Delivery of short interfering RNA using endosomolytic cell-penetrating peptides. FASEB J

Department of Neurochemistry, Stockholm University, Svante Arrhenius väg 21A, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.
The FASEB Journal (Impact Factor: 5.04). 10/2007; 21(11):2664-71. DOI: 10.1096/fj.06-6502com
Source: PubMed


Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) are peptides able to promote uptake of various cargos, including proteins and plasmids. Advances in recent years imply the uptake to be endocytic, where the current hurdle for efficient intracellular delivery is material being retained in the endosomes. In this study we wanted to compare the ability of various established CPPs to deliver siRNA and induce gene silencing of luciferase, with a novel designed penetratin analog having endosomolytic properties, using a noncovalent strategy. In principal, the penetratin analog EB1 will, upon protonation in the early-late endosomes, be able to form an amphipathic alpha helix resulting in permeabilization of the endosomal membrane. We demonstrate that even though all CPPs evaluated in this study can form complexes with siRNA, there is not a direct relationship between the complex formation ability and delivery efficacy. More important, although all CPPs significantly promote siRNA uptake, in some cases no gene silencing effect can be observed unless endosomal escape is induced. We find the designed endosomolytic peptide EB1 to be far more effective both in forming complexes and transporting biologically active siRNA than its parent peptide penetratin. We believe that developing CPPs with increased endosomolytical properties is a necessary step toward achieving biological effects at low concentrations for future in vivo applications.

Download full-text


Available from: Tolga Sutlu
  • Source
    • "AP, a 16 amino acid sequence from the third helix of the antennapedia homeodomain, is one of the most studied CPPs with demonstrated success in achieving increased cell penetration [58]. EB1 is a derivative of AP with a triple helix believed to aid in endosomal escape [59]. MPG is a peptide that combines the fusion sequence of HIV (gp41) with the nuclear localization sequence (NLS) of the SV40 antigen. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The surface modification of nanoparticles (NPs) can enhance the intracellular delivery of drugs, proteins, and genetic agents. Here we studied the effect of different surface ligands, including cell penetrating peptides (CPPs), on the cell binding and internalization of poly(lactic-co-glycolic) (PLGA) NPs. Relative to unmodified NPs, we observed that surface-modified NPs greatly enhanced cell internalization. Using one CPP, MPG (unabbreviated notation), that achieved the highest degree of internalization at both low and high surface modification densities, we evaluated the effect of two different NP surface chemistries on cell internalization. After 2 hr, avidin-MPG NPs enhanced cellular internalization by 5 to 26-fold relative to DSPE-MPG NP formulations. Yet, despite a 5-fold increase in MPG density on DSPE- relative to Avidin-NPs, after 24 hr., both formulations resulted in similar internalization levels (48 and 64-fold, respectively). Regardless of surface modification, all NPs were internalized through an energy-dependent, clathrin-mediated process, and became dispersed throughout the cell. Overall both Avidin- and DSPE-CPP modified NPs significantly increased internalization and offer promising delivery options for applications in which internalization presents challenges to efficacious delivery.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2015 · Acta biomaterialia
  • Source
    • "However, chitosan has some drawbacks in gene delivery systems, in particular inefficient endosomal escape, failure of DNA dissociation, and low transfection efficiency,6 and many researchers have tried to overcome these problems.7–12 One approach taken to improving transport from the endosomal compartment to the cytoplasm has been to incorporate fusogenic viral peptides and polyacrylic acid in which the protonated carboxyl group plays an important role.13,14 Some researchers have also demonstrated that addition of negatively charged polyanions can improve the in vitro transfection efficiency of chitosan and other polycations by loosening the polymer/DNA complexes.15–17 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cis-aconitate-modified chitosan-g-stearic acid (CA-CSO-SA) micelles were synthesized in this study to improve the gene transfection efficiency of chitosan-g-stearic acid (CSO-SA). The CA-CSO-SA micelles had a similar size, critical micelle concentration, and morphology, but their zeta potential and cytotoxicity were reduced compared with CSO-SA micelles. After modification with cis-aconitate, the CA-CSO-SA micelles could also compact plasmid DNA (pDNA) to form nanocomplexes. However, the DNA binding ability of CA-CSO-SA was slightly reduced compared with that of CSO-SA. The transfection efficiency mediated by CA-CSO-SA/pDNA against HEK-293 cells reached up to 37%, and was much higher than that of CSO-SA/pDNA (16%). Although the cis-aconitate modification reduced cellular uptake kinetics in the initial stages, the total amount of cellular uptake tended to be the same after 24 hours of incubation. An endocytosis inhibition experiment showed that the internalization mechanism of CA-CSO-SA/pDNA in HEK-293 cells was mainly via clathrin-mediated endocytosis, as well as caveolae-mediated endocytosis and macropinocytosis. Observation of intracellular trafficking indicated that the CSO-SA/pDNA complexes were trapped in endolysosomes, but CA-CSO-SA/pDNA was more widely distributed in the cytosol. This study suggests that modification with cis-aconitate improves the transfection efficiency of CSO-SA/pDNA.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2014 · International Journal of Nanomedicine
  • Source
    • "Previous studies in the DNA delivery field have demonstrated that there are a range of reagents that can be incorporated (either physically or chemically) into delivery systems to help burst endosomes: e.g., chloroquine (Wagner, 1998; Wolfert and Seymour, 1998), and various fusogenic peptides (Cho et al., 2003; Lo and Wang, 2008; Wagner, 1999). Similar strategies in general also work for siRNA delivery (Lundberg et al., 2007; Rozema et al., 2003; Rozema et al., 2007). There are examples of agents that have been demonstrated specifically to enhance endosomal release of co-delivery micelleplexes. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tumor cells exhibit drug resistant phenotypes that decrease the efficacy of chemotherapeutic treatments. The drug resistance has a genetic basis that is caused by an abnormal gene expression. There are several types of drug resistance: efflux pumps reducing the cellular concentration of the drug, alterations in membrane lipids that reduce cellular uptake, increased or altered drug targets, metabolic alteration of the drug, inhibition of apoptosis, repair of the damaged DNA, and alteration of the cell cycle checkpoints (Gottesman et al. , 2002, Holohan et al. , 2013). siRNA is used to silence the drug resistant phenotype and prevent this drug resistance response. Of the listed types of drug resistance, pump-type resistance (e.g., high expression of ATP-binding cassette transporter proteins such as P-glycoproteins (Pgp; also known as multi-drug resistance protein 1 or MDR1)) and apoptosis inhibition (e.g., expression of anti-apoptotic proteins such as Bcl-2) are the most frequently targeted for gene silencing. The co-delivery of siRNA and chemotherapeutic drugs has a synergistic effect, but many of the current projects do not control the drug release from the nanocarrier. This means the drug payload is released before the drug resistance proteins have degraded and the drug resistance phenotype has been silenced. Current research focuses on cross-linking the carrier's polymers to prevent premature drug release, but these carriers still rely on environmental cues to release the drug payload, and the drug may be released too early. In this review, we studied the release kinetics of siRNA and chemotherapeutic drugs from a broad range of carriers. We also give examples of carriers used to co-deliver siRNA and drugs to drug-resistant tumor cells, and we examine how modifications to the carrier affect the delivery. Lastly, we give our recommendations for the future directions of the co-delivery of siRNA and chemotherapeutic drug treatments.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2014 · Biotechnology Advances
Show more