Cargando…

Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment in the 21st century has seen immense advances in optical imaging and immunotherapy. Significant progress has been made in the bioengineering and production of immunoconjugates to achieve the goal of specifically targeting tumors. DISCUSSION: In the 21st century, antibody...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Padayachee, Eden Rebecca, Adeola, Henry Ademola, Van Wyk, Jennifer Catherine, Nsole Biteghe, Fleury Augustine, Chetty, Shivan, Khumalo, Nonhlanhla Patience, Barth, Stefan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6375544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30809593
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.103
_version_ 1783395374807908352
author Padayachee, Eden Rebecca
Adeola, Henry Ademola
Van Wyk, Jennifer Catherine
Nsole Biteghe, Fleury Augustine
Chetty, Shivan
Khumalo, Nonhlanhla Patience
Barth, Stefan
author_facet Padayachee, Eden Rebecca
Adeola, Henry Ademola
Van Wyk, Jennifer Catherine
Nsole Biteghe, Fleury Augustine
Chetty, Shivan
Khumalo, Nonhlanhla Patience
Barth, Stefan
author_sort Padayachee, Eden Rebecca
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment in the 21st century has seen immense advances in optical imaging and immunotherapy. Significant progress has been made in the bioengineering and production of immunoconjugates to achieve the goal of specifically targeting tumors. DISCUSSION: In the 21st century, antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) have been the focus of immunotherapeutic strategies in cancer. ADCs combine the unique targeting of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) with the cancer killing ability of cytotoxic drugs. However, due to random conjugation methods of drug to antibody, ADCs are associated with poor antigen specificity and low cytotoxicity, resulting in a drug to antibody ratio (DAR) >1. This means that the cytotoxic drugs in ADCs are conjugated randomly to antibodies, by cysteine or lysine residues. This generates heterogeneous ADC populations with 0 to 8 drugs per an antibody, each with distinct pharmacokinetic, efficacy, and toxicity properties. Additionally, heterogeneity is created not only by different antibody to ligand ratios but also by different sites of conjugation. Hence, much effort has been made to find and establish antibody conjugation strategies that enable us to better control stoichiometry and site‐specificity. This includes utilizing protein self‐labeling tags as fusion partners to the original protein. Site‐specific conjugation is a significant characteristic of these engineered proteins. SNAP‐tag is one such engineered self‐labeling protein tag shown to have promising potential in cancer treatment. The SNAP‐tag is fused to an antibody of choice and covalently reacts specifically in a 1:1 ratio with benzylguanine (BG) substrates, eg, fluorophores or photosensitizers, to target skin cancer. This makes SNAP‐tag a versatile technique in optical imaging and photoimmunotherapy of skin cancer. CONCLUSION: SNAP‐tag technology has the potential to contribute greatly to a broad range of molecular oncological applications because it combines efficacious tumor targeting, minimized local and systemic toxicity, and noninvasive assessment of diagnostic/prognostic molecular biomarkers of cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6375544
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63755442019-02-26 Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy Padayachee, Eden Rebecca Adeola, Henry Ademola Van Wyk, Jennifer Catherine Nsole Biteghe, Fleury Augustine Chetty, Shivan Khumalo, Nonhlanhla Patience Barth, Stefan Health Sci Rep Review BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment in the 21st century has seen immense advances in optical imaging and immunotherapy. Significant progress has been made in the bioengineering and production of immunoconjugates to achieve the goal of specifically targeting tumors. DISCUSSION: In the 21st century, antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) have been the focus of immunotherapeutic strategies in cancer. ADCs combine the unique targeting of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) with the cancer killing ability of cytotoxic drugs. However, due to random conjugation methods of drug to antibody, ADCs are associated with poor antigen specificity and low cytotoxicity, resulting in a drug to antibody ratio (DAR) >1. This means that the cytotoxic drugs in ADCs are conjugated randomly to antibodies, by cysteine or lysine residues. This generates heterogeneous ADC populations with 0 to 8 drugs per an antibody, each with distinct pharmacokinetic, efficacy, and toxicity properties. Additionally, heterogeneity is created not only by different antibody to ligand ratios but also by different sites of conjugation. Hence, much effort has been made to find and establish antibody conjugation strategies that enable us to better control stoichiometry and site‐specificity. This includes utilizing protein self‐labeling tags as fusion partners to the original protein. Site‐specific conjugation is a significant characteristic of these engineered proteins. SNAP‐tag is one such engineered self‐labeling protein tag shown to have promising potential in cancer treatment. The SNAP‐tag is fused to an antibody of choice and covalently reacts specifically in a 1:1 ratio with benzylguanine (BG) substrates, eg, fluorophores or photosensitizers, to target skin cancer. This makes SNAP‐tag a versatile technique in optical imaging and photoimmunotherapy of skin cancer. CONCLUSION: SNAP‐tag technology has the potential to contribute greatly to a broad range of molecular oncological applications because it combines efficacious tumor targeting, minimized local and systemic toxicity, and noninvasive assessment of diagnostic/prognostic molecular biomarkers of cancer. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6375544/ /pubmed/30809593 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.103 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Padayachee, Eden Rebecca
Adeola, Henry Ademola
Van Wyk, Jennifer Catherine
Nsole Biteghe, Fleury Augustine
Chetty, Shivan
Khumalo, Nonhlanhla Patience
Barth, Stefan
Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title_full Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title_fullStr Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title_full_unstemmed Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title_short Applications of SNAP‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
title_sort applications of snap‐tag technology in skin cancer therapy
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6375544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30809593
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.103
work_keys_str_mv AT padayacheeedenrebecca applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT adeolahenryademola applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT vanwykjennifercatherine applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT nsolebiteghefleuryaugustine applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT chettyshivan applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT khumalononhlanhlapatience applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy
AT barthstefan applicationsofsnaptagtechnologyinskincancertherapy