4.6 Article

Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging of Mammalian Cells and Xenograft Tumors with SNAP-Tag

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fluorescence in the near-infrared (NIR) spectral region is suitable for in vivo imaging due to its reduced background and high penetration capability compared to visible fluorescence. SNAP(f) is a fast-labeling variant of SNAP-tag that reacts with a fluorescent dye-conjugated benzylguanine (BG) substrate, leading to covalent attachment of the fluorescent dye to the SNAP(f). This property makes SNAP(f) a valuable tool for fluorescence imaging. The NIR fluorescent substrate BG-800, a conjugate between BG and IRDye 800CW, was synthesized and characterized in this study. HEK293, MDA-MB-231 and SK-OV-3 cells stably expressing SNAP(f)-Beta-2 adrenergic receptor (SNAP(f)-ADR beta 2) fusion protein were created. The ADR beta 2 portion of the protein directs the localization of the protein to the cell membrane. The expression of SNAP(f)-ADR beta 2 in the stable cell lines was confirmed by the reaction between BG-800 substrate and cell lysates. Microscopic examination confirmed that SNAP(f)-ADR beta 2 was localized on the cell membrane. The signal intensity of the labeled cells was dependent on the BG-800 concentration. In vivo imaging study showed that BG-800 could be used to visualize xenograph tumors expressing SNAP(f)-ADR beta 2. However, the background signal was relatively high, which may be a reflection of non-specific accumulation of BG-800 in the skin. To address the background issue, quenched substrates that only fluoresce upon reaction with SNAP-tag were synthesized and characterized. Although the fluorescence was successfully quenched, in vivo imaging with the quenched substrate CBG-800-PEG-QC1 failed to visualize the SNAP(f)-ADR beta 2 expressing tumor, possibly due to the reduced reaction rate. Further improvement is needed to apply this system for in vivo imaging.

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