Influence of DNA Type on the Physicochemical and Biological Properties of Polyplexes Based on Star Polymers Bearing Different Amino Functionalities

The interactions of two star polymers based on poly (2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate) with different types of nucleic acids are investigated. The star polymers differ only in their functionality to bear protonable amino or permanently charged quaternary ammonium groups, while DNAs of different molar masses, lengths and topologies are used. The main physicochemical parameters of the resulting polyplexes are determined. The influence of the polymer’ functionality and length and topology of the DNA on the structure and properties of the polyelectrolyte complexes is established. The quaternized polymer is characterized by a high binding affinity to DNA and formed strongly positively charged, compact and tight polyplexes. The parent, non-quaternized polymer exhibits an enhanced buffering capacity and weakened polymer/DNA interactions, particularly upon the addition of NaCl, resulting in the formation of less compact and tight polyplexes. The cytotoxic evaluation of the systems indicates that they are sparing with respect to the cell lines studied including osteosarcoma, osteoblast and human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells and exhibit good biocompatibility. Transfection experiments reveal that the non-quaternized polymer is effective at transferring DNA into cells, which is attributed to its high buffering capacity, facilitating the endo-lysosomal escape of the polyplex, the loose structure of the latter one and weakened polymer/DNA interactions, benefitting the DNA release.

[1]  M. Gazouli,et al.  Hydrophilic Random Cationic Copolymers as Polyplex-Formation Vectors for DNA , 2022, Materials.

[2]  S. Pispas,et al.  Physicochemical Properties and Biological Performance of Polymethacrylate Based Gene Delivery Vector Systems: Influence of Amino Functionalities. , 2020, Macromolecular bioscience.

[3]  T. Lodge,et al.  Polycation Architecture and Assembly Direct Successful Gene Delivery: Micelleplexes Outperform Polyplexes via Optimal DNA Packaging. , 2019, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[4]  S. Pispas,et al.  Synthesis of (AB) n‐ , A n B n‐, and A x B y ‐type amphiphilic and double‐hydrophilic star copolymers by RAFT polymerization , 2019, Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry.

[5]  U. Schubert,et al.  The great escape: how cationic polyplexes overcome the endosomal barrier. , 2018, Journal of materials chemistry. B.

[6]  D. W. Pack,et al.  Succinylated Polyethylenimine Derivatives Greatly Enhance Polyplex Serum Stability and Gene Delivery In Vitro. , 2018, Biomacromolecules.

[7]  Wing‐Fu Lai,et al.  Design of Polymeric Gene Carriers for Effective Intracellular Delivery. , 2018, Trends in biotechnology.

[8]  C. R. Becer,et al.  One Size Does Not Fit All: The Effect of Chain Length and Charge Density of Poly(ethylene imine) Based Copolymers on Delivery of pDNA, mRNA, and RepRNA Polyplexes. , 2018, Biomacromolecules.

[9]  T. Lodge,et al.  Complexation of DNA with Cationic Copolymer Micelles: Effects of DNA Length and Topology , 2018 .

[10]  S. Pispas,et al.  PDMAEMA-b-PLMA-b-POEGMA triblock terpolymers via RAFT polymerization and their self-assembly in aqueous solutions , 2017 .

[11]  O. Farokhzad,et al.  Challenges in DNA Delivery and Recent Advances in Multifunctional Polymeric DNA Delivery Systems. , 2017, Biomacromolecules.

[12]  Charles H Jones,et al.  Overcoming Gene-Delivery Hurdles: Physiological Considerations for Nonviral Vectors. , 2016, Trends in biotechnology.

[13]  E. Haladjova,et al.  Comblike Polyethylenimine-Based Polyplexes: Balancing Toxicity, Cell Internalization, and Transfection Efficiency via Polymer Chain Topology. , 2015, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[14]  A. Sieron,et al.  Polycationic star polymers with hyperbranched cores for gene delivery , 2014 .

[15]  J. Kahn,et al.  DNA, flexibly flexible. , 2014, Biophysical journal.

[16]  Daniel G. Anderson,et al.  Non-viral vectors for gene-based therapy , 2014, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[17]  H Fessi,et al.  Gene therapy and DNA delivery systems. , 2014, International journal of pharmaceutics.

[18]  Abhay Pandit,et al.  Polymer gene delivery: overcoming the obstacles. , 2013, Drug discovery today.

[19]  Chih-Kuang Chen,et al.  Overcoming nonviral gene delivery barriers: perspective and future. , 2013, Molecular pharmaceutics.

[20]  Chi Wu,et al.  Progress and perspectives in developing polymeric vectors for in vitro gene delivery. , 2013, Biomaterials science.

[21]  S. Agarwal,et al.  PDMAEMA based gene delivery materials , 2012 .

[22]  Leaf Huang,et al.  In vivo gene delivery by nonviral vectors: overcoming hurdles? , 2012, Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy.

[23]  Daniel G. Anderson,et al.  Effect of molecular weight of amine end-modified poly(β-amino ester)s on gene delivery efficiency and toxicity. , 2012, Biomaterials.

[24]  W. Hennink,et al.  Polyplexes based on cationic polymers with strong nucleic acid binding properties. , 2012, European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences.

[25]  B. Chain,et al.  The impact of DNA topology on polyplex uptake and transfection efficiency in mammalian cells. , 2011, Journal of biotechnology.

[26]  J. Engbersen,et al.  Physicochemical and Biological Evaluation of siRNA Polyplexes Based on PEGylated Poly(amido amine)s , 2011, Pharmaceutical Research.

[27]  Rahul Sharma,et al.  A discussion of the pH-dependent protonation behaviors of poly(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate) (PDMAEMA) and poly(ethylenimine-ran-2-ethyl-2-oxazoline) (P(EI-r-EOz)). , 2011, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[28]  Abhay Pandit,et al.  Non-viral polyplexes: Scaffold mediated delivery for gene therapy , 2010 .

[29]  P. Sun,et al.  Redox-cleavable star cationic PDMAEMA by arm-first approach of ATRP as a nonviral vector for gene delivery. , 2010, Biomaterials.

[30]  D. Burgess,et al.  DNA-based therapeutics and DNA delivery systems: A comprehensive review , 2005, The AAPS Journal.

[31]  I. Ugrinova,et al.  DNA bending versus DNA end joining activity of HMGB1 protein is modulated in vitro by acetylation. , 2007, Biochemistry.

[32]  L. Young,et al.  Viral gene therapy strategies: from basic science to clinical application , 2006, The Journal of pathology.

[33]  Y. Barenholz,et al.  Polymers for DNA Delivery , 2005, Molecules.

[34]  Y. Lim,et al.  Polyplexes assembled with internally quaternized PAMAM-OH dendrimer and plasmid DNA have a neutral surface and gene delivery potency. , 2003, Bioconjugate chemistry.

[35]  J. H. van Zanten,et al.  Monitoring DNA/poly-L-lysine polyplex formation with time-resolved multiangle laser light scattering. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[36]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Vector unpacking as a potential barrier for receptor-mediated polyplex gene delivery. , 2000, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[37]  A. Mikos,et al.  Size matters: molecular weight affects the efficiency of poly(ethylenimine) as a gene delivery vehicle. , 1999, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[38]  W. Hennink,et al.  Structure-activity relationships of water-soluble cationic methacrylate/methacrylamide polymers for nonviral gene delivery. , 1999, Bioconjugate chemistry.

[39]  V. Izumrudov,et al.  Controllable stability of DNA-containing polyelectrolyte complexes in water-salt solutions. , 1999, Biopolymers.