
Web Release Date: May 13,
Nanotube Molecular Transporters: Internalization of Carbon Nanotube-Protein Conjugates into Mammalian Cells
Department of Chemistry Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
Received March 10, 2004
Abstract:
The interactions between various functionalized carbon nanotubes and several types of human cancer cells are explored. We have prepared modified nanotubes and have shown that these can be derivatized in a way that enables attachment of small molecules and of proteins, the latter through a novel noncovalent association. The functionalized carbon nanotubes enter nonadherent human cancer cells as well as adherent cell lines (CHO and 3T3) and by themselves are not toxic. While the fluoresceinated protein streptavidin (MW
60 kD) by itself does not enter cells, it readily enters cells when complexed to a nanotube-biotin transporter and exhibits dose-dependent cytotoxicity. The uptake pathway is consistent with adsorption-mediated endocytosis. The use of carbon nanotubes as molecular transporters could be exploited for various cargos. The biocompatibility and unique physical, electrical, optical, and mechanical properties of nanotubes provide the basis for new classes of materials for drug, protein, and gene delivery applications.
The design of new strategies for the delivery of drugs and
molecular probes into cells is necessitated by the poor cellular
penetration of many small molecules and an increasing number of
macromolecules including proteins and nucleic acids.1 Strategies
in which a poorly permeating drug or probe molecule is covalently
attached to a transporter to produce a cell-penetrating conjugate
offer a solution to this problem. Several classes of transporters have
been investigated including lipids, PEGs, and more recently
peptides.2-5
Stable aqueous suspensions of purified, shortened, and functionalized nanotubes were obtained by oxidation and sonication9,10 of laser-ablated SWNT. Specifically, SWNTs were refluxed in 2.5 M HNO3 for two 36-h periods separated by cup-horn sonication for 30 min [see Supporting Information (SI)]. The resulting mixture was then filtered through a 100-nm pore size polycarbonate filter, rinsed, and resuspended in pure water with sonication. Centrifugation (7000 rpm, 5 min) removed larger unreacted impurities from the solution to afford a stable suspension of 1.
Analysis of 1 by atomic force microscopy revealed mostly short
(~100 nm to 1
m) SWNTs with diameters in the range of 1-5
nm corresponding to mostly isolated individual SWNTs and small
bundles (see SI). No significant amounts of particles were observed
on the substrate, suggesting good purity of the SWNTs in solution.
Zeta potential measurement revealed a surface potential of ~ -75
mV at pH 7 on 1 (see SI), confirming the existence of numerous
negatively charged acidic groups at the sidewalls of the nanotubes.
In pure water, 1 was stable for extended periods of time and did
not agglomerate. In physiological buffer solutions containing ~0.2
M salt, the suspension was less stable and started to aggregate after
2-3 h.
Besides providing a highly stable aqueous suspension of purified, shortened nanotubes, the oxidation/sonication procedure introduced surface carboxylates on the nanotubes for chemical derivatization. Reaction of 1 with EDC and 5-(5-aminopentyl)thioureidyl fluorescein afforded fluorescein-functionalized SWNTs, 2 (Figure 1).
To visualize the interaction of nanotubes with cells, fluorescently
labeled nanotubes 2 (0.05 mg/mL SWNT) were incubated with
HL60 cells for 1 h at 37
C. The cells were washed twice, collected
by centrifugation, and resuspended in growth medium. Confocal
microscopy revealed appreciable fluorescence on the surface and,
more importantly, in the cell interior (Figure 2a).
Having discovered the ability of 2 to enter cells, we sought to
utilize the nanotubes to carry proteins into cells. Toward this end,
1 was treated with EDC and biotin-LC-PEO-amine followed by
dialysis to afford biotin-functionalized SWNTs 3, which was then
incubated with fluoresceinated streptavidin (SA) to afford SWNT-biotin-SA conjugate 4 (Figure 1). To evaluate the ability of
nanotubes to enable the cellular uptake of the attached protein, HL60
cells were incubated with 4 as described above. Visualization of
the SA revealed intense fluorescence inside the cells (Figure 2b).
Importantly, the internalization of SWNT-biotin-SA conjugate
4 illustrates that nanotubes can carry large cargos, in this case SA
(MW
60 kD), and transport them into cells. The uptake of SA
was further confirmed by flow cytometry (Figure 3). The fluorescence of cells incubated with SA alone was only slightlygreater than the background fluorescence of untreated cells (Figure
3a, green and red curves respectively). We systematically varied
the time of cell incubation of 4 ([SWNT]
0.05 mg/mL in the
solution) and found uptake increased with longer incubations, up
to ~4 h (Figure 3b). Upon increasing the concentration of 4 in the
incubation solution, we observed a monotonic increase in the
cellular fluorescence (Figure 3c).
To examine the potential toxicity of SWNT, HL60 cells were incubated with 1, 2, 3, and 4 (1 h, 0.05 mg/mL tubes), isolated by centrifugation and observed after 24 and 48 h. In the case of 1, 2, and 3, no appreciable cell death was observed (see SI). These results indicate that the functionalized SWNT themselves exhibit little toxicity to HL60 cells.
The SWNT-biotin-SA conjugate 4, however, was found to
cause extensive cell death when examined 48 h after the 1-h
incubation with HL60. The degree of cell death was substantial as
evidenced by the large amounts of cell debris observed (see SI).
We found that the onset of appreciable cell death occurred typically
~12 h after the incubation with 4. To further confirm that the
toxicity was due to the delivery of SA into cells, the amount of SA
on the SWNT was reduced by decreasing the [SA] used to load
the SWNT from 2.5 to 0.0625
M (Figure 1c). The observed
toxicity was nearly nonexistent at [SA] < 1.25
M. The dependence
of cell viability on the amount of SA uptake was similar to a
previous observation.17 Consistent with the inability of SA to
transverse the cell membrane alone, no toxicity was observed after
cells were incubated even in highly concentrated solutions of SA.
Significantly, these studies show that the SWNTs not only
internalize the protein but the internalized conjugate also elicits a
functional dose-dependent response.
The results described above with HL60 cells appear to be general
with other cells as well, including Jurkat, Chinese hamster ovary
(CHO), and 3T3 fibroblast cell lines. It has been shown that
hydrophobic forces are responsible for nonspecific binding between
nanotubes and proteins.14 Although the nanotubes used in the current
work contain negatively charged carboxylates along the sidewalls,
such groups are likely only present on defect sites along the tubes.
The unoxidized areas of the nanotubes may still afford regions of
appreciable hydrophobicity. We propose that the nanotubes nonspecifically associate with hydrophobic regions of the cell surface
and internalize by endocytosis.18,19
C (Figure
2d), consistent with the blockage of endocytosis at 4
C.18,19 Further,
we used a red FM 4-64 marker to stain19,20 endosomes formed
around nanotubes during endocytosis and observed yellow color
(Figure 2c) inside cells due to overlapping of green fluorescence
(SWNT conjugates) (Figure 2b) and red-stained endosomes (also
see SI). This provides a direct evidence for endocytosis of nanotubes
conjugates. The nanotubes appear to accumulate in the cytoplasm
in the cells after internalization.
In conclusion, we have prepared modified nanotubes and have shown that these can be derivatized to enable attachment of small molecules and proteins. The functionalized SWNT enter nonadherent as well as adherent cell lines (CHO and 3T3) and by themselves are not toxic. While the fluoresceinated protein SA by itself cannot enter cells, it readily enters cells when complexed to a SWNT-biotin transporter, exhibiting dose-dependent cytotoxicity. The uptake pathway is consistent with endocytosis. SWNT could be exploited as molecular transporters for various cargos. The biocompatibility, unique physical, electrical, optical, and mechanical properties of SWNT provide the basis for new classes of materials for drug, protein, and gene delivery applications.
Support of this work by grants from CPIMA at Stanford University (H.D.), the National Institutes of Health (P.A.W.: CA NIH CA31841, CA31845), and a Packard Fellowship is acknowledged.
Experimental procedures and additional results and discussions. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http:://pubs.acs.org.
* In papers with more than one author, the asterisk indicates the name of the author to whom inquiries about the paper should be addressed.
1. Smith, D. A.; van de Waterbeemd, H. Curr. Opion. Chem. Biol. 1999, 3,
373-378.
2. Bendas, G. Biodrugs 2001, 15, 215-224.
3. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2002, 54.
4. Wright, L. R.; J. B. R.; Wender, P. A. Curr. Protein Peptide Sci. 2003,
4, 105-124.
5. Langel, Ü., Ed.; Cell-Penetrating Peptides: Processes and Applications; CRC Press: Boca Raton, Fla, 2002.
6. Dresselhaus, M. S., Dresselhaus, G., Avouris, P., Eds. Carbon Nanotubes; Springer: Berlin, 2001; Vol. 80.
7. Dai, H. Surf. Sci. 2002, 500, 218-241.
8. Acc. Chem. Res. 2002, 35. Special issue on carbon nanotubes.
9. Chen, J.; Hammon, M. A.; Hu, H.; Chen, Y. S.; Rao, A. M.; Eklund, P.
C.; Haddon, R. C. Science 1998, 282, 95-98.
10. Liu, J.; Rinzler, A. G.; Dai, H.; Hafner, J. H.; Bradley, R. K.; Boul, P. J.;
Lu, A.; Iverson, T.; Shelimov, K.; Huffman, C. B.; Rodriguez-Macias,
F.; Shon, Y.-S.; Lee, T. R.; Colbert, D. T.; Smalley, R. E. Science 1998,
280, 1253-1256.
11. O'Connell, M. J.; Boul, P.; Ericson, L. M.; Huffman, C.; Wang, Y.; Haroz,
E.; Kuper, C.; Tour, J.; Ausman, K.; Smalley, R. E. Chem. Phys. Lett.
2001, 342, 265-271.
12. Chen, R.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, D.; Dai, H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
3838-3839.
13. Erlanger, B. F.; Chen, B.; Zhu, M.; Brus, L. E. Nano Lett. 2001, 1, 465-467.
14. Chen, R. J.; Bangsaruntip, S.; Drouvalakis, K. A.; Kam, N. W. S.; Shim,
M.; Li, Y. M.; Kim, W.; Utz, P. J.; Dai, H. J. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2003, 100, 4984-4989.
15. Mattson, M. P.; Haddon, R. C.; Rao, A. M. J. Mol. Neurosci. 2000, 14,
175-182.
16. Pantarotto, D.; Briand, J.; Prato, M.; Bianco, A. Chem. Commun. 2004,
1, 16-17.
17. Hussey, S. L.; Peterson, B. R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 6265-6273.
18. Silverstein, S. C.; Steinman, R. M.; Cohn, Z. A. Annu. Rev. Biochem.
1977, 46, 669-722.
19. Vida, T. A.; Emr, S. D. J. Cell Biol. 1995, 128, 779-792.
20. Richard, J. P.; Melikov, K.; Vives, E.; Ramos, C.; Verbeure, B.; Gait, M.
J.; Chenomordik, L. V.; Lebleu, B. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 585-590.