Bioengineered yeast-derived vacuoles with enhanced tissue-penetrating ability for targeted cancer therapy

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 113, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 710-715

  Gujrati, Vipul ^a   Lee, Miriam ^b   Ko, Young Joon ^b   Lee, Sangeun ^b   Kim, Daejin ^a   Kim, Hyungjun ^a   Kang, Sukmo ^a   Lee, Soyoung ^a   Kim, Jinjoo ^a   Jeon, Hyungsu ^a   Kim, Sun Chang ^a   Jun, Youngsoo ^b   Jon, Sangyong ^a  

^a Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

^b Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Affibody; Bioengineered yeast; Cancer therapy; Drug delivery; Yeast vacuoles

Indexed keywords

DOXORUBICIN; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; NANOCARRIER; NANOPARTICLE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; ERBB2 PROTEIN, HUMAN;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BIOENGINEERING; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CELL VACUOLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEM; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG TARGETING; ENDOCYTOSIS; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; TUMOR XENOGRAFT; ANIMAL; ANTIBODY SPECIFICITY; BLOOD; C57BL MOUSE; CELL DEATH; DRUG EFFECTS; DRUG RELEASE; DRUG SCREENING; KINETICS; METABOLISM; NEOPLASMS; RAW 264.7 CELL LINE; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION;

ANIMALS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BIOENGINEERING; CELL DEATH; DOXORUBICIN; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; DRUG LIBERATION; KINETICS; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; MOLECULAR TARGETED THERAPY; NEOPLASMS; ORGAN SPECIFICITY; RAW 264.7 CELLS; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION; VACUOLES; XENOGRAFT MODEL ANTITUMOR ASSAYS;

EID: 84955099141     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1509371113     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Davis ME, Chen ZG, Shin DM (2008) Nanoparticle therapeutics: An emerging treatment modality for cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7(9):771-782.
2. Chauhan VP, Jain RK (2013) Strategies for advancing cancer nanomedicine. Nat Mater 12(11):958-962.
3. Shi J, Votruba AR, Farokhzad OC, Langer R (2010) Nanotechnology in drug delivery and tissue engineering: From discovery to applications. Nano Lett 10(9):3223-3230.
4. Chow EKH, Ho D (2013) Cancer nanomedicine: From drug delivery to imaging. Sci Transl Med 5(216):216rv4.
5. Adair JH, Parette MP, Altinoʇlu EI, Kester M (2010) Nanoparticulate alternatives for drug delivery. ACS Nano 4(9):4967-4970.
6. Peer D, et al. (2007) Nanocarriers as an emerging platform for cancer therapy. Nat Nanotechnol 2(12):751-760.
7. Petros RA, DeSimone JM (2010) Strategies in the design of nanoparticles for therapeutic applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9(8):615-627.
8. Desai N (2012) Challenges in development of nanoparticle-based therapeutics. AAPS J 14(2):282-295.
9. Yoo JW, Irvine DJ, Discher DE, Mitragotri S (2011) Bio-inspired, bioengineered and biomimetic drug delivery carriers. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10(7):521-535.
10. MacDiarmid JA, et al. (2007) Bacterially derived 400 nm particles for encapsulation and cancer cell targeting of chemotherapeutics. Cancer Cell 11(5):431-445.
11. Alvarez-Erviti L, et al. (2011) Delivery of siRNA to the mouse brain by systemic injection of targeted exosomes. Nat Biotechnol 29(4):341-345.
12. Gujrati V, et al. (2014) Bioengineered bacterial outer membrane vesicles as cell-specific drug-delivery vehicles for cancer therapy. ACS Nano 8(2):1525-1537.
13. MacDiarmid JA, et al. (2009) Sequential treatment of drug-resistant tumors with targeted minicells containing siRNA or a cytotoxic drug. Nat Biotechnol 27(7): 643-651.
14. Jang SC, et al. (2013) Bioinspired exosome-mimetic nanovesicles for targeted delivery of chemotherapeutics to malignant tumors. ACS Nano 7(9):7698-7710.
15. Nevoigt E (2008) Progress in metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 72(3):379-412.
16. A A (1992) Yeast genome project:300,000 and counting. Science 256(5056):462.
17. Armstrong J (2010) Yeast vacuoles: More than a model lysosome. Trends Cell Biol 20(10):580-585.
18. Klionsky DJ, Herman PK, Emr SD (1990) The fungal vacuole: Composition, function, and biogenesis. Microbiol Rev 54(3):266-292.
19. Weisman LS (2003) Yeast vacuole inheritance and dynamics. Annu Rev Genet 37: 435-460.
20. Weisman LS (2006) Organelles on the move: Insights from yeast vacuole inheritance. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 7(4):243-252.
21. Orlova A, et al. (2006) Tumor imaging using a picomolar affinity HER2 binding affibody molecule. Cancer Res 66(8):4339-4348.
22. Qvarnström OF, Simonsson M, Carlsson J, Tran TA (2011) Effects of affinity on binding of HER2-targeting Affibody molecules: Model experiments in breast cancer spheroids. Int J Oncol 39(2):353-359.
23. Li SC, Kane PM (2009) The yeast lysosome-like vacuole: Endpoint and crossroads. Biochim Biophys Acta 1793(4):650-663.
24. Ostrowicz CW, Meiringer CTA, Ungermann C (2008) Yeast vacuole fusion: A model system for eukaryotic endomembrane dynamics. Autophagy 4(1):5-19.
25. Wickner W (2010) Membrane fusion: Five lipids, four SNAREs, three chaperones, two nucleotides, and a Rab, all dancing in a ring on yeast vacuoles. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 26:115-136.
26. Wickner W (2002) Yeast vacuoles and membrane fusion pathways. EMBO J 21(6): 1241-1247.
27. Haas A, Scheglmann D, Lazar T, Gallwitz D, Wickner W (1995) The GTPase Ypt7p of Saccharomyces cerevisiae is required on both partner vacuoles for the homotypic fusion step of vacuole inheritance. EMBO J 14(21):5258-5270.
28. Jun Y, Wickner W (2007) Assays of vacuole fusion resolve the stages of docking, lipid mixing, and content mixing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(32):13010-13015.
29. Coonrod EM, et al. (2013) Homotypic vacuole fusion in yeast requires organelle acidification and not the V-ATPase membrane domain. Dev Cell 27(4):462-468.
30. Zieger M, Mayer A (2012) Yeast vacuoles fragment in an asymmetrical two-phase process with distinct protein requirements. Mol Biol Cell 23(17):3438-3449.
31. Segev N (2001) Ypt and Rab GTPases: Insight into functions through novel interactions. Curr Opin Cell Biol 13(4):500-511.
32. Hickey CM, Stroupe C, Wickner W (2009) The major role of the Rab Ypt7p in vacuole fusion is supporting HOPS membrane association. J Biol Chem 284(24):16118-16125.
33. Wiederhold E, et al. (2009) The yeast vacuolar membrane proteome. Mol Cell Proteomics 8(2):380-392.
34. Kunz-Schughart LA (1999) Multicellular tumor spheroids: Intermediates between monolayer culture and in vivo tumor. Cell Biol Int 23(3):157-161.
35. Perche F, Patel NR, Torchilin VP (2012) Accumulation and toxicity of antibody-targeted doxorubicin-loaded PEG-PE micelles in ovarian cancer cell spheroid model. J Control Release 164(1):95-102.
36. Hirschhaeuser F, et al. (2010) Multicellular tumor spheroids: An underestimated tool is catching up again. J Biotechnol 148(1):3-15.
37. Lee JH, et al. (2007) Artificially engineered magnetic nanoparticles for ultra-sensitive molecular imaging. Nat Med 13(1):95-99.
38. Haas A, Wickner W (1996) Homotypic vacuole fusion requires Sec17p (yeast alpha-SNAP) and Sec18p (yeast NSF). EMBO J 15(13):3296-3305.
39. Ko YJ, Lee M, Kang K, Song WK, Jun Y (2014) In vitro assay using engineered yeast vacuoles for neuronal SNARE-mediated membrane fusion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(21):7677-7682.
40. Friedrich J, Seidel C, Ebner R, Kunz-Schughart LA (2009) Spheroid-based drug screen: Considerations and practical approach. Nat Protoc 4(3):309-324.
41. Yu MK, et al. (2008) Drug-loaded superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for combined cancer imaging and therapy in vivo. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 47(29): 5362-5365.
42. Bagalkot V, Farokhzad OC, Langer R, Jon S (2006) An aptamer-doxorubicin physical conjugate as a novel targeted drug-delivery platform. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 45(48):8149-8152.
43. Tagami T, Ernsting MJ, Li SD (2011) Efficient tumor regression by a single and low dose treatment with a novel and enhanced formulation of thermosensitive liposomal doxorubicin. J Control Release 152(2):303-309.
44. Letsch M, Schally AV, Busto R, Bajo AM, Varga JL (2003) Growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) antagonists inhibit the proliferation of androgen-dependent and -independent prostate cancers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(3):1250-1255.
45. Hajjar AM, Ernst RK, Tsai JH, Wilson CB, Miller SI (2002) Human Toll-like receptor 4 recognizes host-specific LPS modifications. Nat Immunol 3(4):354-359.