Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38836425›Full record

ArticleACS chemical biology2024

Comparing Cell Penetration of Biotherapeutics across Human Cell Lines.

Nefeli Batistatou, Joshua A Kritzer

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in ACS chemical biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nefeli BatistatouDepartment of Chemistry, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155, United States.
Joshua A KritzerDepartment of Chemistry, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2878-6781

Funding

Diversity Supplement for Imani McDonald - Developing Autophagy-Targeting Chimeras and Optimizing Cell Penetration of Large-Molecule TherapeuticsR35GM148407 · NIGMS · TUFTS UNIVERSITY MEDFORD · PI Joshua A Kritzer · 2023 to 2026
$2.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM148407
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major obstacle in biotherapeutics development is maximizing cell penetration. Ideally, assays would allow for optimization of cell penetration in the cell type of interest early in the drug development process. However, few assays exist to compare cell penetration across different cell types independent of drug function. In this work, we applied the chloroalkane penetration assay (CAPA) in seven mammalian cell lines as well as primary cells. Careful controls were used to ensure that data could be compared across cell lines. We compared the nuclear penetration of several peptides and drug-like oligonucleotides and saw significant differences among the cell lines. To help explain these differences, we quantified the relative activities of endocytosis pathways in these cell lines and correlated them with the penetration data. Based on these results, we knocked down clathrin in a cell line with an efficient permeability profile and observed reduced penetration of peptides but not oligonucleotides. Finally, we used small-molecule endosomal escape enhancers and observed enhancement of cell penetration of some oligonucleotides, but only in some of the cell lines tested. CAPA data provide valuable points of comparison among different cell lines, including primary cells, for evaluating the cell penetration of various classes of peptides and oligonucleotides.

Indexed as

EndocytosisCell LineCell Membrane PermeabilityCell-Penetrating PeptidesClathrinHumansHydrocarbons, ChlorinatedOligonucleotidesPeptidesCell-Penetrating PeptidesClathrinHydrocarbons, ChlorinatedOligonucleotidesPeptides

Identifiers

PMID38836425
PMCPMC11687341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.