Advertisement

Practical Considerations in the Design and Use of Immunologically Active Fibrillar Peptide Assemblies

  • Carolina Mora Solano
  • Yi Wen
  • Huifang Han
  • Joel H. Collier
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1777)

Abstract

The design, formulation, and immunological evaluation of self-assembling peptide materials is relatively straightforward. Indeed, one of the advantages of synthetic self-assembling peptides is that one can progress from initial concept to in vivo testing in a matter of days. However, because these materials are supramolecular, working with them is not without some practical challenges, and subtle changes in design, synthesis, handling, and formulation can affect the materials’ immunogenicity. This chapter is intended to communicate some of these practical aspects of working with these materials that are not always enumerated in conventional research papers. Epitope considerations, peptide synthesis, purification, storage, nanofiber formation, quality control, immunological evaluation, and the overall phenotypic characteristics of the immune responses to be expected from these materials are discussed.

Key words

Vaccine Supramolecular Immunogenicity Immunization 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Work in our group on immunologically active self-assembled materials has been funded by the National Institutes of Health: The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) under grant number 1R01EB009701, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) under grant number 1R01AI118182, and the National Institute for Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) under grant number R21AR066244. The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of these agencies. None of the authors have financial conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Rudra JS, Tian YF, Jung JP et al (2010) A self-assembling peptide acting as an immune adjuvant. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:622–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rudra JS, Mishra S, Chong AS et al (2012) Self-assembled peptide nanofibers raising durable antibody responses against a malaria epitope. Biomaterials 33:6476–6484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen J, Pompano RR, Santiago FW et al (2013) The use of self-adjuvanting nanofiber vaccines to elicit high-affinity B cell responses to peptide antigens without inflammation. Biomaterials 34:8776–8785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pompano RR, Chen J, Verbus EA et al (2014) Titrating T-cell epitopes within self-assembled vaccines optimizes CD4+ helper T cell and antibody outputs. Adv Healthc Mater 3:1898–1908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mora Solano C, Collier JH (2014) Engaging adaptive immunity with biomaterials. J Mater Chem B 2:2409–2421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Huang Z-H, Shi L, Ma J-W et al (2012) A totally synthetic, self-assembling, adjuvant-free MUC1 glycopeptide vaccine for cancer therapy. J Am Chem Soc 134:8730–8733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wen Y, Collier JH (2015) Supramolecular peptide vaccines: tuning adaptive immunity. Curr Opin Immunol 35:73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rudra JS, Sun T, Bird KC et al (2012) Modulating adaptive immune responses to peptide self-assemblies. ACS Nano 6:1557–1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hudalla GA, Modica JA, Tian YF et al (2013) A self-adjuvanting supramolecular vaccine carrying a folded protein antigen. Adv Healthc Mater 2:1114–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hudalla GA, Sun T, Gasiorowski JZ et al (2014) Gradated assembly of multiple proteins into supramolecular nanomaterials. Nat Mater 13:829–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gasiorowski JZ, Collier JH (2011) Directed intermixing in multicomponent self-assembling biomaterials. Biomacromolecules 12:3549–3558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun T, Han H, Hudalla GA et al (2015) Thermal stability of self-assembled peptide vaccine materials. Acta Biomater 30:62–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Malyala P, Singh M (2008) Endotoxin limits in formulations for preclinical research. J Pharm Sci 97:2041–2044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chesson CB, Huelsmann EJ, Lacek AT et al (2013) Antigenic peptide nanofibers elicit adjuvant-free CD8(+) T cell responses. Vaccine 32:1174–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vita R, Zarebski L, Greenbaum JA et al (2010) The immune epitope database 2.0. Nucleic Acids Res 38:D854–D862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim Y, Ponomarenko J, Zhu Z et al (2012) Immune epitope database analysis resource. Nucleic Acids Res 40:W525–W530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nielsen M, Marcatili P (2015) Prediction of antibody epitopes. Methods Mol Biol 1348:23–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu J, Zhang W (2014) Databases for B-cell epitopes. Methods Mol Biol 1184:135–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tung C-W (2014) Databases for T-cell epitopes. Methods Mol Biol 1184:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nagarkar RP, Schneider JP (2008) Synthesis and primary characterization of self-assembled peptide-based hydrogels. Methods Mol Biol 474:61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hyde C, Johnson T, Sheppard RC (1992) Internal aggregation during solid phase peptide synthesis. Dimethyl sulfoxide as a powerful dissociating solvent. J Chem Soc Chem Commun:1573–1575.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C39920001573
  22. 22.
    Arnesen T (2011) Towards a functional understanding of protein N-terminal acetylation. PLoS Biol 9:e1001074.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001074 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wallace RJ (1992) Acetylation of peptides inhibits their degradation by rumen micro-organisms. Br J Nutr 68:365–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sélo I, Négroni L, Créminon C et al (1996) Preferential labeling of α-amino N-terminal groups in peptides by biotin: application to the detection of specific anti-peptide antibodies by enzyme immunoassays. J Immunol Methods 199:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Howl J, Wang X, Kirk CJ et al (1993) Fluorescent and biotinylated linear peptides as selective bifunctional ligands for the V1a vasopressin receptor. Eur J Biochem 213:711–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buranda T, Lopez GP, Keij J et al (1999) Peptides, antibodies, and FRET on beads in flow cytometry: a model system using fluoresceinated and biotinylated beta-endorphin. Cytometry 37:21–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Farley RA, Tran CM, Carilli CT et al (1984) The amino acid sequence of a fluorescein-labeled peptide from the active site of (Na,K)-ATPase. J Biol Chem 259:9532–9535PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Richard JP, Melikov K, Vives E et al (2003) Cell-penetrating peptides. A reevaluation of the mechanism of cellular uptake. J Biol Chem 278:585–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Futaki S, Suzuki T, Ohashi W et al (2001) Arginine-rich peptides. An abundant source of membrane-permeable peptides having potential as carriers for intracellular protein delivery. J Biol Chem 276:5836–5840CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carolina Mora Solano
    • 1
  • Yi Wen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Huifang Han
    • 1
  • Joel H. Collier
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biomedical EngineeringDuke UniversityDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations