MMP modified - Biodegradable hydrogel
Hyperactivation and release of extracellular proteases has been shown to underly many disease pathologies, including neurodegeneration, inflammation, cardiovascular, and cancer1. Matrix metalloproteases (MMPs) are the main group of enzymes involved in extracellular matrix (ECM) degradation and remodeling2. MMPs, which are either soluble or membrane-bound, are critical for the development of multiple different tissues3. MMPs are also upregulated during repair and ECM remodeling3. More recent evidence has additionally implicated the importance of MMPs during neurodevelopment, as it has been suggested MMPs play a critical role in remolding the ECM to allow spinal motor neurons to exit through the basal lamina in order to innervate peripheral targets4. However, MMPs are more commonly studied in disease pathologies. Overexpression of MMPs can induce, and result from, disease states. For example, highly metastatic cancer cells release MMPs to remodel the extracellular matrix and create an invasion phenotype5. This aberrant ECM remodeling is also observed in cardiomyopathy6, osteoarthritis7, and fibrosis8. There are several MMPs that play critical roles in development, healthy tissue function, repair, and disease pathology, including MMP1, MMP2, MMP3, MMP9 and MMP132. These MMPs can target cleavage sites on different ECM proteins. For example, MMP1 can cleave collagen (I, II, III, VII, and X), gelatins, aggrecan, entactin, and tenascin9. Other MMPs also target collagens (MMP2/3/9/13), laminin (MMP3), and fibronectin (MMP3/13)3. Mutations in MMPs can induce a variety of developmental and repair issues, such as the following: defects in tracheal development (MMP110), reduced neovascularization and lung development (MMP211,12), altered development of the neuromuscular junction (MMP33), defects in bone development, neuronal remyelination, vascular remodeling, and angiogenesis (MMP914–16), and defects in bone remodeling and increased collagen accumulation in atherosclerotic plaques (MMP1317,18). Therefore, understanding normal and aberrant MMP function, and subsequent changes in ECM structure, in different cell types can aid in furthering our understanding of many diseases.
In order to study MMP activity and ECM degradation, experimenters have developed protease-sensitive hydrogels19. In their seminal work, West and colleagues incorporated MMP1 reactive peptides into polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogels and found targeted MMP1-mediated cleavage19. As a result, the incorporation of degradable substrates into 3D matrices has been duplicated in many other studies with PEG, as well as other hydrogels, such as hyaluronic acid20, Pluronic triblock copolymer21, silk and elastin22, collagen23, alginate24, and heparin25.
The use of hydrogels with incorporated MMP substrates has been employed to study cancer cell migration and invasion. Tumor growth and metastasis are often promoted by cancer-associated fibroblasts, which modify the surrounding ECM to create fibrillar structures that may act as tracks for migrating cancer cells26. In order to remodel the ECM and promote migration and invasion, fibroblasts and cancer cells release ECM proteins, such as collagen27, and fibronectin28, as well as MMPs3, 26. By incorporating MMP cleavable substrates, experimenters can measure cell spreading, migration, and invasion in a number of cancer cell models. For example, covalent anchoring of a general MMP cleavable substrate into a PEG hydrogel was shown to support the growth, spreading, and migration of U87 cells, a glioblastoma cell line29. Invasion is often analogous to cancer metastasis, and the application of hydrogels with MMP cleavable substrates allows researchers to measure the level of invasion through ECM barriers. Increased invasion in these modified hydrogels has been observed with multiple cancer cell lines, including melanoma (WM239A,30) and breast (MDA-MB-231,31). As stated above, in addition to cancer cells, fibroblasts release MMPs, which promotes an environment for tumor growth and metastasis. Therefore, researchers have also measured fibroblast migration and invasion in MMP modified hydrogels. Similar to cancer cells, the presence of MMP cleavable substrates promotes migration and invasion of fibroblasts32,33. These data illustrate how MMP substrate modified hydrogels may be employed to study cancer growth and metastasis and prove critical to developing pharmacotherapies for a variety of cancers.
Besides their critical role in tumor growth and metastasis, MMPs are expressed in a number of other cell types during development, injury repair, and tissue function. MMPs regulate morphogenic development of the nervous system4,13, mammary gland34, lung12, and bone14. The development of MMP cleavable hydrogels has allowed for the study of these developmental programs in a controlled 3D environment. Endothelial cell proliferation, adhesion, and migration is a critical step in vascularization35. Endothelial cell survival, adhesion, and migration are enhanced in 3D hydrogel cultures with MMP substrates36. Furthermore, Turturro et. al. (2013) created a 3D hydrogel with gradients of MMP degradable peptides, substrata stiffness, and RGD, an adhesive ligand37. As a model to study vascular sprout formation, the authors used human umbilical vein endothelial and umbilical artery smooth muscle cells and measured aggregate cell invasion. They observed increased aggregate cell invasion toward gradients of higher levels of MMP substrate peptides, further illustrating the role of MMPs in cell migration and invasion. Several other studies have also tested cell migration and invasion in MMP substrate modified hydrogels38–40. These studies show the utility of MMP substrate modified hydrogels in studying tissue development.
With the recent explosion of stem cell research scientists have put effort into creating the most accurate 3D cell culture systems to mimic in vivo environments41. This has led scientists to explore different hydrogel types and modifications to promote stem cell survival, proliferation, and differentiation. As a result, studies have tested the role of ECM remodeling, via MMP protease activity, in stem cell proliferation and fate. Accordingly, MMP degradable hydrogels have been shown to promote the expression of differentiation markers in human mesenchymal stem cells42. Moreover, a critical role for MMPs is to degrade the local ECM allowing for the necessary cell growth and spreading needed to induce proliferation and differentiation. Thus, MMP modifiable hydrogels have been shown to enhance cell spreading, traction forces, differentiation, migration, and invasion of both human and mouse mesenchymal stem cells38,43. Finally, increased neuronal differentiation and neurite outgrowth has also been shown in stem cells cultured in MMP degradable hydrogels, likely due to ECM remodeling and greater migratory area44. Overall, these data further demonstrate the variety of cell types and cellular behaviors that may be studied with MMP substrate modifiable hydrogels.
Cell Type Behavior Reference Table for VitroGel MMP
|Tissue/Organ Type||Cell Type||Peptide Sequence||Behavior|
|Breast||Mammary gland MCF10A||KCGPQG↑IWGQCK||Increased MMP activity in response to TGF-ß1|
|Cancer/tumor||Breast MDA-MB-231||Not specified||Enhanced cell invasion|
|Glioma U87||CGPQGIWGQC||Support cell growth, spreading, and migration|
|Melanoma WM239A||KKCGGPQG↓IWGQGCKK||Promoted cell invasion|
|Connective tissue||Human foreskin fibroblasts||GCRD-GPQGIWGQ-DRCG||Increased radial cell migration|
|Human foreskin fibroblasts||GCRD-GPQG↓IWGQ-DRCG||Increased cell invasion and substrata degradation|
|Stem cells||Human mesenchymal stem cells||Not specified||Increased cell differentiation marker expression|
|Human mesenchymal stem cells||GCRDGPQGIWGQDRCG||Promoted neuronal differentiation and neurite outgrowth|
|Human mesenchymal stem cells||GCRDVPMS↓MRGGDRCG||Increased cell spreading, traction forces, and differentiation|
|Mouse mesenchymal stem cells||GCREG-PQGIWGQ-ERCG||Increased cell spreading and migration|
|Vascular||Human umbilical vein endothelial cell||GCRDGPQGIWGQDRCG||Promoted cell adhesion, migration, and survival|
|Human umbilical vein endothelial and umbilical artery smooth muscle cells||GGVPMS↓MRGGK||Increased aggregate cell invasion toward gradient of peptide|
|Human umbilical vein endothelial cells||GDGIPVS↓LRSGGK (MMP2) and GDIPES↓LRAGGK||Increased cell invasion|
B. Turk, “Targeting proteases: Successes, failures and future prospects,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. 2006, doi: 10.1038/nrd2092.
C. Bonnans, J. Chou, and Z. Werb, “Remodelling the extracellular matrix in development and disease,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2014, doi: 10.1038/nrm3904.
A. Page-McCaw, A. J. Ewald, and Z. Werb, “Matrix metalloproteinases and the regulation of tissue remodelling,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2007, doi: 10.1038/nrm2125.
M. Santiago-Medina, K. A. Gregus, R. H. Nichol, S. M. O’Toole, and T. M. Gomez, “Regulation of ecm degradation and axon guidance by growth cone invadosomes,” Dev., 2015, doi: 10.1242/dev.108266.
M. Egeblad and Z. Werb, “New functions for the matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression,” Nature Reviews Cancer. 2002, doi: 10.1038/nrc745.
H. E. Kim, S. S. Dalal, E. Young, M. J. Legato, M. L. Weisfeldt, and J. D’Armiento, “Disruption of the myocardial extracellular matrix leads to cardiac dysfunction,” J. Clin. Invest., 2000, doi: 10.1172/JCI8040.
J. Bondeson, S. Wainwright, C. Hughes, and B. Caterson, “The regulation of the ADAMTS4 and ADAMTS5 aggrecanases in osteoarthritis: A review,” Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology. 2008, doi: 10.1016/s1063-4584(10)60506-7.
T. A. Wynn and T. R. Ramalingam, “Mechanisms of fibrosis: Therapeutic translation for fibrotic disease,” Nature Medicine. 2012, doi: 10.1038/nm.2807.
P. Lu, K. Takai, V. M. Weaver, and Z. Werb, “Extracellular Matrix degradation and remodeling in development and disease,” Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol., 2011, doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a005058.
A. Page-McCaw, J. Serano, J. M. Santé, and G. M. Rubin, “Drosophila matrix metalloproteinases are required for tissue remodeling, but not embryonic development,” Dev. Cell, 2003, doi: 10.1016/S1534-5807(02)00400-8.
T. Kato et al., “Diminished corneal angiogenesis in gelatinase A-deficient mice,” FEBS Lett., 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0014-5793(01)02897-6.
F. Kheradmand, K. Rishi, and Z. Werb, “Signaling through the EGF receptor controls lung morphogenesis in part by regulating MT1-MMP-mediated activation of gelatinase A/MMP2,” J. Cell Sci., 2002.
M. Vansaun, A. A. Herrera, and M. J. Werle, “Structural alterations at the neuromuscular junctions of matrix metalloproteinase 3 null mutant mice,” J. Neurocytol., 2003, doi: 10.1023/B:NEUR.0000021907.68461.9c.
T. H. Vu et al., “MMP-9/gelatinase B is a key regulator of growth plate angiogenesis and apoptosis of hypetrophic chondrocytes,” Cell, 1998, doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81169-1.
P. H. Larsen, J. E. Wells, W. B. Stallcup, G. Opdenakker, and V. W. Yong, “Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Facilitates Remyelination in Part by Processing the Inhibitory NG2 Proteoglycan,” J. Neurosci., 2003, doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.23-35-11127.2003.
Z. S. Galis et al., “Targeted disruption of the matrix metalloproteinase-9 gene impairs smooth muscle cell migration and geometrical arterial remodeling,” Circ. Res., 2002, doi: 10.1161/01.RES.0000041036.86977.14.
D. Stickens et al., “Altered endochondral bone development in matrix metalloproteinase 13-deficient mice,” Development, 2004, doi: 10.1242/dev.01461.
J. O. Deguchi et al., “Matrix metalloproteinase-13/collagenase-3 deletion promotes collagen accumulation and organization in mouse atherosclerotic plaques,” Circulation, 2005, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.562041.
J. L. West and J. A. Hubbell, “Polymeric biomaterials with degradation sites for proteases involved in cell migration,” Macromolecules, 1999, doi: 10.1021/ma981296k.
J. A. Burdick and G. D. Prestwich, “Hyaluronic acid hydrogels for biomedical applications,” Adv. Mater., 2011, doi: 10.1002/adma.201003963.
V. K. Garripelli, J. K. Kim, S. Son, W. J. Kim, M. A. Repka, and S. Jo, “Matrix metalloproteinase-sensitive thermogelling polymer for bioresponsive local drug delivery,” Acta Biomater., 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2011.02.005.
J. A. Gustafson, R. A. Price, J. Frandsen, C. R. Henak, J. Cappello, and H. Ghandehari, “Synthesis and characterization of a matrix-metalloproteinase responsive silk-elastinlike protein polymer,” Biomacromolecules, 2013, doi: 10.1021/bm3013692.
P. A. Parmar et al., “Collagen-mimetic peptide-modifiable hydrogels for articular cartilage regeneration,” Biomaterials, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.02.079.
K. B. Fonseca et al., “Injectable MMP-sensitive alginate hydrogels as hMSC delivery systems,” Biomacromolecules, 2014, doi: 10.1021/bm4016495.
S. Prokoph et al., “Sustained delivery of SDF-1α from heparin-based hydrogels to attract circulating pro-angiogenic cells,” Biomaterials, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.03.039.
K. M. Park, D. Lewis, and S. Gerecht, “Bioinspired Hydrogels to Engineer Cancer Microenvironments,” Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 2017, doi: 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071516-044619.
H. P. Rodemann and G. A. Müller, “Characterization of Human Renal Fibroblasts in Health and Disease: II. In Vitro Growth, Differentiation, and Collagen Synthesis of Fibroblasts From Kidneys With Interstitial Fibrosis,” Am. J. Kidney Dis., 1991, doi: 10.1016/S0272-6386(12)80352-0.
H. Y. Chang et al., “Diversity, topographic differentiation, and positional memory in human fibroblasts,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2002, doi: 10.1073/pnas.162488599.
C. Wang, X. Tong, and F. Yang, “Bioengineered 3D brain tumor model to elucidate the effects of matrix stiffness on glioblastoma cell behavior using peg-based hydrogels,” Mol. Pharm., 2014, doi: 10.1021/mp5000828.
S. P. Singh et al., “A synthetic modular approach for modeling the role of the 3D microenvironment in tumor progression,” Sci. Rep., 2015, doi: 10.1038/srep17814.
S. A. Fisher, P. N. Anandakumaran, S. C. Owen, and M. S. Shoichet, “Tuning the Microenvironment: Click-Crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid-Based Hydrogels Provide a Platform for Studying Breast Cancer Cell Invasion,” Adv. Funct. Mater., 2015, doi: 10.1002/adfm.201502778.
M. P. Lutolf et al., “Repair of bone defects using synthetic mimetics of collagenous extracellular matrices,” Nat. Biotechnol., 2003, doi: 10.1038/nbt818.
M. P. Lutolf et al., “Synthetic matrix metalloproteinase-sensitive hydrogels for the conduction of tissue regeneration: Engineering cell-invasion characteristics,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2003, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0737381100.
B. S. Wiseman et al., “Site-specific inductive and inhibitory activities of MMP-2 and MMP-3 orchestrate mammary gland branching morphogenesis,” J. Cell Biol., 2003, doi: 10.1083/jcb.200302090.
C. Park, T. M. Kim, and A. B. Malik, “Transcriptional regulation of endothelial cell and vascular development,” Circulation Research. 2013, doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.113.301078.
T. P. Kraehenbuehl, L. S. Ferreira, P. Zammaretti, J. A. Hubbell, and R. Langer, “Cell-responsive hydrogel for encapsulation of vascular cells,” Biomaterials, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.04.057.
M. V. Turturro, M. C. Christenson, J. C. Larson, D. A. Young, E. M. Brey, and G. Papavasiliou, “MMP-Sensitive PEG Diacrylate Hydrogels with Spatial Variations in Matrix Properties Stimulate Directional Vascular Sprout Formation,” PLoS One, 2013, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058897.
Y. Lei, S. Gojgini, J. Lam, and T. Segura, “The spreading, migration and proliferation of mouse mesenchymal stem cells cultured inside hyaluronic acid hydrogels,” Biomaterials, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.08.103.
S. Sokic, M. C. Christenson, J. C. Larson, A. A. Appel, E. M. Brey, and G. Papavasiliou, “Evaluation of MMP substrate concentration and specificity for neovascularization of hydrogel scaffolds,” Biomater. Sci., 2014, doi: 10.1039/c4bm00088a.
M. Bracher et al., “Cell specific ingrowth hydrogels,” Biomaterials, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.05.057.
Y. H. Tsou, J. Khoneisser, P. C. Huang, and X. Xu, “Hydrogel as a bioactive material to regulate stem cell fate,” Bioactive Materials. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2016.05.001.
S. B. Anderson, C. C. Lin, D. V. Kuntzler, and K. S. Anseth, “The performance of human mesenchymal stem cells encapsulated in cell-degradable polymer-peptide hydrogels,” Biomaterials, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.064.
S. Khetan, M. Guvendiren, W. R. Legant, D. M. Cohen, C. S. Chen, and J. A. Burdick, “Degradation-mediated cellular traction directs stem cell fate in covalently crosslinked three-dimensional hydrogels,” Nat. Mater., 2013, doi: 10.1038/nmat3586.
J. Park, E. Lim, S. Back, H. Na, Y. Park, and K. Sun, “Nerve regeneration following spinal cord injury using matrix metalloproteinase-sensitive, hyaluronic acid-based biomimetic hydrogel scaffold containing brain-derived neurotrophic factor,” J. Biomed. Mater. Res. – Part A, 2010, doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.32519.