Swelling, Rupture and Endosomal Escape of Biological Nanoparticles Per Se and Those Fused with Liposomes in Acidic Environment

Biological nanoparticles (NPs), such as extracellular vesicles (EVs), exosome-mimetic nanovesicles (EMNVs) and nanoghosts (NGs), are perspective non-viral delivery vehicles for all types of therapeutic cargo. Biological NPs are renowned for their exceptional biocompatibility and safety, alongside their ease of functionalization, but a significant challenge arises when attempting to load therapeutic payloads, such as nucleic acids (NAs). One effective strategy involves fusing biological NPs with liposomes loaded with NAs, resulting in hybrid carriers that offer the benefits of both biological NPs and the capacity for high cargo loads. Despite their unique parameters, one of the major issues of virtually any nanoformulation is the ability to escape degradation in the compartment of endosomes and lysosomes which determines the overall efficiency of nanotherapeutics. In this study, we fabricated all major types of biological and hybrid NPs and studied their response to the acidic environment observed in the endolysosomal compartment. In this study, we show that EMNVs display increased protonation and swelling relative to EVs and NGs in an acidic environment. Furthermore, the hybrid NPs exhibit an even greater response compared to EMNVs. Short-term incubation of EMNVs in acidic pH corresponding to late endosomes and lysosomes again induces protonation and swelling, whereas hybrid NPs are ruptured, resulting in the decline in their quantities. Our findings demonstrate that in an acidic environment, there is enhanced rupture and release of vesicular cargo observed in hybrid EMNVs that are fused with liposomes compared to EMNVs alone. This was confirmed through PAGE electrophoresis analysis of mCherry protein loaded into nanoparticles. In vitro analysis of NPs colocalization with lysosomes in HepG2 cells demonstrated that EMNVs mostly avoid the endolysosomal compartment, whereas hybrid NPs escape it over time. To conclude, (1) hybrid biological NPs fused with liposomes appear more efficient in the endolysosomal escape via the mechanism of proton sponge-associated scavenging of protons by NPs, influx of counterions and water, and rupture of endo/lysosomes, but (2) EMNVs are much more efficient than hybrid NPs in actually avoiding the endolysosomal compartment in human cells. These results reveal biochemical differences across four major types of biological and hybrid NPs and indicate that EMNVs are more efficient in escaping or avoiding the endolysosomal compartment.

Authors
Ponomareva Natalia1, 2, 3 , Brezgin Sergey1, 2 , Karandashov Ivan1 , Kostyusheva Anastasiya1 , Demina Polina4, 5 , Slatinskaya Olga6 , Bayurova Ekaterina7 , Silachev Denis8, 9 , Pokrovsky Vadim S. 2, 10, 11 , Gegechkori Vladimir3 , Khaydukov Evgeny4, 5 , Maksimov Georgy6 , Frolova Anastasia2, 12 , Gordeychuk Ilya7 , Zamyatnin Jr. Andrey A.2, 9, 13 , Chulanov Vladimir1, 14 , Parodi Alessandro2 , Kostyushev Dmitry1, 2, 13
Journal
Publisher
MDPI AG
Number of issue
5
Language
English
Pages
1-17
Status
Published
Number
667
Volume
16
Year
2024
Organizations
  • 1 Laboratory of Genetic Technologies, Martsinovsky Institute of Medical Parasitology, Tropical and Vector-Borne Diseases, First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119991 Moscow, Russia
  • 2 Division of Biotechnology, Sirius University of Science and Technology, 354340 Sochi, Russia
  • 3 Department of Pharmaceutical and Toxicological Chemistry, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, 119146 Moscow, Russia
  • 4 Institute of Physics, Technology, and Informational Systems, Moscow Pedagogical State University, Malaya Pirogovskaya St. 1, 119435 Moscow, Russia
  • 5 National Research Centre “Kurchatov Institute”, Akademika Kurchatova Sq. 1, 123182 Moscow, Russia
  • 6 Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia
  • 7 Chumakov Federal Scientific Center for Research and Development of Immunobiological Products, Russian Academy of Sciences (Polio Institute), 108819 Moscow, Russia
  • 8 V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, 117997 Moscow, Russia
  • 9 A.N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991 Moscow, Russia
  • 10 Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, 115478 Moscow, Russia
  • 11 Department of Biochemistry, People’s Friendship University, 117198 Moscow, Russia
  • 12 Institute of Molecular Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119435 Moscow, Russia
  • 13 Faculty of Bioengineering and Bioinformatics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119234 Moscow, Russia
  • 14 Department of Infectious Diseases, First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119991 Moscow, Russia
Share

Other records