protected the
RNP complex from pH-induced deactivation. Incubation of Cas9/sgRNA
RNPs with degraded Fe-fum NPs slightly reduced the activity of RNPs,
but nevertheless showed very high activity (Figure S6). Also, the cleavage assay of degraded Fe-fum NPs containing
biomimetically incorporated Cas9/sgRNA RNPs (RNP@Fe-fum) revealed
cleavage of the substrate (Figure b); however, cleavage efficiency was reduced compared
to free RNP controls. This reduction in cleavage efficiency may result
from the conditions used for degradation of the Fe-fum NPs. In particular,
the cysteine used for degradation of Fe-fum NPs can reduce RNP activity,
as shown by the control of free RNPs directly incubated with cysteine
(Figure S6, for details on degradation
by cysteine see Figures S7 and S8). Even
though we cannot fully exclude that the observed reduction in activity
occurs during synthesis or during degradation of the loaded RNP@Fe-fum
in
the cell, the observed activity encourages further experiments on
intracellular delivery. Therefore, we next analyzed the efficiency
of the biomimetically mineralized RNP@Fe-fum to mediate gene knockout
in cells. To this end, we incubated HeLa cells expressing GFP-tubulin
(Hela GFPtub) with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum that contained
the same sgRNA targeting the GFP coding region used in the in vitro
cleavage assay. In case of successful intracellular delivery, the
cleavage of the GFP gene leads to gene knockout and loss of fluorescence.
This is depicted in Figure c, which shows a cell with GFP-tubulin and a cell without
fluorescence upon GFP knockout. The knockout efficiency after cellular
treatments was quantified by flow cytometry. To exclude artifacts
due to codelivered calcein, which has a fluorescence spectrum overlapping
with GFP, the cells were passaged twice and regrown for two days after
each passage (Figure S9). After treatment
with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum at concentrations corresponding
to 75 and 110 nM Cas9 RNP, knockout efficiencies amounted to 16 and
30%, respectively (Figure d). Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX (LF CM), which was used as a commercially
available benchmark reagent, yielded knockout efficiencies of 22 and
23% at the same concentrations of 75 and 110 nM Cas9 RNP, respectively.
Hence, RNP@Fe-fum mediated higher knockout levels at 110 nM RNP compared
to LF CM. In contrast, negative controls of Fe-fum NPs without RNP
and Fe-fum or LF with a control sgRNA, without a target sequence in
the genome, did not show GFP knockout (Figures S10–S12). With these knockout efficiencies, biomimetically
mineralized iron-fumarate nanoparticles may represent a good alternative
for the delivery of Cas9/sgRNA RNPs into cells.
Figure 5
In vitro and intracellular
activity of Cas9 RNPs. (a) Schematic
of the cleavage of the EGFP gene and cellular knockout caused by Cas9/sgGFP
RNPs. (b) Agarose gel electrophoresis of cleavage assay confirming
RNP activity after RNP@Fe-fum synthesis. The samples were an untreated
control, free RNP, degraded RNP@Fe-fum, degraded Fe-fum NPs without
RNP, RNP added to degraded Fe-fum NPs after NP degradation, and RNP
exposed to 80 mM cysteine (concentration used for Fe-fum NP degradation).
(c) Microscopy images of a cell with GFP-tubulin expression (bottom)
and knocked out GFP (top). The left image represents the GFP channel,
and the right image the overlay with brightfield. Scale bar: 10 μm
(d) Knockout efficiency of lipid-coated, calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum
corresponding to two different concentrations of RNP: 75 nM (RNP@Fe-fum
1) and 110 nM Cas9 RNP (RNP@Fe-fum 2). The corresponding amounts of
Fe-fum NPs without RNP served as negative controls. As positive controls,
cells were transfected with the same concentrations of Cas9/sgGFP
RNP using Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX (LF CM). LF CM1 and LF CM2 contain
75 nM and 110 nM Cas9, respectively. (e) The impact of acidic conditions
and (f) a 2-month storage at 4 °C on the knockout efficiency
of encapsulated and free RNP. Free RNP was delivered into the cells
via lipofectamine. EGFP knockout efficiencies were determined by flow
cytometry. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3).
In vitro and intracellular
activity of Cas9 RNPs. (a) Schematic
of the cleavage of the EGFP gene and cellular knockout caused by Cas9/sgGFP
RNPs. (b) Agarose gel electrophoresis of cleavage assay confirming
RNP activity after RNP@Fe-fum synthesis. The samples were an untreated
control, free RNP, degraded RNP@Fe-fum, degraded Fe-fum NPs without
RNP, RNP added to degraded Fe-fum NPs after NP degradation, and RNP
exposed to 80 mM cysteine (concentration used for Fe-fum NP degradation).
(c) Microscopy images of a cell with GFP-tubulin expression (bottom)
and knocked out GFP (top). The left image represents the GFP channel,
and the right image the overlay with brightfield. Scale bar: 10 μm
(d) Knockout efficiency of lipid-coated, calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum
corresponding to two different concentrations of RNP: 75 nM (RNP@Fe-fum
1) and 110 nM Cas9 RNP (RNP@Fe-fum 2). The corresponding amounts of
Fe-fum NPs without RNP served as negative controls. As positive controls,
cells were transfected with the same concentrations of Cas9/sgGFP
RNP using Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX (LF CM). LF CM1 and LF CM2 contain
75 nM and 110 nM Cas9, respectively. (e) The impact of acidic conditions
and (f) a 2-month storage at 4 °C on the knockout efficiency
of encapsulated and free RNP. Free RNP was delivered into the cells
via lipofectamine. EGFP knockout efficiencies were determined by flow
cytometry. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3).Next, we studied the ability of
biomimetically mineralized Fe-fum
NPs to protect Cas9/sgRNA RNPs from degradation under challenging
conditions. Importantly, all RNP@Fe-fum are washed and stored in ethanol
after synthesis and before lipid coating. Thus, the knockout efficiencies
obtained above already show that Fe-fum NPs successfully protect RNPs
from a potential negative impact of ethanol. RNPs and many other proteins
lose their activity under acidic conditions.[29,40] Therefore, we assessed the ability of biomimetically mineralized
Fe-fum NPs to protect RNPs from acidic pH. The experiments shown above
on the protection of RNPs by fumaric acid at pH 4.8, which otherwise
inactivates RNPs, already suggest that RNPs might also be protected
in the Fe-fum NPs. To further investigate the potential protection
from acidic conditions, we exposed lipid-coated, calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum
to an acidic environment (pH 3.5) for a short-term (10 min) and a
long-term (overnight) incubation. The stability of Fe-fum NPs was
confirmed by UV/VIS spectrometry (Figure S13), and subsequently, the RNP activity was measured via cellular gene
knockout efficiency. While a control of free and unprotected RNP,
which was incubated under the same conditions and subsequently transfected
with lipofectamine, lost its activity already after 10 min incubation
at pH 3.5, RNPs incorporated into Fe-fum NPs retained their activity
and achieved similar knockout levels even after overnight incubation
at acidic pH (Figure e). In addition to the protective properties against acidic conditions,
we also evaluated the ability of biomimetically mineralized Fe-fum
nanoparticles to facilitate long-term storage. Again, free RNPs stored
for 2 months at 4 °C and transfected with lipofectamine lost
almost all its cellular knockout efficiency. In contrast, RNP@Fe-fum
stored for the same time at 4 °C achieved almost the same knockout
levels as the fresh RNP@Fe-fum (Figure f). Thus, the biomimetically mineralized Fe-fum NPs
provide good protection of incorporated Cas9/sgRNA RNPs and are a
promising storage form.
Conclusions
In conclusion, we have
developed a synthesis protocol for biomimetically
mineralized iron-fumarate nanoparticles that preserves proteins and
their function. The resulting Fe-fum NPs had comparably high loading
efficiency of proteins and successfully delivered them into cells
preserving protein activity. Delivery of Cas9/sgRNA RNPs showed efficient
gene knockout in HeLa cells. While other efficient delivery systems
for proteins exist,[5] generic strategies
for flexible encapsulation of different proteins and their protection
from degrading conditions are still challenges. The biomineralization
approach presented here is a versatile platform as shown by the four
different encapsulated model proteins (BSA, GFP, HRP, Cas9/sgRNA RNPs).
Furthermore, the biomimetically mineralized Fe-fum NPs provide very
good protection of Cas9/sgRNA RNPs against acidic pH and allowed for
storage over 2 months at 4 °C. They do not show efficient release
without glucose shock, which demands further research for on-board
release triggers for therapeutic applications. Yet, the glucose shock
allows for temporal control of release in applications in biotechnology
and cell biology research. Thus, the Fe-fum NPs present a valuable
alternative to existing ZIF or polymer delivery systems, specifically
when protein protection or temporal control of release is necessary.
Experimental Section
Materials
Chemicals
were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
(St. Louis, MO), if not stated otherwise.
Biomimetic Mineralization
of Protein@Fe-fum
Twenty
milliliters of a 10 mM solution of fumaric acid in deionized water
was prepared, and the pH of the solution was adjusted to 4.8 by adding
NaOH. Proteins were added into the solution of fumaric acid in the
concentration range of 30–150 μg/mL. The mixture was
incubated for 10 min at room temperature and 750 rpm stirring. A separate
solution of iron chloride in deionized water (10 mM, 2 mL) was prepared.
Then, the iron chloride solution was added to the fumaric acid and
protein mixture in 5 steps at 20 s intervals. The resulting protein@Fe-fum
were washed three times by centrifugation at 7179 RCF for 20 min and
subsequent redispersion in ethanol.
Production and Purification
of Cas9 Protein
Production
and purification of Cas9 protein were performed as previously reported.[5] pET28a/Cas9-Cys was a gift from Hyongbum Kim[41] (Addgene plasmid # 53261; http://n2t.net/addgene:53261; RRID:Addgene_53261). In brief, the plasmid pET28a/Cas9-Cys was
transformed into Rosetta BL21 (DE3) pLysS competent cells (Merck Millipore,
Germany). A monoclonal culture of the bacteria was cultivated in LB
medium (34 μg/mL chloramphenicol and 50 μg/mL kanamycin)
under shaking (250 rpm) at 37 °C until an optical density at
600 nm of 0.7 was reached. Subsequently, 1 mM isopropyl β-d-1-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) was added to induce Cas9 protein
expression. Bacteria were then harvested and lysed. Purification of
Cas9 protein was conducted by nickel chromatography (HisTrap HP column,
GE Healthcare, Sweden) using a gradient from the binding buffer (20
mM Trizma base, 0.5 M NaCl, pH 7.4, 20 mM imidazole) to elution buffer
(20 mM Trizma base, 0.5 M NaCl, pH 7.4, 0.5 M imidazole). The fractions
containing Cas9 were collected and further purified by size exclusion
chromatography on an Äkta purifier system using the storage
buffer (20 mM HEPES, 200 mM KCl, 10 mM MgCl2, and 1 mM
DTT) as the mobile phase. The fractions containing Cas9 were combined,
and the concentration of Cas9 was measured using a NanoDrop photometer
(Thermo Scientific). The Cas9 solution was aliquoted and stored at
−80 °C before use.
Preparing Ribonucleoprotein
(RNP) Complexes
Cas9/sgGFP
RNP complexes were formed by mixing Cas9 protein with sgGFP (spacer
sequence: GACCAGGAUGGGCACCACCC) or control sgRNA (space sequence:
GGGTAACCGTGCGGTCGTAC) at a molar ratio of 1:1 at room temperature
(RT) for 15 min. The obtained RNP complexes were diluted in HEPES
buffer (20 mM, pH 7.4) to a final concentration of 1.5 μg/μL
RNP and directly used for in vitro cleavage assay or preparation of
nanoparticles.
Preparing Labeled Proteins (Atto-BSA and
Atto-HRP)
BSA or HRP in solution (3 mg/mL) was labeled with
ATTO633-NHS ester
fluorescence dye (ATTO-TEC, Siegen, Germany) based on the manufacturer’s
instruction. In brief, the pH of the protein solution was adjusted
to 8.3 with a 0.2 M sodium bicarbonate solution and then incubated
with dye at room temperature for 1 h in the dark. The unbound dye
was removed with Bio-Spin 6 size exclusion spin columns (Bio-Rad Laboratories).
Biomimetic Mineralization of RNP@Fe-fum
RNP was mixed
with a fumaric acid solution (10 mM, 5 mL, pH 4.8) to yield a concentration
of 30 μg/mL RNP. The mixture was incubated at room temperature
for 10 min and 750 rpm. To the mixture of fumaric acid and RNP, 500
μL of iron chloride solution (10 mM) was added in 5 steps at
20 s intervals. The resulting RNP@Fe-fum were washed three times via
centrifugation and redispersion in ethanol.
Preparation of the Calcein-Loaded
and Liposome-Coated Fe-fum
NPs
A 1 mM solution of calcein in deionized water was prepared.
One milligram of Fe-fum NPs or protein@Fe-fum was redispersed in 1
mL of calcein solution. The mixture was then incubated overnight and
at 700 rpm shaking for loading. In the case of protein@Fe-fum, the
incubation was performed at 4 °C. Then, the Fe-fum NPs were centrifuged
for 5 min at 14 000 rpm and the supernatant was discarded to
collect the Fe-fum NPs for liposome coating. The liposome coating
of the Fe-fum NPs was performed via a fusion method reported by Illes
et al.[21] In this approach, first, a liposome
coating solution was prepared by extruding a 1 mg/mL PBS solution
of DOPC (1,2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine,
Avanti) through an extruder with a 100 nm pore-sized membrane 11 times.
Then, the pellet of the calcein-loaded Fe-fum NPs or calcein-loaded
protein@Fe-fum was redispersed in 500 μL of liposome solution,
followed by the addition of 500 μL of deionized water and incubation
for 2 h. The particles were then centrifuged (5 min at 14 000
rpm) and redispersed in PBS. All cell experiments were performed with
lipid-coated, calcein-loaded nanoparticles.
Dynamic Light Scattering
(DLS)
DLS and ζ potential
measurements were performed by applying a Zetasizer Nano series (Nano-ZS,
Malvern) equipped with a laser with the wavelength λ of 633
nm. DLS measurements were performed at 25 °C and PMMA cuvettes
were used. Samples for DLS measurements were prepared by diluting
the freshly produced NPs or liposome-coated NPs in ethanol or PBS,
respectively. Samples in water were used for the single-point measurements
of the ζ potential of NPs using DTS107 cuvettes. For autotitration
measurements, the additional Zetasizer titration system (MPT-2) based
on diluted NaOH and HCl as titrants was used. Samples for this purpose
were prepared by diluting the Fe-fum NPs to the concentration of 0.1
mg/mL in water.
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
All SEM micrographs
were recorded with a Helios NanoLab G3UC (FEI) operating at 5 kV.
For sample preparation, the Fe-fum NP dispersion was dried overnight
on a carbon film placed on an aluminum sample holder followed by carbon
sputtering before the measurement. For evaluation of the SEM micrographs,
the software ImageJ v1.49 was used.
X-ray Diffraction (XRD)
XRD experiments were performed
on dried Fe-fum NPs or Atto-BSA@Fe-fum (before calcein loading). The
samples were measured on a STOE diffractometer system STADI P operating
in transmission mode. The setup is using Cu Kα1 radiation with
a wavelength λ of 0.15418 nm.
Infrared Spectroscopy (IR)
Infrared spectra of dried
sample powder were recorded on a Thermo Scientific Nicolet iN10 IR
microscope in reflection–absorption mode with a liquid N2-cooled
MCT-A detector.
UV Absorbance
Fe-fum NP stability
in acidic conditions
was studied by UV–vis measurements performed with the Thermo
Scientific NanoDrop 2000c spectrometer. Before measurements, Fe-fum
NPs were treated with HCl to reach the pH 3.5, and after 10 min, the
pH was neutralized by adding NaOH.
Bicinchoninic Acid Assay
(BCA Assay)
To estimate the
protein loading efficiency in the protein@Fe-fum, the encapsulated
proteins in the protein@Fe-fum were released by disintegrating the
uncoated protein@Fe-fum. To this end, ethanolic suspension of protein@Fe-fum
was centrifuged at 16 900 RCF for 5 min. The pellet was then
redispersed in citrate buffer (10 mM) to the same volume as before
to allow for the complete dissociation of protein@Fe-fum. Afterward,
to quantify the protein loading in protein@Fe-fum, a BCA assay was
performed according to the protocol provided by the manufacturer (Pierce
BCA Protein Assay Kit, Thermo). The albumin standard (BSA), provided
in the kit, was diluted sequentially to concentrations between 0 and
250 μg/mL in citrate buffer or fumaric acid to obtain the standard
curve for quantifying the concentration of encapsulated protein and
initial protein, respectively. The absorption at 562 nm was measured
using a SpectraFluor Plus microplate reader S4 (Tecan, Grödig,
Austria).
Confocal Microscopy
The fluorescence
microscope images
were taken with a Zeiss Observer SD spinning disk confocal microscope
using a Yokogawa CSU-X1 spinning disc unit and an oil objective with
63× or 100× magnification (1.40 N.A.) and BP 525/50 (green
channel) and LP 690/50 filters (red channel). For excitation, a 488
nm and a 639 nm laser were used. The images were processed with the
ImageJ v2.35 software.
Cell Culture
HeLa cells (a human
cervical carcinoma
cell line) and HeLa GFPTub cells (Hela cells stably expressing eGFP-tubulin)
were cultivated in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
(DMEM, Gibco) with 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (FBS, Gibco) and 1%
(v/v) penicillin–streptomycin (Gibco). Cells were grown in
a cell culture incubator (Heracell) at 37 °C with 5% carbon dioxide.
Cell Viability Assay (MTT Assay)
The cytotoxicity of
the lipid-coated, calcein-loaded BSA@Fe-fum was studied using an MTT
assay (Thermo Fisher). HeLa cells were seeded onto 96-well plates
with a density of 5000 cells per well 24 h before treatment. The cells
were then treated with different concentrations of lipid-coated, calcein-loaded
BSA@Fe-fum (0–240 μg/mL) and each concentration in triplicate.
Cells without treatment were used as a control group. After 48 h,
the MTT assay was performed. For this, cells were washed twice with
PBS and then incubated for 2 h in DMEM containing 500 μg/mL
MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide)
in the incubator (37 °C, 5% carbon dioxide). Subsequently, the
supernatant was removed, and the cells were lysed by incubating the
plate at −80 °C for at least 20 min. Next, the resulting
purple crystals were dissolved in 100 μL of DMSO per well and
the absorption at 590 nm was measured using a SpectraFluor Plus microplate
reader S4 (Tecan, Grödig, Austria). Cell viability was calculated
as the ratio of the absorption of wells with treated cells relative
to wells with untreated control cells.
In Vitro Activity Assay
of HRP
For the in vitro HRP
enzymatic activity assay, the Fe-fum NPs and HRP@Fe-fum were centrifuged
at 16 900 RCF for 5 min. Subsequently, the pellet was redispersed
in citrate buffer to disintegrate the NPs and release the encapsulated
HRP. Then, the decomposed NPs at a volume corresponding to 4 μg
of HRP were added to 1.5 mL of an aqueous solution containing 2500
μM H2O2 and Amplex UltraRed (final concentration
50 μM). The enzyme activity was determined by monitoring the
fluorescence of mixtures at an excitation/emission of 571/584 nm.
Spectra were recorded with an MD-5020 setup from PTI Photon Technology
International. HRP kinetics was performed using free HRP (at a concentration
of 0.03 and 0.06 ng/mL) in presence of degraded Fe-fum NPs or degraded
HRP@Fe-fum (at a concentration of 30 and 60 ng/mL) and 2500 μM
H2O2 and Amplex UltraRed concentrations between
0 and 100 μM. The resulting fluorescence intensity was measured
at different time points with a SpectraFluor Plus microplate reader
S4 (Tecan, Grödig, Austria) and 535/590 excitation/emission
filters. KM and kcat were determined via a fit to v0/E0 vs. Amplex UltraRed concentration according to the Michaelis–Menten
equation as described in the literature.[34]
Inducing Protein Release in the Cytosol (Glucose Shock)
To induce protein release from the endosome into the cytosol, a glucose
shock was applied. For this purpose, the cell medium was removed,
and cells were exposed to a 1 M solution of glucose in DMEM for 6
min. The cells were then washed twice with PBS to remove the glucose
completely before fresh DMEM or FluoroBrite DMEM (in case of imaging)
was added to the cells.
Intracellular Activity of HRP
HeLa
cells were seeded
on ibidi 8-well plates with a density of 5000 cells per well. The
next day, cells were treated with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded HRP@Fe-fum
and lipid-coated, calcein-loaded Fe-fum NPs as the negative control.
After 3 days, the supernatant was removed, and a glucose shock was
applied as described above. After 6 min, the cells were incubated
with 200 μL of DMEM containing 2500 μM H2O2 and 50 μM Amplex UltraRed for 30 min at room temperature.
Then, the cells were washed with PBS and imaged.
Degradation
Studies
To study degradation of the Fe-fum
NPs, 90 μg of uncoated HRP@Fe-fum with Atto633-labeled HRP were
centrifuged and dissolved in either water at the indicated pH, 10
mM citrate buffer, or cysteine at the indicated concentration in water.
If not stated otherwise, the NPs were centrifuged after 7 min and
the absorption spectrum of the supernatant was measured using a Thermo
Scientific NanoDrop 2000c spectrometer. For analysis, the absorption
at 633 nm was used. For kinetics studies, 1 mL of a 20 mM cysteine
solution was used to dissolve 900 μg of HRP@Fe-fum. After the
indicated time intervals, 100 μL of samples were taken and centrifuged
and the supernatant analyzed with respect to the absorption at 633
nm using a Thermo Scientific NanoDrop 2000c spectrometer.
Compatibility
of the Synthesis Process of NPs with RNP (In Vitro
Cleavage Assay)
To confirm the compatibility of the fumaric
acid (at different pH) as well as the Fe-fum NP synthesis with the
RNP, an in vitro cleavage assay was applied. Briefly, a linearized
plasmid containing the EGFP gene (linear pEGFPLuc) was incubated with
the RNP and the activity of the RNP was visualized via the existence
of bands resulting from cleaved plasmid in a 2% agarose gel. To study
the effect of fumaric acid on the activity of RNP, initially the RNP
was incubated with fumaric acid for 10 min. Then, the pEGFPLuc was
treated with RNPs in 1× Cas9 nuclease reaction buffer (New England
Biolabs, NEB) for 1 h. The activity of the RNPs was compared via the
amount of cleaved pEGFPLuc in the agarose gel.To investigate
the compatibility of the Fe-fum NP synthesis with RNPs, the RNP@Fe-fum
were first decomposed by redispersing the NP pellet in cysteine (80
mM, pH 5) for 10 min. Then, the pEGFPLuc was treated with the decomposed
Fe-fum NPs containing the released RNP. Next, samples were incubated
with EDTA 5 mM for 10 min to chelate the free iron ions, which interfere
with electrophoresis. Then, activity was measured using electrophoresis
as described above.
RNP Genome-Editing Efficiency Study (Cellular
Knockout Experiments)
HeLa GFPTub cells (GFP-expressing HeLa
cells) were used as an RNP-transfection
cell model. Twenty-four hours before treatment, cells were seeded
at a density of 5000 cells per well onto 96-well plates in 100 μL
of DMEM. The next day, cells were treated with lipid-coated, calcein-loaded
RNP@Fe-fum containing 75 or 110 nM Cas9. Cells treated with corresponding
concentrations of Fe-fum NPs without RNPs, with a control RNP that
does not target a genome sequence, as well as cells treated only with
HEPES buffer served as negative controls. As the positive control,
the RNP complex formulated with Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX was applied.
All treatments were performed in triplicate. After 48 h, glucose shock
was performed in case of the cells treated with Fe-fum NPs, as described
above. Then, every 48 h, the cells were trypsinized and passaged into
a new plate. After two passages, the fluorescence signal resulting
from the coloaded calcein disappeared allowing for analysis of GFP
expression without artifacts. Forty-eight hours after the second passaging,
cells were harvested, and the knockout efficiency was determined by
flow cytometry (CytoFLEX S, Beckman Coulter) as the percentage of
GFP-negative cells after subtraction of unspecific GFP-negative population
in HEPES-treated cells (gating strategy, see Figure S11). The GFP knockout was visualized by imaging using an ImageXpress
Micro XLS (Molecular Devices) with a 40× objective and a GFP
filter. The resulting images were evaluated with the ImageJ v2.35
software.
Protective Feature of NPs against the Acidic
Condition
To study the capability of Fe-fum NPs to protect
RNPs from acidic
conditions, the encapsulated RNPs in the lipid-coated, calcein-loaded
RNP@Fe-fum, as well as free RNP (both containing 75 nM Cas9), were
exposed to a low pH environment by addition of HCl (final pH was 3.5).
After a 10 min or overnight incubation, the pH of the environment
was neutralized with NaOH. Then, the activity of acid-treated free
RNP (transfected with Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX) and encapsulated RNP,
as well as a nontreated group of samples, was compared by performing
a cellular knockout efficiency experiment as described above.
Stability
of the Encapsulated RNP Over Time
Lipid-coated,
calcein-loaded RNP@Fe-fum and free RNP (both containing 110 nM Cas9)
were stored at 4 °C for 2 months. The intracellular activity
of old free RNP transfected with Lipofectamine CRISPRMAX and encapsulated
RNP was compared with fresh samples by performing a cellular knockout
efficiency experiment as described above.
Authors: Le Cong; F Ann Ran; David Cox; Shuailiang Lin; Robert Barretto; Naomi Habib; Patrick D Hsu; Xuebing Wu; Wenyan Jiang; Luciano A Marraffini; Feng Zhang Journal: Science Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Anh Phan; Christian J Doonan; Fernando J Uribe-Romo; Carolyn B Knobler; Michael O'Keeffe; Omar M Yaghi Journal: Acc Chem Res Date: 2010-01-19 Impact factor: 22.384
Authors: Karin Möller; Katharina Müller; Hanna Engelke; Christoph Bräuchle; Ernst Wagner; Thomas Bein Journal: Nanoscale Date: 2016-02-21 Impact factor: 7.790
Authors: Qiang Cheng; Tuo Wei; Lukas Farbiak; Lindsay T Johnson; Sean A Dilliard; Daniel J Siegwart Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 40.523