Designer peptide delivery systems for gene therapy

European Journal of Nanomedicine

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 85-96

  Loughran, Stephen Patrick ^a   McCrudden, Cian Michael ^a   McCarthy, Helen Olga ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

biological barriers; DNA; gene therapy; non viral; peptide

Indexed keywords

CYTOLOGY; DISEASE CONTROL; DNA; DRUG THERAPY; GENE TRANSFER; PEPTIDES; VIRUSES;

BIOLOGICAL BARRIER; CATIONIC PEPTIDES; CELL MEMBRANE PERMEABILIZATION; DNA DELIVERY SYSTEM; ENDOSOMAL ESCAPES; NONVIRAL; NUCLEIC ACID DELIVERIES; SYSTEMIC ADMINISTRATION;

GENE THERAPY;

NUCLEIC ACID; PEPTIDE;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; CELL MEMBRANE; COATED VESICLE; ENDOCYTOSIS; ENDOSOME; EXTRACELLULAR FLUID; GENE DELIVERY SYSTEM; GENE THERAPY; HUMAN; INTERNALIZATION; NUCLEAR IMPORT; NUCLEAR LOCALIZATION SIGNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; REVIEW;

EID: 84927934629     PISSN: 16625986     EISSN: 1662596X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/ejnm-2014-0037     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Friedmann T, Roblin R. Gene therapy for human disease. Science 1972;175:949-55.
2. El-Aneed A. An overview of current delivery systems in cancer gene therapy. J Control Release 2004;94:1-14.
3. Niidome T, Huang L. Gene therapy progress and prospects: nonviral vectors. Gene Ther 2002;9:1647-52.
4. Robbins PD, Ghivizzani SC. Viral vectors for gene therapy. Pharmacol Ther 1998;80:35-47.
5. Nayak S, Herzog RW. Progress and prospects: immune responses to viral vectors. Gene Ther 2010;17:295-304.
6. Pouton CW, Seymour LW. Key issues in non-viral gene delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2001;46:187-203.
7. Shi J, Schellinger JG, Pun SH. Engineering biodegradable and multifunctional peptide-based polymers for gene delivery. J Biol Eng 2013;7:25.
8. Kircheis R, Wightman L, Wagner E. Design and gene delivery activity of modified polyethylenimines. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2001;53:341-58.
9. Ogris M, Wagner E. Targeting tumors with non-viral gene delivery systems. Drug Discov Today 2002;7:479-85.
10. Koren E, Torchilin VP. Cell-penetrating peptides: breaking through to the other side. Trends Mol Med 2012;18:385-93.
11. Park S, Lee SJ, Chung H, Her S, Choi Y, Kim K, et al. Cellular uptake pathway and drug release characteristics of drug-encapsulated glycol chitosan nanoparticles in live cells. Microsc Res Tech 2010;73:857-65.
12. Pouton CW, Wagstaff KM, Roth DM, Moseley GW, Jans DA. Targeted delivery to the nucleus. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2007;59:698-717.
13. Liu F, Shollenberger LM, Conwell CC, Yuan X, Huang L. Mechanism of naked DNA clearance after intravenous injection. J Gene Med 2007;9:613-9.
14. Gong P, Shi B, Zhang P, Hu D, Zheng M, Zheng C, et al. DNase-activatable fluorescence probes visualizing the degradation of exogenous DNA in living cells. Nanoscale 2012;4:2454-62.
15. Rejman J, Oberle V, Zuhorn IS, Hoekstra D. Size-dependent internalization of particles via the pathways of clathrin- and caveolae-mediated endocytosis. Biochem J 2004;377:159-69.
16. Krishnamoorthy G, Roques B, Darlix J, Me Y. DNA condensation by the nucleocapsid protein of HIV-1: a mechanism ensuring DNA protection. Nucleic Acids Res 2003;31:5425-32.
17. Gratton SEA, Ropp PA, Pohlhaus PD, Luft JC, Madden VJ, Napier ME, et al. The effect of particle design on cellular internalization pathways. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008;105:11613-8.
18. Kwoh D, Coffin C, Lollo CP, Jovenal J, Banaszczyk MG, Mullen P, et al. Stabilization of poly-L-lysine/DNA polyplexes for in vivo gene delivery to the liver. Biochim Biophys Acta 1999;1444:171-90.
19. Murray KD, Etheridge CJ, Shah SI, Matthews DA, Russell W, Gurling HM, et al. Enhanced cationic liposome-mediated transfection using the DNA-binding peptide mu (mu) from the adenovirus core. Gene Ther [Internet] 2001;8:453-60. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11313824.
20. Cahill K. Molecular electroporation and the transduction of oligoarginines. Phys Biol [Internet] 2009 Jan [cited 2014 May 9];7:16001. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20009189.
21. Tunnemann G, Ter-Avetisyan G, Martin RM, Stockl M, Herrmann A, Cardoso MC. Live-cell analysis of cell penetration ability and toxicity of oligo-arginines. J Pept Sci 2008;14:469-76.
22. Mann A, Shujla V, Khanduri R, Dabral S, Singh H, Ganguli M. Linear short histidine and cysteine modified arginine peptides constitute a potential class of DNA delivery agents. Mol Pharm 2014;11:683-96.
23. Canine BF, Wang Y, Hatefi A. Evaluation of the effect of vector architecture on DNA condensation and gene transfer efficiency. J Control Release 2008;129:117-23.
24. Midoux P, Pichon C, Yaouanc J-J, Jaffrès P-A. Chemical vectors for gene delivery: a current review on polymers, peptides and lipids containing histidine or imidazole as nucleic acids carriers. Br J Pharmacol 2009;157:166-78.
25. Gill T, Singer DS, Thompson JW. Purification and analysis of protamine. Process Biochem 2006;41:1875-82.
26. Hosokawa K, Sung MT. Isolation and characterization of an extremely basic protein from adenovirus type 5. J Virol 1976;17:924-34.
27. McCarthy HO, Zholobenko AV, Wang Y, Canine B, Robson T, Hirst DG, et al. Evaluation of a multi-functional nanocarrier for targeted breast cancer iNOS gene therapy. Int J Pharm [Internet] 2011 Mar 28 [cited 2014 Oct 29];405:196-202. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21134429.
28. Rajagopalan R, Xavier J, Rangaraj N, Rao NM, Gopal V. Recombinant fusion proteins TAT-Mu, Mu and Mu-Mu mediate efficient non-viral gene delivery. J Gene Med 2007;9:275-86.
29. Akita H, Masuda T, Nishio T, Niikura K, Ijiro K, Harashima H. Improving in vivo hepatic transfection activity by controlling intra- cellular trafficking: the function of GALA and maltotriose. Mol Pharm 2011;8:1436-42.
30. Karjoo Z, McCarthy HO, Patel P, Nouri FS, Hatefi A. Systematic engineering of uniform, highly efficient, targeted and shielded viral-mimetic nanoparticles. Small 2013;9:2774-83.
31. Koren E, Apte A, Sawant RR, Grunwald J, Torchilin VP. Cell-penetrating TAT peptide in drug delivery systems: proteolytic stability requirements. Drug Deliv 2011;18:377-84.
32. Noh SM, Park MO, Shim G, Han SE, Lee HY, Huh JH, et al. Pegylated poly-l-arginine derivatives of chitosan for effective delivery of siRNA. J Control Release [Internet] 2010 Jul 14 [cited 2014 May 3];145:159-64. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20385182.
33. Mishra S, Webster P, Davis ME. PEGylation significantly affects cellular uptake and intracellular trafficking of non-viral gene delivery particles. Eur J Cell Biol 2004;83:97-111.
34. Zhu L, Perche F, Wang T, Torchilin VP. Matrix metalloproteinase 2-sensitive multifunctional polymeric micelles for tumor-specific co-delivery of siRNA and hydrophobic drugs. Biomaterials 2014;35:4213-22.
35. Cho YW, Kim J, Park K. Polycation gene delivery systems: escape from endosomes to cytosol. J Pharm Pharmacol 2003;55:721-34.
36. Bechara C, Sagan S. Cell-penetrating peptides: 20 years later, where do we stand? FEBS Lett 2013;587:1693-702.
37. Wender PA, Galliher WC, Goun EA, Jones LR, Pillow TH. The design of guanidinium-rich transporters and their internalization mechanisms. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2008;60:452-72.
38. Wender PA, Mitchell DJ, Pattabiraman K, Pelkey ET, Steinman L, Rothbard JB. The design, synthesis, and evaluation of molecules that enable or enhance cellular uptake: peptoid molecular transporters. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000;97:13003-8.
39. Åmand HL, Fant K, Nordén B, Esbjörner EK. Stimulated endocytosis in penetratin uptake: Effect of arginine and lysine. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2008;371:621-5.
40. Ma Y, Gong C, Ma Y, Fan F, Luo M, Yang F, et al. Direct cytosolic delivery of cargoes in vivo by a chimera consisting of D- and L-arginine residues. J Control Release [Internet]. 2012 Sep 10 [cited 2014 May 3];162:286-94. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22824782.
41. Rothbard JB, Jessop TC, Wender PA. Adaptive translocation: the role of hydrogen bonding and membrane potential in the uptake of guanidinium-rich transporters into cells. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2005;57:495-504.
42. Deshayes S, Plenat T, Aldrian-Herrada G, Divita G, Grimmellec CD, Heitz F. Primary amphipathic cell-penetrating peptides: structural requirements and interactions with model membranes. Biochemistry 2004;43:7698-706.
43. Ohmori N, Niidome T, Kiyota T, Lee S, Sugihara G, Wada A, et al. Importance of hydrophobic region in amphiphilic structures of a -helical peptides for their gene transfer-ability into cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1998;245:259-65.
44. Derossi D, Calvet S, Trembleau A, Brunissen A, Chassaing G, Prochiantz A. Cell Internalization of the Third Helix of the Antennapedia Homeodomain Is Receptor-independent. J Biol Chem 1996;271:18188-93.
45. Lécorché P, Walrant A, Burlina F, Dutot L, Sagan S, Mallet J-M, et al. Cellular uptake and biophysical properties of galactose and/or tryptophan containing cell-penetrating peptides. Biochim Biophys Acta 2012;1818:448-57.
46. Dom G, Shaw-Jackson C, Matis C, Bouffioux O, Picard J, Prochiantz A. Cellular uptake of Antennapedia Penetratin peptides is a two-step process in which phase transfer precedes a tryptophan-dependent translocation. Nucleic Acids Res 2003;31:556-61.
47. Jafari M, Karunaratne DN, Sweeting CM, Chen P. Modification of a designed amphipathic cell-penetrating peptide and its effect on solubility, secondary structure, and uptake efficiency. Biochemistry 2013;52:3428-35.
48. Subrizi A, Tuominen E, Bunker A, Róg T, Antopolsky M, Urtti A. Tat (48-60) peptide amino acid sequence is not unique in its cell penetrating properties and cell-surface glycosaminoglycans inhibit its cellular uptake. J Control Release 2012;158:277-85.
49. Rydberg HA, Matson M, Åmand HL, Esbjorner EK, Norden B. Effects of tryptophan content and backbone spacing on the uptake efficiency of cell-penetrating peptides. Biochemistry 2012;51:5531-9.
50. Maiolo JR, Ferrer M, Ottinger EA. Effects of cargo molecules on the cellular uptake of arginine-rich cell-penetrating peptides. Biochim Biophys Acta 2005;1712:161-72.
51. Tünnemann G, Martin RM, Haupt S, Patsch C, Edenhofer F, Cardoso MC. Cargo-dependent mode of uptake and bioavailability of TAT-containing proteins and peptides in living cells. FASEB J 2006;20:1775-84.
52. Barany-Wallje E, Gaur J, Lundberg P, Langel U, Grasland A. Differential membrane perturbation caused by the cell penetrating peptide Tp10 depending on attached cargo. FEBS Lett 2007;581:2389-93.
53. Vasconcelos L, Madani F, Arukuusk P, Pärnaste L, Gräslund A, Langel U. Effects of cargo molecules on membrane perturbation caused by transportan10 based cell-penetrating peptides. Biochim Biophys Acta 2014;1838:3118-29.
54. Amand HL, Rydberg HA, Fornander LH, Lincoln P, Nordén B, Esbjörner EK. Cell surface binding and uptake of arginine- and lysine-rich penetratin peptides in absence and presence of proteoglycans. Biochim Biophys Acta 2012;1818:2669-78.
55. Poon GM, Gariepy J. Cell-surface proteoglycans as molecular portals for cationic peptide and polymer entry into cells. Biochem Soc Trans 2007;35:788-93.
56. Naik RJ, Chandra P, Mann A, Ganguli M. Exogenous and cell surface glycosaminoglycans alter DNA delivery efficiency of arginine and lysine homopeptides in distinctly different ways. J Biol Chem 2011;286:18982-93.
57. Naik RJ, Chatterjee A, Ganguli M. Different roles of cell surface and exogenous glycosaminoglycans in controlling gene delivery by arginine-rich peptides with varied distribution of arginines. Biochim Biophys Acta 2013;1828:1484-93.
58. Epand RF, Macosko JC, Russell CJ, Shin YK, Epand RM. The ecto-domain of HA2 of influenza virus promotes rapid pH dependent membrane fusion. J Mol Biol 1999;286:489-503.
59. Durrer P, Galli C, Hoenke S, Corti C, Glück R, Vorherr T, et al. H + -induced membrane insertion of influenza virus hemagglutinin involves the HA2 amino-terminal fusion peptide but not the coiled coil region. J Biol Chem 1996;271:13417-21.
60. Li W, Nicol F, Szoka FC. GALA: a designed synthetic pH-responsive amphipathic peptide with applications in drug and gene delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2004;56:967-85.
61. Wang Y, Mangipudi SS, Canine BF, Hatefi A. A designer biomimetic vector with a chimeric architecture for targeted gene transfer. J Control Release 2009;137:46-53.
62. Khalil IA, Hayashi Y, Mizuno R, Harashima H. Octaarginine- and pH sensitive fusogenic peptide-modified nanoparticles for liver gene delivery. J Control Release 2011;156:374-80.
63. Wyman TB, Nicol F, Zelphati O, Scaria PV, Plank C, Szoka FC. Design, synthesis, and characterization of a cationic peptide that binds to nucleic acids and permeabilizes bilayers. Biochemistry 1997;36:3008-17.
64. Lee H, Jeong JH, Park TG. PEG grafted polylysine with fusogenic peptide for gene delivery: high transfection efficiency with low cytotoxicity. J Control Release 2002;79:283-91.
65. Li X, Chen Y, Wang M, Ma Y, Xia W, Gu H. A mesoporous silica nanoparticle-PEI-fusogenic peptide system for siRNA delivery in cancer therapy. Biomaterials 2013;34:1391-401.
66. McCarthy HO, McCaffrey J, McCrudden CM, Zholobenko A, Ali AA, McBride JW, et al. Development and characterization of self-assembling nanoparticles using a bio-inspired amphipathic peptide for gene delivery. J Control Release [Internet] 2014 Sep 10 [cited 2014 Oct 14];189:141-9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995949.
67. Nouri FS, Wang X, Dorrani M, Karjoo Z, Hatefi A. A recombinant biopolymeric platform for reliable evaluation of the activity of pH-responsive amphiphile fusogenic peptides. Biomacromolecules [Internet] 2013;14:2033-40. Available from: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/bm400380s.
68. Plank C, Oberhauser B, Mechtler K, Koch C, Wagner E. The influence of endosome-disruptive peptides on gene transfer using synthetic virus-like gene transfer systems. J Biol Chem 1994;269:12918-24.
69. Midoux P, Kichler A, Boutin V, Maurizot JC, Monsigny M. Membrane permeabilization and efficient gene transfer by a peptide containing several histidines. Bioconjug Chem 1998;9:260-7.
70. Funhoff AM, van Nostrum CF, Koning GA, Schuurmans-Nieuwenbroek NME, Crommelin DJ, Hennink WE. Endosomal escape of polymeric gene delivery complexes is not always enhanced by polymers buffering at low pH. Biomacromolecules 2004;5:32-9.
71. Lo SL, Wang S. An endosomolytic Tat peptide produced by incorporation of histidine and cysteine residues as a nonviral vector for DNA transfection. Biomaterials 2008;29:2408-14.
72. Aa MAEM Van Der, Mastrobattista E, Oosting RS, Hennink WE, Koning GA, Crommelin DJA. Expert review the nuclear pore complex: the gateway to successful nonviral gene delivery. Pharm Res 2006;23:447-59.
73. Brunner S, Sauer T, Carotta S, Cotten M, Saltik M, Wagner E. Nonviral transfer technology cell cycle dependence of gene transfer by lipoplex, polyplex and recombinant adenovirus. Gene Ther 2000;7:401-7.
74. Kim B-K, Kang H, Doh K-O, Lee S-H, Park J-W, Lee S-J, et al. Homodimeric SV40 NLS peptide formed by disulfide bond as enhancer for gene delivery. Bioorg Med Chem Lett [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2012 Sep 1 [cited 2014 May 3];22:5415-8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22871581.
75. Pinol-Roma S, Dreyfuss G. Shuttling of pre-mRNA binding proteins between nucleus and cytoplasm. Nature. 1992;355:730-2.
76. Canine BF, Wang Y, Hatefi A. Biosynthesis and characterization of a novel genetically engineered polymer for targeted gene transfer to cancer cells. J Control Release 2009;138:188-96.
77. Gu L, Tsuji T, Jarboui MA, Yeo GP, Sheehy N, Hall WW, et al. Intermolecular masking of the HIV-1 Rev NLS by the cellular protein HIC: novel insights into the regulation of Rev nuclear import. Retrovirology [Internet]. BioMed Central Ltd; 2011 Jan [cited 2014 Oct 31];8:17. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral. nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3062594&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.
78. Kau TR, Way JC, Silver PA. Nuclear transport and cancer: From mechanism to intervention. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:106-17.
79. Dahl E, Kristiansen G, Gottlob K, Klaman I, Ebner E, Hinzmann B, et al. Molecular profiling of laser-microdissected matched tumor and normal breast tissue identifies karyopherin α 2 as a potential novel prognostic marker in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2006;3950-60.
80. Kim I, Kim D, Han S, Chin M, Nam H, Cho H, et al. Genes: structure and regulation: truncated form of importin α identified in breast cancer cell inhibits nuclear import of p53. J Biol Chem 2000;275:23139-45.
81. Lechardeur D, Sohn K, Haardt M, Joshi PB, Monck M, Graham RW, et al. Metabolic instability of plasmid DNA in the cytosol: a potential barrier to gene transfer. Gene Ther 1999;482-97.
82. Dauty E, Verkman AS. Actin cytoskeleton as the principal determinant of size-dependent DNA mobility in cytoplasm: a new barrier for non-viral gene delivery. J Biol Chem [Internet] 2005 Mar 4 [cited 2014 Oct 31];280:7823-8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15632160.
83. Lee TWR, Lawrence FJ, Dauksaite V, Akusja G, Blair GE, Matthews DA. Precursor of human adenovirus core polypeptide Mu targets the nucleolus and modulates the expression of E2 proteins. J Gen Virol 2004;85:185-96.
84. Wagstaff KM, Glover DJ, Tremethick DJ, Jans DA. Histone-mediated transduction as an efficient means for gene delivery. Mol Ther 2007;15:721-31.
85. Yi W-J, Yang J, Li C, Wang H-Y, Liu C-W, Tao L, et al. Enhanced nuclear import and transfection efficiency of TAT peptidebased gene delivery systems modified by additional nuclear localization signals. Bioconjug Chem [Internet]. 2012 Jan 18;23:125-34. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22148643.
86. Wang T, Upponi JR, Torchilin VP. Design of multifunctional non-viral gene vectors to overcome physiological barriers: dilemmas and strategies. Int J Pharm 2012;427:3-20.