Cargando…

Impact of various buffers and weak bases on lysosomal and intracellular pH: Implications for infectivity of SARS‐CoV‐2

Acidification of the cellular lysosome is an important factor in infection of mammalian cells by SARS‐CoV‐2. Therefore, raising the pH of the lysosome would theoretically be beneficial in prevention or treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Sodium bicarbonate, carbicarb, and THAM are buffers that can be...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kraut, Jeffrey A., Cheetham‐Wilkinson, Izaak J., Swan, Laura E., Stagi, Massimiliano, Kurtz, Ira
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37020747
http://dx.doi.org/10.1096/fba.2022-00062
Descripción
Sumario:Acidification of the cellular lysosome is an important factor in infection of mammalian cells by SARS‐CoV‐2. Therefore, raising the pH of the lysosome would theoretically be beneficial in prevention or treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Sodium bicarbonate, carbicarb, and THAM are buffers that can be used clinically to provide base to patients. To examine whether these bases could raise lysosomal pH and therefore be a primary or adjunctive treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, we measured lysosomal and intracellular pH of mammalian cells after exposure to each of these bases. Mammalian HEK293 cells expressing RpH‐LAMP1‐3xFLAG, a ratiometric sensor of lysosomal luminal pH, were first exposed to Hepes which was then switched to sodium bicarbonate, carbicarb, or THAM and lysosomal pH measured. In bicarbonate buffer the mean lysosomal pH was 4.3 ± 0.1 (n = 20); p = NS versus Hepes (n = 20). The mean lysosomal pH in bicarbonate/carbonate was 4.3 ± 0.1 (n = 21) versus Hepes (n = 21), p = NS. In THAM buffer the mean lysosomal pH was 4.7 ± 0.07 (n = 20) versus Hepes (4.6 ± 0.1, n = 20), p = NS. In addition, there was no statistical difference between pH(i) in bicarbonate, carbicarb or THAM solutions. Using the membrane permeable base NH(4)Cl (5 mM), lysosomal pH increased significantly to 5.9 ± 0.1 (n = 21) compared to Hepes (4.5 ± 0.07, n = 21); p < 0.0001. Similarly, exposure to 1 mM hydroxychloroquine significantly increased the lysosomal pH to (5.9 ± 0.06, n = 20) versus Hepes (4.3 ± 0.1, n = 20), p < 0.0001. Separately steady‐state pHi was measured in HEK293 cells bathed in various buffers. In bicarbonate pH(i) was 7.29 ± 0.02 (n = 12) versus Hepes (7.45 ± 0.03, [n = 12]), p < 0.001. In cells bathed in carbicarb pH(i) was 7.27 ± 0.02 (n = 5) versus Hepes (7.43 ± 0.04, [n = 5]), p < 0.01. Cells bathed in THAM had a pH(i) of 7.25 ± 0.03 (n = 12) versus Hepes (7.44 ± 0.03 [n = 12]), p < 0.001. In addition, there was no statistical difference in pH(i) in bicarbonate, carbicarb or THAM solutions. The results of these studies indicate that none of the buffers designed to provide base to patients alters lysosomal pH at the concentrations used in this study and therefore would be predicted to be of no value in the treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. If the goal is to raise lysosomal pH to decrease the infectivity of SARS‐CoV‐2, utilizing lysosomal permeable buffers at the appropriate dose that is non‐toxic appears to be a useful approach to explore.