各种缓冲液和弱碱基对溶酶体和细胞内pH值的影响:对SARS-CoV-2传染性的影响

IF 2.5 Q3 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY FASEB bioAdvances Pub Date : 2023-01-12 DOI:10.1096/fba.2022-00062
Jeffrey A. Kraut, Izaak J. Cheetham-Wilkinson, Laura E. Swan, Massimiliano Stagi, Ira Kurtz
{"title":"各种缓冲液和弱碱基对溶酶体和细胞内pH值的影响:对SARS-CoV-2传染性的影响","authors":"Jeffrey A. Kraut,&nbsp;Izaak J. Cheetham-Wilkinson,&nbsp;Laura E. Swan,&nbsp;Massimiliano Stagi,&nbsp;Ira Kurtz","doi":"10.1096/fba.2022-00062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>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 (<i>n =</i> 20); <i>p =</i> NS versus Hepes (<i>n =</i> 20). The mean lysosomal pH in bicarbonate/carbonate was 4.3 ± 0.1 (<i>n =</i> 21) versus Hepes (<i>n =</i> 21), <i>p =</i> NS. In THAM buffer the mean lysosomal pH was 4.7 ± 0.07 (<i>n =</i> 20) versus Hepes (4.6 ± 0.1, <i>n =</i> 20), <i>p =</i> NS. In addition, there was no statistical difference between pH<sub>i</sub> in bicarbonate, carbicarb or THAM solutions. Using the membrane permeable base NH<sub>4</sub>Cl (5 mM), lysosomal pH increased significantly to 5.9 ± 0.1 (<i>n =</i> 21) compared to Hepes (4.5 ± 0.07, <i>n =</i> 21); <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001. Similarly, exposure to 1 mM hydroxychloroquine significantly increased the lysosomal pH to (5.9 ± 0.06, <i>n =</i> 20) versus Hepes (4.3 ± 0.1, <i>n =</i> 20), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001. Separately steady-state pHi was measured in HEK293 cells bathed in various buffers. In bicarbonate pH<sub>i</sub> was 7.29 ± 0.02 (<i>n =</i> 12) versus Hepes (7.45 ± 0.03, [<i>n =</i> 12]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001. In cells bathed in carbicarb pH<sub>i</sub> was 7.27 ± 0.02 (<i>n =</i> 5) versus Hepes (7.43 ± 0.04, [<i>n =</i> 5]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. Cells bathed in THAM had a pH<sub>i</sub> of 7.25 ± 0.03 (<i>n =</i> 12) versus Hepes (7.44 ± 0.03 [<i>n =</i> 12]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001. In addition, there was no statistical difference in pH<sub>i</sub> 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":12093,"journal":{"name":"FASEB bioAdvances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1096/fba.2022-00062","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of various buffers and weak bases on lysosomal and intracellular pH: Implications for infectivity of SARS-CoV-2\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey A. Kraut,&nbsp;Izaak J. Cheetham-Wilkinson,&nbsp;Laura E. Swan,&nbsp;Massimiliano Stagi,&nbsp;Ira Kurtz\",\"doi\":\"10.1096/fba.2022-00062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>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 (<i>n =</i> 20); <i>p =</i> NS versus Hepes (<i>n =</i> 20). The mean lysosomal pH in bicarbonate/carbonate was 4.3 ± 0.1 (<i>n =</i> 21) versus Hepes (<i>n =</i> 21), <i>p =</i> NS. In THAM buffer the mean lysosomal pH was 4.7 ± 0.07 (<i>n =</i> 20) versus Hepes (4.6 ± 0.1, <i>n =</i> 20), <i>p =</i> NS. In addition, there was no statistical difference between pH<sub>i</sub> in bicarbonate, carbicarb or THAM solutions. Using the membrane permeable base NH<sub>4</sub>Cl (5 mM), lysosomal pH increased significantly to 5.9 ± 0.1 (<i>n =</i> 21) compared to Hepes (4.5 ± 0.07, <i>n =</i> 21); <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001. Similarly, exposure to 1 mM hydroxychloroquine significantly increased the lysosomal pH to (5.9 ± 0.06, <i>n =</i> 20) versus Hepes (4.3 ± 0.1, <i>n =</i> 20), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001. Separately steady-state pHi was measured in HEK293 cells bathed in various buffers. In bicarbonate pH<sub>i</sub> was 7.29 ± 0.02 (<i>n =</i> 12) versus Hepes (7.45 ± 0.03, [<i>n =</i> 12]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001. In cells bathed in carbicarb pH<sub>i</sub> was 7.27 ± 0.02 (<i>n =</i> 5) versus Hepes (7.43 ± 0.04, [<i>n =</i> 5]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. Cells bathed in THAM had a pH<sub>i</sub> of 7.25 ± 0.03 (<i>n =</i> 12) versus Hepes (7.44 ± 0.03 [<i>n =</i> 12]), <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001. In addition, there was no statistical difference in pH<sub>i</sub> 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"FASEB bioAdvances\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1096/fba.2022-00062\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"FASEB bioAdvances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1096/fba.2022-00062\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FASEB bioAdvances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1096/fba.2022-00062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

细胞溶酶体的酸化是导致哺乳动物细胞感染SARS-CoV-2的重要因素。因此,从理论上讲,提高溶酶体的pH值有利于预防或治疗SARS-CoV-2感染。碳酸氢钠、碳水化合物和THAM是缓冲液,可用于临床为患者提供基础。为了研究这些碱基是否能提高溶酶体pH值,从而成为SARS-CoV-2感染的主要或辅助治疗方法,我们测量了暴露于每种碱基后哺乳动物细胞的溶酶体和细胞内pH值。表达RpH-LAMP1-3xFLAG(溶酶体腔内pH的比率传感器)的哺乳动物HEK293细胞首先暴露于Hepes中,然后切换到碳酸氢钠、碳水化合物或THAM中,并测量溶酶体pH。在碳酸氢盐缓冲液中,溶酶体pH平均值为4.3±0.1 (n = 20);p = NS vs . Hepes (n = 20)。碳酸氢盐/碳酸盐岩溶酶体pH平均值为4.3±0.1 (n = 21), Hepes溶酶体pH平均值为21 (p = NS)。在THAM缓冲液中,溶酶体平均pH为4.7±0.07 (n = 20), Hepes为4.6±0.1 (n = 20), p = NS。此外,在碳酸氢盐、碳水化合物或THAM溶液中,pHi无统计学差异。使用膜透性碱NH4Cl (5 mM)时,溶酶体pH值显著高于Hepes(4.5±0.07,n = 21),为5.9±0.1 (n = 21);p < 0.0001。同样,暴露于1 mM羟氯喹显著增加溶酶体pH值(5.9±0.06,n = 20),而Hepes(4.3±0.1,n = 20), p < 0.0001。在不同缓冲液浸泡的HEK293细胞中分别测量稳态pHi。碳酸氢盐φ7.29±0.02 (n = 12)和消息灵通的(7.45±0.03,[n = 12]), p & lt; 0.001。碳水化合物浸泡的细胞pHi为7.27±0.02 (n = 5), Hepes为7.43±0.04 (n = 5), p < 0.01。浸泡在THAM中的细胞pHi为7.25±0.03 (n = 12),而Hepes为7.44±0.03 [n = 12], p < 0.001。此外,在碳酸氢盐、碳水化合物或THAM溶液中,pHi没有统计学差异。这些研究的结果表明,为患者提供碱的缓冲液在本研究中使用的浓度下都不会改变溶酶体pH值,因此预计在治疗SARS-CoV-2感染方面没有价值。如果目标是提高溶酶体pH值以降低SARS-CoV-2的传染性,那么在适当剂量下使用无毒的溶酶体渗透性缓冲液似乎是一种有用的探索方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
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 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 pHi in bicarbonate, carbicarb or THAM solutions. Using the membrane permeable base NH4Cl (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 pHi was 7.29 ± 0.02 (n = 12) versus Hepes (7.45 ± 0.03, [n = 12]), p < 0.001. In cells bathed in carbicarb pHi was 7.27 ± 0.02 (n = 5) versus Hepes (7.43 ± 0.04, [n = 5]), p < 0.01. Cells bathed in THAM had a pHi 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 pHi 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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
FASEB bioAdvances
FASEB bioAdvances Multiple-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
56
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information In vivo optical assessment of cerebral and skeletal muscle microvascular response to phenylephrine Human inborn errors of long-chain fatty acid oxidation show impaired inflammatory responses to TLR4-ligand LPS Activation of nociception-sensitive ionotropic glutamate receptor-expressing rostroventrolateral medulla neurons by stimulation of cardiac afferents in rats Osteocalcin binds to a GPRC6A Venus fly trap allosteric site to positively modulate GPRC6A signaling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1