Biotechnological approaches toward nanoparticle biofunctionalization

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 11-20

  Avvakumova, Svetlana ^a   Colombo, Miriam ^b   Tortora, Paolo ^b   Prosperi, Davide ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Ligand orientation; Nanoparticles; Tailoring; Targeting; Tumor

Indexed keywords

BIOFUNCTIONALIZATION; BIOTECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES; DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT; DIAGNOSTIC APPLICATIONS; NON-SPECIFIC PROTEIN ADSORPTION; TAILORING; TARGETING; TARGETING MOLECULES;

CELL MEMBRANES; MEDICAL NANOTECHNOLOGY; NANOCONJUGATES; NANOPARTICLES; TUMORS;

LIGANDS;

BIOTIN; CELL RECEPTOR; COBALT; COPPER NANOPARTICLE; GOLD NANOPARTICLE; IRON OXIDE; LIGAND; MACROGOL; MAGNETIC NANOPARTICLE; MANGANESE; MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY; NANOCONJUGATE; NANOCRYSTAL; NANOMATERIAL; NANOPARTICLE; NANOROD; NICKEL; POLYHISTIDINE; QUANTUM DOT; RECOMBINANT PROTEIN; SILICON DIOXIDE NANOPARTICLE; SILVER NANOPARTICLE; STREPTAVIDIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADSORPTION; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CANCER CELL; CONJUGATION; COVALENT BOND; CYCLOADDITION; DENSITY; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY; NANOMEDICINE; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PARTICLE SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN IMMOBILIZATION; REVIEW; STAUDINGER REACTION;

LIGAND ORIENTATION; NANOPARTICLES; TAILORING; TARGETING; TUMOR;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CELL LINE, TUMOR; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; HUMANS; NANOCONJUGATES; NANOMEDICINE;

EID: 84890788346     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.09.006     Document Type: Review

References (85)

1. Schroeder A., et al. Treating metastatic cancer with nanotechnology. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012, 12:39-50.
2. Harisinghani M.G., et al. Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2003, 348:2491-2499.
3. Gao X., et al. Reduced cardiotoxicity and preserved antitumor efficacy of liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with conventional doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in a randomized, multicenter trial of metastatic breast cancer. Nat. Biotechnol. 2004, 22:969-976.
4. Wang A.Z., et al. Nanoparticle delivery of cancer drugs. Annu. Rev. Med. 2012, 63:185-198.
5. Yu M.K., et al. Targeting strategies for multifunctional nanoparticles in cancer imaging and therapy. Theranostics 2012, 2:3-44.
6. Huang X., et al. A reexamination of active and passive tumor targeting by using rod-shaped gold nanocrystals and covalently conjugated peptide ligands. ACS Nano 2010, 4:5887-5896.
7. Colombo M., et al. HER2 targeting as a two-sided strategy for breast cancer diagnosis and treatment: outlook and recent implications in nanomedical approaches. Pharmacol. Res. 2010, 62:150-165.
8. Russ Algar W., et al. The controlled display of biomolecules on nanoparticles: a challenge suited to bioorthogonal chemistry. Bioconjug. Chem. 2011, 22:825-858.
9. Shang W., et al. Unfolding of ribonuclease A on silica nanoparticle surfaces. Nano Lett. 2007, 7:1991-1995.
10. Aubin-Tam M.E., et al. Structure and function of nanoparticle-protein conjugates. Biomed. Mater. 2008, 3:34001-34017.
11. Shemetov A.A., et al. Molecular interaction of proteins and peptides with nanoparticles. ACS Nano 2012, 6:4585-4602.
12. Gagner J.E., et al. Effect of gold nanoparticle structure on the conformation and function of adsorbed proteins. Biomaterials 2012, 33:8503-8516.
13. Torcello-Gomez A., et al. Adsorption of antibody onto Pluronic F68-covered nanoparticles: link with surface properties. Soft Matter 2011, 7:8450-8461.
14. Anand G., et al. Conformational transitions of adsorbed proteins on surfaces of varying polarity. Langmuir 2010, 26:10803-10811.
15. Apicella A., et al. A hydrophobic gold surface triggers misfolding and aggregation of the amyloidogenic Josephin domain in monomeric form, while leaving the oligomers unaffected. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e58794. 1-8.
16. Vertegel A.A., et al. Silica nanoparticle size influences the structure and enzymatic activity of adsorbed lysozyme. Langmuir 2004, 20:6800-6807.
17. Shang W., et al. Cytochrome c on silica nanoparticles: influence of nanoparticle size on protein structure, stability, and activity. Small 2009, 5:470-476.
18. Gagner J.E., et al. Effect of gold nanoparticle morphology on adsorbed protein structure and function. Biomaterials 2011, 32:7241-7252.
19. Mahon E., et al. Designing the nanoparticle-biomolecule interface for targeting and therapeutic delivery. J. Control. Release 2012, 161:164-174.
20. Chithrani B.D., et al. Elucidating the mechanism of cellular uptake and removal of protein-coated gold nanoparticles of different sizes and shapes. Nano Lett. 2007, 7:1542-1550.
21. Occhipinti E., et al. Investigating the structural biofunctionality of antibodies conjugated to magnetic nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2011, 3:387-390.
22. Medintz I. Universal tools for biomolecular attachment to surfaces. Nat. Mater. 2006, 5:842.
23. Sapsford K.E., et al. Functionalizing nanoparticles with biological molecules: developing chemistries that facilitate nanotechnology. Chem. Rev. 2012, 113:1904-2074.
24. Kabashin A.V., et al. Plasmonic nanorod metamaterials for biosensing. Nat. Mater. 2006, 8:867-871.
25. Tannous B.A., et al. Metabolic biotinylation of cell surface receptors for in vivo imaging. Nat. Methods 2004, 3:391-396.
26. Yang L., et al. Single chain epidermal growth factor receptor antibody conjugated nanoparticles for in vivo tumor targeting and imaging. Small 2009, 5:235-243.
27. Fiandra L., et al. Assessing the in vivo targeting efficiency of multifunctional nanoconstructs bearing antibody-derived ligands. ACS Nano 2013, 7:6092-6102.
28. Hou Y., et al. NaGdF4 Nanoparticle-based molecular probes for magnetic resonance imaging of intraperitoneal tumor xenografts in vivo. ACS Nano 2013, 7:330-338.
29. Baniukevic J., et al. Magnetic gold nanoparticles in SERS-based sandwich immunoassay for antigen detection by well oriented antibodies. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 43:281-288.
30. Dawson P.E., et al. Synthesis of proteins by native chemical ligation. Science 1994, 266:776-779.
31. Helmes B., et al. Site-specific protein and peptide immobilization on a biosensor surface by pulsed native chemical ligation. Chembiochem 2007, 8:1790-1794.
32. Kolb H.C., et al. Click chemistry: diverse chemical function from a few good reactions. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2001, 40:2004-2021.
33. Polito L., et al. One-step bioengineering of magnetic nanoparticles via a surface diazo transfer/azide-alkyne click reaction sequence. Chem. Commun. (Camb.) 2008, 621-623.
34. Brantley J.N., et al. Unclicking the click: mechanically facilitated 1,3-dipolar cycloreversions. Science 2011, 333:1606-1609.
35. CUA pair and click chemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131:8720-8721.
36. Dieterich D.C., et al. Labeling, detection and identification of newly synthesized proteomes with bioorthogonal non-canonical amino-acid tagging. Nat. Protoc. 2007, 2:532-540.
37. Jewett J.C., et al. Cu-free click cycloaddition reactions in chemical biology. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2010, 39:1272-1279.
38. Changa P.V., et al. Copper-free click chemistry in living animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:1821-1826.
39. Colombo M., et al. Site-specific conjugation of scfvs to nanoparticles by bioorthogonal strain-promoted alkyne-nitrone cycloaddition. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2012, 51:496-499.
40. Prasuhn D.J., et al. Combining chemoselective ligation with polyhistidine-driven self-assembly for the modular display of biomolecules on quantum dots. ACS Nano 2010, 4:267-278.
41. Haun J.B., et al. Bioorthogonal chemistry amplifies nanoparticle binding and enhances the sensitivity of cell detection. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2010, 5:660-665.
42. Saxon E., et al. Cell surface engineering by a modified staudinger reaction. Science 2000, 287:2007-2010.
43. Parkhouse S.M. Targeting of polyamidoamine-DNA nanoparticles using the Staudinger ligation: attachment of an RGD motif either before or after complexation. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2008, 16:6641-6650.
44. Ta H.T., et al. Enzymatic antibody tagging: toward a universal biocompatible targeting tool. Trends Cardiovasc. Med. 2012, 22:105-111.
45. Ta H.T., et al. Enzymatic single-chain antibody tagging: a universal approach to targeted molecular imaging and cell homing in cardiovascular disease. Circ. Res. 2011, 109:365-373.
46. Parthasarathy R., et al. Sortase A as a novel molecular stapler for sequence-specific protein conjugation. Bioconjug. Chem. 2007, 18:469-476.
47. Mazzucchelli S., et al. Dependence of nanoparticle-cell recognition efficiency from surface orientation of scFv targeting ligands. Biomater. Sci. 2013, 1:728-735.
48. Leung M.K.M., et al. Bio-click chemistry: enzymatic functionalization of PEGylated capsules for targeting applications. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2012, 51:7132-7136.
49. 6-alkylguanine-DNA transferase (SNAP) genetically encoded fusion. Small 2012, 8:1492-1497.
50. Colombo M., et al. Orientation-controlled conjugation of HALO-fused homing peptides to multifunctional nanoparticles for specific recognition of cancer cells. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2013, 52:3121-3125.
51. Hodneland C.D., et al. Selective immobilization of proteins to self-assembled monolayers presenting active site-directed capture ligands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99:5048-5052.
52. Lim Y.T., et al. Simultaneous intracellular delivery of targeting antibodies and functional nanoparticles with engineered protein G system. Biomaterials 2009, 30:1197-1204.
53. Mazzucchelli S., et al. Single-domain protein A-engineered magnetic nanoparticles: toward a universal strategy to site-specific labeling of antibodies for targeted detection of tumor cells. ACS Nano 2010, 4:5693-5702.
54. Corsi F., et al. HER2 expression in breast cancer cells is downregulated upon active targeting by antibody-engineered multifunctional nanoparticles in mice. ACS Nano 2011, 5:6383-6393.
55. Colombo M., et al. Protein-assisted one-pot synthesis and biofunctionalization of spherical gold nanoparticles for selective targeting of cancer cells. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2012, 51:9272-9275.
56. Brown S., et al. Metal-recognition by repeating polypeptides. Nat. Biotechnol. 1997, 15:269-272.
57. Park H., et al. Immobilization of genetically engineered fusion proteins on gold-decorated carbon nanotube hybrid films for the fabrication of biosensor platforms. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2010, 350:453-458.
58. Liu W., et al. Specific enzyme immobilization approaches and their application with nanomaterials. Top. Catal. 2012, 55:1146-1156.
59. Montenegro J-M., et al. Controlled antibody/(bio-)conjugation of inorganic nanoparticles for targeted delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2013, 65:677-688.
60. Barkey N.M., et al. Development of melanoma-targeted polymer micelles by conjugation of a melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) specifi{ligature}c ligand. J. Med. Chem. 2011, 54:8078-8084.
61. Davis M.E., et al. Nanoparticle therapeutics: an emerging treatment modality for cancer. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2008, 7:771-782.
62. Powell Gray B., et al. From phage display to nanoparticle delivery: functionalizing liposomes with multivalent peptides improves targeting to a cancer biomarker. Bioconjug. Chem. 2013, 24:85-96.
63. Hong S., et al. The binding avidity of a nanoparticle-based multivalent targeted drug delivery platform. Chem. Biol. 2007, 14:107-115.
64. Jiang W., et al. Nanoparticle-mediated cellular response is size-dependent. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2008, 3:145-150.
65. Lu F., et al. Size effect on cell uptake in well- suspended, uniform mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Small 2009, 5:1408-1413.
66. Park J.H., et al. Magnetic iron oxide nanoworms for tumor targeting and imaging. Adv. Mater. 2008, 20:1630-1635.
67. Barua S., et al. Particle shape enhances specificity of antibody-displaying nanoparticles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:3270-3275.
68. Josan J.S., et al. Cell-specifi{ligature}c targeting by heterobivalent ligands. Bioconjug. Chem. 2011, 22:1270-1278.
69. 3 and tenascin-C proteins. Biomaterials 2011, 32:1130-1138.
70. Monopoli M.P., et al. Biomolecular coronas provide the biological identity of nanosized materials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2012, 7:779-786.
71. Salvati A., et al. Transferrin-functionalized nanoparticles lose their targeting capabilities when a biomolecule corona adsorbs on the surface. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2013, 8:137-143.
72. Wang J., et al. Soft interactions at nanoparticles alter protein function and conformation in a size dependent manner. Nano Lett. 2011, 11:4985-4991.
73. Aillon K.L., et al. Effects of nanomaterial physicochemical properties on in vivo toxicity. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2009, 61:457-466.
74. Harivardhan Reddy L., et al. Magnetic nanoparticles: design and characterization, toxicity and biocompatibility, pharmaceutical and biomedical applications. Chem. Rev. 2012, 112:5818-5878.
75. Baldwin A.D., et al. Polysaccharide-modified synthetic polymeric biomaterials. Pept. Sci. 2012, 94:128-140.
76. Karakoti A.S., et al. Pegylated inorganic nanoparticles. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2011, 50:1980-1994.
77. Steinmetz N.F., et al. Pegylated viral nanoparticles (VNPs) for biomedicine: the impact of PEG chain length on VNP cell interactions in vitro and ex vivo. Biomacromolecules 2009, 10:784-792.
78. Li S-D., et al. Stealth nanoparticles: high density but sheddable PEG is a key for tumor targeting. J. Control. Release 2010, 145:178-181.
79. Damodaran V.B., et al. Prediction of protein interaction behaviour with PEG-grafted matrices using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2010, 256:4894-4901.
80. Walkey C.D., et al. Nanoparticle size and surface chemistry determine serum protein adsorption and macrophage uptake. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134:2139-2147.
81. Huang L., et al. In vivo delivery of RNAi with lipid-based nanoparticles. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2011, 13:507-530.
82. Stefanick J.F., et al. A systematic analysis of peptide linker length and liposomal polyethylene glycol coating on cellular uptake of peptide-targeted liposomes. ACS Nano 2013, 7:2935-2947.
83. Wyszogrodzka M., et al. Synthesis and characterization of glycerol dendrons, self-assembled monolayers on gold: a detailed study of their protein resistance. Biomacromolecules 2009, 10:1043-1054.
84. Sapsford K.E., et al. Analyzing nanomaterial bioconjugates: a review of current and emerging techniques for purification and characterization. Anal. Chem. 2011, 83:4453-4488.
85. Chomoucka J., et al. Magnetic nanoparticles and targeted drug delivering. Pharmacol. Res. 2010, 62:144-149.