Incubation of ELP-mmpL-CPP with MMP-2 produces cleaved CPP
Figure 2A depicts how ELP-mmpL-CPP would be cleaved by MMP, producing ELP (60KDa) and cleaved CPP (Tat peptide, 3KDa), while the other construct, ELP-CPP-Dox (63KDa), will not be digested by MMP. This hypothesis was verified by the following experiments. MMP-2 was used for the digestion in this experiment since MMP-2 is involved in the degradation of extracellular matrices in tumors and is overexpressed in most tumors compared with normal tissues (20). After incubation of each rhodamine (rho)-labeled construct (ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho and ELP-CPP-rho) with MMP-2, the reactant was run on SDS-PAGE and analyzed by both silver staining and fluorescence scanning (Figure 2B). Silver-stained gels revealed that MMP-digested ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho produced two bands (lane ② in the left panel); the upper one for ELP (60 kDa) and the other for cleaved CPP-rho (3 kDa), while ELP-CPP-rho digestion produced only one band (lane ①in the left panel) which represents undigested ELP-CPP-rho. However, when the gel was scanned for fluorescence, each reactant showed only one band. Since rhodamine was conjugated to the C-terminal of the CPP (Tat peptide), MMP-digestion produced one single fluorescent band (CPP-rho, 3 kDa) without ELP (lane ② in the right panel), while a band of undigested ELP-CPP-rho fluoresced at around 63kDa, as with the silver-stained gel (lane ①in the right panel).
MMP-2 digestion increases the cellular uptake of CPP-rhodamine in breast cancer cells
MMP-digestion will produce CPP-rhodamine (rho), which is smaller than the whole construct, ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho. This small size would be a primary contributor for facilitated uptake by cells. Cells treated with MMP-digested ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho and ELP-CPP-rho, respectively, were analyzed for uptake ability via flow cytometry. In Figure 3A, cells treated with cleaved CPP-rho (from ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho) showed up to five times higher uptake rates than the ELP-CPP-rho treated group in three cancer cell lines. This improved cellular uptake was also evident in observation with a fluorescence microscope (Figure 3B).
Cleaved CPP-Dox kills breast cancer cells more efficiently than non-cleaved ELP-CPP
Rhodamine was replaced by doxorubicin to investigate whether improved uptake of cleaved CPP will contribute to cytotoxocity. Figure 3C compares the cytotoxicities of MMP-2 digested ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox and ELP-CPP-Dox against three cancer cell lines. Improved cytotoxicity was observed in MMP-2 digested ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox treated cells over ELP-CPP-Dox. These results suggest that MMP digestion of ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox results in increased uptake of cargo molecules and facilitated death of cancer cells by cleaved CPP-Dox.
Cleaved CPP-Dox deposits in and kills Dox-resistant cancer cells.
To investigate whether cleaved CPP-Dox is able to penetrate and kill even Dox-resistant cancer cells, comparison of cytoxotoxicities and uptake rates of MMP-cleaved CPP-Dox were made between Dox-resistant cells (NCI-ADR, MESSA-5DX) and Dox-sensitive cells (MCF7, MES-SA).
Figure 4A shows the validated Dox resistance in MCF/ADR and MESSA-5DX, and cleaved CPP-Dox from ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox showed more cell killing than ELP-CPP-Dox at 4uM Dox equivalence. Confocal microscopic images of MCF/ADR cells show that cleaved CPP-Dox from ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox were taken up by MCF/ADR more than the other groups; free Dox and ELP-CPP-Dox (Figure 4B). This was also confirmed by flow cytometry (Figure 5C). The uptake rate of MMP-digested CPP-Dox in MCF/ADR was almost doubled compared with those of free Dox and ELP-CPP-Dox. These results suggest that MMP-cleaved CPP-Dox can penetrate and kill even Dox-resistant cancer cells probably with help of a CPP (Tat peptide). One limitation in this experiment to mention is that 4uM of doxorubicin equivalent dose is the maximum concentration that can be reached from the current cleavage assay protocol; further optimization of the protocol may enable generation of higher concentration of each drug and calculation of IC50 to compare the cytotoxicity of each treatment.
MMP-releasing HT-1080 can cleave ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho and take up cleaved CPP-rho.
Given that MMP-cleaved CCP-dox can inhibit proliferation in Dox-resistance breast cancer cell lines, this ELP-mmpL-CPP-Dox system was further validated using HT-10180, a fibrosarcoma cancer cell line, producing endogenous MMP2 and MMP9. This experiment shows that the ELP-mmpL-CPP construct can also be digested by endogenous MMP enzyme and release CPP-cargo molecules. MMP-releasing HT1080 cells were incubated with either ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho or ELP-CPP-rho for 4hrs, and each group of treated cells was processed either for flow cytometry or fluorescence microscopy. In flow cytometry, cells incubated with the ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho group had twice the rhodamine signal than did the ELP-CPP-rho group. However, this increased uptake was reversed by pretreatment with GM6001, an MMP catalytic inhibitor (Figure 5A). This finding was further confirmed by fluorescence microscopy, with the rhodamine particles being found in the nucleus of HT1080 cells treated with ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho (Figure 5B). Uptake of these particles, as in the flow cytometry experiment, were also abolished by GM6001 pretreatment. GM6001 prevents MMP digestion, and undigested ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho was likely washed off the cells during the rinsing step. These results demonstrate that ELP-mmpL-CPP-rho is digested by intrinsic MMP released from HT-1080, and the resultant cleaved CPP-rho penetrates the HT-1080 cells.