4.8 Article

Crescent-Shaped Supramolecular Tetrapeptide Nanostructures

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 142, Issue 47, Pages 20058-20065

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.0c09399

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DMR-1454754]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01GM123508]
  3. Dreyfus Foundation through a Camille Dreyfus Teacher-Scholar Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-assembly of amphiphilic peptide-based building blocks gives rise to a plethora of interesting nanostructures such as ribbons, fibers, and tubes. However, it remains a great challenge to employ peptide self-assembly to directly produce nanostructures with lower symmetry than these highly symmetric motifs. We report here our discovery that persistent and regular crescent nanostructures with a diameter of 28 +/- 3 nm formed from a series of tetrapeptides with the general structure AdK(S)K(S)EX (Ad = adamantyl group, K-S = lysine residue functionalized with an S-aroylthiooxime (SATO) group, E = glutamic acid residue, and X = variable amino acid residue). In the presence of cysteine, the biological signaling gas hydrogen sulfide (H2S) was released from the SATO units of the crescent nanostructures, termed peptide-H2S donor conjugates (PHDCs), reducing levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in macrophage cells. Additional in vitro studies showed that the crescent nanostructures alleviated cytotoxicity induced by phorbol 12-myristate-13-acetate more effectively than common H2S donors and a PHDC of a similar chemical structure, AdK(S)K(S)E, that formed short nanoworms instead of nanocrescents. Cell internalization studies indicated that nanocrescent-forming PHDCs were more effective in reducing ROS levels in macrophages because they entered into and remained in cells better than nanoworms, highlighting how nanostructure morphology can affect bioactivity in drug delivery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available