Team:Marburg:Project:Tumor
From 2014.igem.org
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
<span class="caption"> | <span class="caption"> | ||
Figure 1: (A) Scheme of the DARPin library design. | Figure 1: (A) Scheme of the DARPin library design. | ||
- | B) Tetrameric StrepDARPidin construct. Four DARPin | + | B) Tetrameric <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> |
+ | construct. Four DARPin | ||
Ec1 molecules were fused via linker peptides to a | Ec1 molecules were fused via linker peptides to a | ||
streptavidin protein. At the N terminus the Ec1 | streptavidin protein. At the N terminus the Ec1 | ||
Line 48: | Line 49: | ||
<html><h2><a name="production">Production of a DARPin-Strep module for specific recognition of EpCAM in lung cancer cells</a></h2></html> | <html><h2><a name="production">Production of a DARPin-Strep module for specific recognition of EpCAM in lung cancer cells</a></h2></html> | ||
- | To address the goal of creating a CancerSURFer for efficient and rapid targeting of cancer cells, we first had to synthesize a Strep-DARPin fusion construct (StrepDARPidin). | + | To address the goal of creating a CancerSURFer for efficient and rapid targeting of cancer cells, we first had to synthesize a Strep-DARPin fusion construct (<html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html>). |
- | Template DNA for thetetrameric StrepDARPidin construct was commercially synthesized by IDT (Integrated DNA Technologies) and cloned into a pET-plasmide for overexpressionof the protein in ''E.coli'' BL21 (DE3).Streptavidin is not soluble when overexpressed and remains in inclusion bodies, so we had to apply a refolding protocol to (re)-gain StrepDARPidin in sufficient amounts (Howarth and Ting, 2008). | + | Template DNA for thetetrameric <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> construct was commercially synthesized by IDT (Integrated DNA Technologies) and cloned into a pET-plasmide for overexpressionof the protein in ''E.coli'' BL21 (DE3). |
- | After refolding the protein was purified in a two-step process: Ni-NTA-affinity purification and size-exclusion chromatography (Figure 3).The calculated protein mass of the monomeric StrepDARPidin is 31 kDa. | + | Streptavidin is not soluble when overexpressed and remains in inclusion bodies, so we had to apply a refolding protocol to (re)-gain <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> in sufficient amounts (Howarth and Ting, 2008). |
+ | After refolding the protein was purified in a two-step process: Ni-NTA-affinity purification and size-exclusion chromatography (Figure 3).The calculated protein mass of the monomeric <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> is 31 kDa. | ||
The tetramer should have a size of 124 kDa and is visible above the highest marker line (116 kDa; Figure 3). | The tetramer should have a size of 124 kDa and is visible above the highest marker line (116 kDa; Figure 3). | ||
Line 59: | Line 61: | ||
<span class="caption"> | <span class="caption"> | ||
Figure 3: | Figure 3: | ||
- | Purification of StrepDARPidin. Size-exclusion chromatogram and | + | Purification of <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html>. Size-exclusion chromatogram and |
- | coomassie stained SDS-PAGE of purified StrepDARPidin. Upper SDS-PAGE: | + | coomassie stained SDS-PAGE of purified <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html>. Upper SDS-PAGE: |
Fractions taken from Ni-NTA purification. M: marker, L: lysate, FT: flow through, | Fractions taken from Ni-NTA purification. M: marker, L: lysate, FT: flow through, | ||
W: wash, E: elution. Lower SDS-PAGE: Samples of peak fractions taken from size-exclusion | W: wash, E: elution. Lower SDS-PAGE: Samples of peak fractions taken from size-exclusion | ||
fractions. Samples on the right side have been cooked prior to loading showing the monomeric | fractions. Samples on the right side have been cooked prior to loading showing the monomeric | ||
- | StrepDARPidin. | + | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html>. |
</span> | </span> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
Line 70: | Line 72: | ||
- | Protein containing fractions were analyzed on a coomassie stained SDS-PAGE and refolding was verified by incubating the eluate for 10 min at 95°C (Fig 3). The peak fractions after size-exclusion were pooled and concentrated for further analysis. | + | Protein containing fractions were analyzed on a coomassie stained SDS-PAGE and refolding was verified by incubating the eluate for 10 min at 95°C (Fig 3). |
+ | The peak fractions after size-exclusion were pooled and concentrated for further analysis. | ||
- | In the next step StrepDARPidin binding specificity to EpCAM at lung and colon cancer cells was assayed to check functionality of the engineered StrepDARPidin. | + | In the next step <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> |
- | Colon cancer cells (Caco-2) and lung cancer cells (A549) which were known to highly express EpCAM (Maaser and Borlak, 2008) were treated with StrepDARPidin in serial dilutions. | + | binding specificity to EpCAM at lung and colon cancer cells was assayed to check functionality of the engineered |
+ | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html>. | ||
+ | Colon cancer cells (Caco-2) and lung cancer cells (A549) which were known to highly express EpCAM (Maaser and Borlak, 2008) were treated with | ||
+ | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> in serial dilutions. | ||
After washing they were incubated with anti-His-antibody-Alexa488 conjugate. | After washing they were incubated with anti-His-antibody-Alexa488 conjugate. | ||
Fibroblasts (3T3 wild typecells) were used as EpCAM-negative control. Fluorescence was quantified at 520 nm (Fig.4C)with a fluorometer. | Fibroblasts (3T3 wild typecells) were used as EpCAM-negative control. Fluorescence was quantified at 520 nm (Fig.4C)with a fluorometer. | ||
Line 152: | Line 158: | ||
</html> | </html> | ||
- | To investigate whether the purified Flagellin-D2-Strep is able to interact with Streptavidinin vitro prior to labeling intact filaments from ''B. subtilis'' flagella, we used Streptavidin-pulldown assays to confirm the functionality. | + | To investigate whether the purified Flagellin-D2-Strep is able to interact with Streptavidinin vitro prior to labeling intact filaments from |
- | We therefore immobilized purified Flagellin-D2-Strep and Flagellin-Strep on Streptavidin- and GST-beads (Figure 6B). Both engineered variants of Flagellin bound to Streptavidin-beads but not GST and confirmed that the Strep-Tag is accessible and functional (Figure 5B, lanes 2 and 3). | + | ''B. subtilis'' flagella, we used Streptavidin-pulldown assays to confirm the functionality. |
+ | We therefore immobilized purified Flagellin-D2-Strep and Flagellin-Strep on Streptavidin- and GST-beads (Figure 6B). Both engineered variants | ||
+ | of Flagellin bound to Streptavidin-beads but not GST and confirmed that the Strep-Tag is accessible and functional (Figure 5B, lanes 2 and 3). | ||
- | We further wanted to know if our functional StrepDARPidin is capable of binding to the engineered Flagellin variants. This was the last and crucial step that had to be verified before docking of StrepDARPidin to the flagellar filaments could be performed. | + | We further wanted to know if our functional |
- | Purified proteins were mixed in different ratios and precipitation was observed. Samples from the supernatant (soluble fraction) and the pellet (insoluble fraction) were loaded on a SDS-PAGE showing that the pellet contained a huge amount of StrepDARPidin and the Flagellin variants (Figure 5C). | + | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> is capable of binding to the engineered Flagellin variants. |
- | We assume that the strong interaction of Streptavidin with the Strep-Tag leads to an aggregation of Flagellin-Strep variants followed by precipitation (Figure 5C, lanes 6-9). | + | This was the last and crucial step that had to be verified before docking of |
+ | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> to the flagellar filaments could be performed. | ||
+ | Purified proteins were mixed in different ratios and precipitation was observed. Samples from the supernatant (soluble fraction) and the | ||
+ | pellet (insoluble fraction) were loaded on a SDS-PAGE showing that the pellet contained a huge amount of | ||
+ | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> and the Flagellin variants (Figure 5C). | ||
+ | We assume that the strong interaction of Streptavidin with the Strep-Tag leads to an aggregation of Flagellin-Strep variants followed by | ||
+ | precipitation (Figure 5C, lanes 6-9). | ||
- | The D2-Strep variant of Flagellin was also used for replacement of the native Flagellin in ''B. subtilis'' as described before (see SURFing for detailed information) to generate a strain exposing the Strep-Tag on the surface of the flagellar filament. | + | The D2-Strep variant of Flagellin was also used for replacement of the native Flagellin in ''B. subtilis'' as described before |
- | In vitro assays confirmed that the Flagellin-D2-Strep was stable and functional but we had no information about the incorporation of the engineered Flagellin variant into the flagellar filament in vivo. | + | (see SURFing for detailed information) to generate a strain exposing the Strep-Tag on the surface of the flagellar filament. |
- | Therefore, we inoculated swimming plates (containing 0.3 % agar) and swarming plates (containing 0.7 % agar) with ''B. subtilis'' wild type and D2-Strep cells. | + | In vitro assays confirmed that the Flagellin-D2-Strep was stable and functional but we had no information about the incorporation |
- | The mutant strain showed only slightly slower spreading on both plates, indicating that both single cellular and multi cellular movement is not affected much (Figure 6E, F). | + | of the engineered Flagellin variant into the flagellar filament in vivo. |
- | Additionally we employed negative staining transmission electron microscopy and could show that D2-Strep cells are as much flagellated as the wild type (Figure 6A, B). | + | Therefore, we inoculated swimming plates (containing 0.3 % agar) and swarming plates (containing 0.7 % agar) with ''B. subtilis'' |
+ | wild type and D2-Strep cells. | ||
+ | The mutant strain showed only slightly slower spreading on both plates, indicating that both single cellular and multi cellular | ||
+ | movement is not affected much (Figure 6E, F). | ||
+ | Additionally we employed negative staining transmission electron microscopy and could show that D2-Strep cells are as much | ||
+ | flagellated as the wild type (Figure 6A, B). | ||
Finally, we can state that our engineered Flagellin variant D2-Strep is fully functional and incorporated into intact flagellar filaments. | Finally, we can state that our engineered Flagellin variant D2-Strep is fully functional and incorporated into intact flagellar filaments. | ||
- | The last step, immobilizing StrepDARPidin on purified filaments, is currently finalized in the laboratory. | + | The last step, immobilizing <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> |
+ | on purified filaments, is currently finalized in the laboratory. | ||
Line 185: | Line 205: | ||
The flagellar filament serves as a huge scaffold that can be loaded with different agents of ones own choice. | The flagellar filament serves as a huge scaffold that can be loaded with different agents of ones own choice. | ||
By fusing the tetrameric Streptavidin to small molecules such as DARPin, a wide range of different applications is imaginable. Combining e.g. StrepDARPidin and fluorescent proteins fused to Streptavidin, cancer cells could be marked during clinical surgeries. | By fusing the tetrameric Streptavidin to small molecules such as DARPin, a wide range of different applications is imaginable. Combining e.g. StrepDARPidin and fluorescent proteins fused to Streptavidin, cancer cells could be marked during clinical surgeries. | ||
- | Cytotoxic agents in combination with StrepDARPidin would directly lead to cancer cell lysis without a collateral damage to surrounding tissues making StrepDARPidin an imaginable antibody alternative for both future diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives. | + | Cytotoxic agents in combination with |
+ | <html><a href="http://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1329000">StrepDARPidin</a></html> would directly lead to cancer | ||
+ | cell lysis without a collateral damage to surrounding tissues making StrepDARPidin an imaginable antibody alternative for both future diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives. | ||
<html> | <html> |
Revision as of 11:04, 17 October 2014
CancerSURF
DARPins (Designed Ankyrin Repeat Proteins) serve as highly potential next generation protein drugs. They are derived from natural ankyrin repeat proteins that are the most common protein-protein interaction motif and predominantly found in eukaryotic proteins (Al Khodor et al. 2010). Also the genomes of various pathogenic or symbiotic bacteria and eukaryotic viruses contain several genes encoding ankyrin repeat proteins. Typically, two to four library modules, each corresponding to oneankyrin repeat of 33 amino acids with seven variable positions, are encased by two caps (N- and C-)(Figure 1A). Next to the resulting high diversity, these repeating modules reach an extremely small size compared to conventional IgG antibodies, preventing a higher tissue penetration. They show an absence of effector functions and can also exert allosteric inhibition mechanisms.