4.6 Article

Direct Translocation as Major Cellular Uptake for CADY Self-Assembling Peptide-Based Nanoparticles

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 6, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025924

关键词

-

资金

  1. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  2. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR- ANR-06-BLAN-0071]
  3. Estonian Science Foundation [ESF8705]
  4. Estonian Ministry of Education and Research [180019s11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cell penetrating peptides constitute a potent approach to overcome the limitations of in vivo siRNA delivery. We recently proposed a peptide-based nanoparticle system, CADY, for efficient delivery of siRNA into numerous cell lines. CADY is a secondary amphipathic peptide that forms stable complexes with siRNA thereby improving both their cellular uptake and biological response. With the aim of understanding the cellular uptake mechanism of CADY: siRNA complexes, we have combined biochemical, confocal and electron microscopy approaches. In the present work, we provide evidence that the major route for CADY: siRNA cellular uptake involves direct translocation through the membrane but not the endosomal pathway. We have demonstrated that CADY: siRNA complexes do not colocalize with most endosomal markers and remain fully active in the presence of inhibitors of the endosomal pathway. Moreover, neither electrostatic interactions with cell surface heparan sulphates nor membrane potential are essential for CADY: siRNA cell entry. In contrast, we have shown that CADY: siRNA complexes clearly induce a transient cell membrane permeabilization, which is rapidly restored by cell membrane fluidity. Therefore, we propose that direct translocation is the major gate for cell entry of CADY: siRNA complexes. Membrane perturbation and uptake are driven mainly by the ability of CADY to interact with phospholipids within the cell membrane, followed by rapid localization of the complex in the cytoplasm, without affecting cell integrity or viability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据