research papers
Revealing cholesterol effects on PEGylated HSPC liposomes using AF4–MALS and simultaneous small- and wide-angle X-ray scattering
aNational Synchrotron Radiation Research Center, 101 Hsin-Ann Road, Hsinchu Science Park, Hsinchu 300094, Taiwan, bDepartment of Chemical Engineering, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan, cDepartment of Physics, National Central University, Zhongli 320317, Taiwan, and dCollege of Semiconductor Research, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300044, Taiwan
*Correspondence e-mail: su.cj@nsrrc.org.tw, usjeng@nsrrc.org.tw
Rh) of 52 nm with 10% polydispersity, a comparable (Rg) and a major particle mass of 118 kDa. The local bilayer structure of the is found to have asymmetric electronic density profiles in the inner and outer leaflets, sandwiched by two PEGylated outer layers ca 5 nm thick. Cholesterol was found to effectively intervene in lipid chain packing, resulting in the thickening of the bilayer, an increase in the area per lipid and an increase in size, especially in the fluid phase of the These cholesterol effects show signs of saturation at cholesterol concentrations above ca 1:5 cholesterol:lipid molar ratio.
development is of great interest owing to increasing requirements for efficient drug carriers. The structural features and thermal stability of such liposomes are crucial in drug transport and delivery. Reported here are the results of the structural characterization of PEGylated liposomes via small- and wide-angle X-ray scattering and an asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation (AF4) system coupled with differential refractive-index detection, multi-angle (MALS) and dynamic This integrated analysis of the exemplar PEGylated formed from hydrogenated soy phosphatidylcholine (HSPC) with the addition of cholesterol reveals an average hydrodynamic radius (Keywords: drug-carrying liposomes; phospholipid membranes; cholesterol effects; asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation; multi-angle light scattering; AF4-MALS; small-angle X-ray scattering; wide-angle X-ray scattering; SAXS–WAXS.
1. Introduction
Liposomes, often containing unilamellar vesicles of phospholipids, have seen increasing utilization as nanocarriers for drug delivery (Lombardo & Kiselev, 2022). In such applications, the physical and chemical stabilities of liposomes for traversing complex biological environments under different conditions, such as temperature and pH, are critical. Recent studies have shown that cholesterol can significantly increase the thermal stability and mechanical properties of polyethylene glycol-coated (PEGylated) liposomes (Geisler et al., 2020; Nakhaei et al., 2021; Shoji et al., 1998). The improved performance in solution can be attributed to the intervention of cholesterol in the phospholipid chain packing (Faria et al., 2019); however, how cholesterols intervene in phospholipids for nano-scaled segregation in vesicle bilayers remains to be elucidated. Such information would be of help in tuning the membrane fluidity and permeability of the liposomes, hence facilitating the uptake or release of drug molecules (Faria et al., 2019; Nakhaei et al., 2021; Li et al., 2019) in different environments.
For drug-carrying purposes, liposomes are often designed to have a large enclosed water core on the order of about 100 nm in diameter; to further improve the structural stability during drug transportation and delivery, cholesterol, sucrose and polyethylene glycol et al., 2019; Hirai et al., 2013). However, the multi-component liposomes are subject to environmental stimulation during drug loading or release, leading to correlated local and global structural changes (Lorena et al., 2012; Schilt et al., 2016). Simultaneous observations of the global and local bilayer structural information of liposomes would be of help in understanding their drug-carrying and -delivery efficiency (Nakhaei et al., 2021; Li et al., 2019). In this study, we have integrated an asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation (AF4) system into multi-angle (MALS), dynamic (DLS) and differential refractive-index (dRI) spectrometers, to reveal the structural features of a model PEGylated of hydrogenated soy phosphatidylcholine (HSPC). Together with simultaneous SAXS–WAXS, our combined analysis elucidates collective global and local structural changes of the HSPC on incorporation of cholesterol, especially during the gel-to-fluid of the liposome.
are mixed with phospholipids to form unilamellar vesicles of a core–multishell structure. Previously, small- and wide-angle X-ray (SAXS and WAXS) or neutron scattering were used to reveal the bilayer features (a few nanometres thick) and the phospholipid chain packing (Sreij2. Experimental
2.1. Sample preparation
The HSPC (L-α-phosphatidylcholine) powder used consists of phospholipids of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DPPC) and 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DSPC) in the molar ratio 1:8. The powder was mixed with cholesterol, sucrose and PEGylated lipid 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-[methoxy(polyethylene glycol)-2000] (mPEG2000-DSPE) with molar ratios HSPC:mPEG2000-DSPE:cholesterol = 9:1:x (with x > 4). The mixed sample powder was used in solution preparation of 10 mM HSPC for AF4/MALS/DLS/dRI and SAXS–WAXS measurements (Dominik et al., 2020). Sample solutions of 10 mM HPSC, without the addition of cholesterol, were also prepared with a similar molar composition of 1 mM DPPC:8.0 mM DSPC, and 1 mM mPEG2000-DSPE, without cholesterol, in co-extrusion processing as previously reported (Yang et al., 2019; Mineart et al., 2017).
2.2. AF4–MALS measurements
A Wyatt Eclipse DualTec system for AF4 was connected to a Wyatt-DAWN MALS spectrometer (with 18-angle Rg; one of the 18 MALS detectors was replaced by a DLS device to determine the hydrodynamic radius Rh of the liposomes (Fig. 1). Sample solutions of 2–30 µl were injected into the AF4 system and measured using a trapezoidal 265 mm-long channel of an RC 10 kDa cut-off membrane and a spacer for a channel height of 350 µm at 293 K. The AF4 parameters used are summarized in Table S1 of the supporting information. The refractive-index increment dn/dc = 0.146 ml g−1, used for deducing the mass of the PEGylated HSPC was determined from a separate measurement, with the integrated area of the elution profile of the sample solution with the AF4 channel path bypassed (to avoid loss of sample). Assuming 100% mass recovery, the ASTRA program (WYATT Technology) was employed to calculate the dn/dc value from the integrated elution and prescribed sample weight. Details of AF4 analysis were reported previously for characterization (Écija-Arenas et al., 2021).
detectors) and an Optilab dRI detector for determination of mass and2.3. Small- and wide-angle X-ray scattering
SAXS and WAXS (SWAXS) measurements were performed at the 13 A BioSWAXS beamline of the Taiwan Photon Source at the National Synchrotron Radiation Research Center. The SWAXS data were collected with an X-ray beam energy of 15.0 keV (or wavelength λ = 0.8266 Å) using the two synchronized in-vacuum detectors Eiger X 9M (SAXS) and 1M (WAXS) of the beamline positioned at sample-to-detector distances of 2500 and 180 mm, respectively. The scattering vector magnitude q = 4πλ−1sinθ (with the scattering angle 2θ) and the projection angles of the WAXS detector plane were calibrated using a mixed powder of silver behenate and lanthanum hexaboride (LaB6). The absolute intensity (in cm−1) was calibrated using water scattering intensity (Shih et al., 2022). The sample solutions were sealed in thermostated quartz capillaries (2 mm diameter and 20 µm wall thickness) and measured at 25, 40, 50 and 70°C. SAXS data were analyzed using the five-layer model of sharp scattering-length-density (SLD) interfaces, known as the core–multishell model, available in the SASView software platform (https://www.sasview.org/). The X+ software with available Gaussian electron density profiles was also used in SAXS data analysis (Ben-Nun et al., 2010).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. AF4-MALS results
The AF4/MALS/DLS/dRI results for the HSPC liposomes with cholesterol are shown in Fig. 2(a), revealing the number-average particle mass Mn of 118 kDa, with Mw/Mn = 1.0 (with weight-averaged mass Mw). Also shown in Fig. 2(a) are the deduced hydrodynamic radius Rh and Rg from the DLS and MALS–dRI data, respectively. Dividing the elution by the particle mass deduced (Fig. 2) leads to the of the liposomes [Fig. 2(b)] as a function of Rh; the result reveals a distribution peak at Rh = 52.4 nm and a polydispersity of ca 10% (Parot et al., 2020). Fig. 2(c) presents the Rg versus Rh plot to illustrate the Burchard–Stockmayer shape factor Sf = Rg/Rh (Mukherjee & Hackley, 2018) for the This falls close to the line of Sf = 1, corresponding to an ideal thin spherical shell structure. Nevertheless, the average Sf value (1.05) deduced is slightly above unity, which can be attributed to possible deformations of the shape from a thin spherical shell under the asymmetric flow field of AF4. We note that from the known equation Rg2 = (3/5)(R15 − R25)/(R13 − R23) for core–shell spheres (Feigin & Svergun, 1987), of core and shell radii R1 and R2, it can be deduced that Rg reduces to (3/5)1/2Rh for solid spheres (i.e. R2 = 0) and Rg ≃ Rh for thin spherical shells with R2 ≃ R1; namely, the shape factor Rg/Rh = (3/5)1/2 of solid spheres is smaller than that (≃ 1) of thin spherical shells. Further, it can be deduced that the values Rg2 = 1/5(a2 + 2b2) of ellipsoids (with the semi-major and semi-minor axes a and b) of a common volume have a minimum with a = b for spheroids. Therefore, the measured shape Sf = 1.05 for the liposomes suggests possible deformation of the liposomes from the ideal spherical shape (Sf = 1).
3.2. membrane bilayer structures
Shown in Fig. 3(a) are the integrated SAXS–WAXS data of the PEGylated HSPC with cholesterol added, revealing a characteristic broad hump centered around q ≃ 0.12 Å−1 from the typical vesical bilayers of ca 5 nm thickness. Also observed is an additional [compared with the SAXS data for the neat without cholesterol; Fig. 3(b)] peak at q ≃ 0.05 Å−1 associated with the addition of cholesterol. Correspondingly, the broad hump centered around q ≃ 1.5 Å−1 in the high-q region [Fig. 3(a)] indicates a significantly relaxed alkyl chain packing due to the intervening cholesterol. In contrast, the neat HSPC without cholesterol exhibits a relatively sharp peak at a similar q position, revealing a 2D hexagonal-like packing of the phospholipids with a Bragg d spacing of 4.2 Å (Geisler et al., 2020; Sreij et al., 2019).
To reveal the detailed bilayer structure of the liposomes, we fitted the SAXS data with a core–multishell model, having a five-layer SLD profile with sharp interfaces (Yang et al., 2019; Mineart et al., 2017); a multilayer model comprising five Gaussian electron density profiles for smooth density transitions across the sublayer interfaces (Schilt et al., 2016; Ben-Nun et al., 2010) is also used to fit the same sets of data. The five-layer core–multishell model comprises the central alkyl-dominated zone sandwiched by the head-group sublayers of the phospholipids, which are further sandwiched by two outer PEGylated layers, as illustrated in Fig. 3(e). As shown in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b), the SAXS data are better fitted in the higher-q region (>0.2 Å−1) using the asymmetric Gaussian electron density profiles compared with the core–multishell SLD profiles [Figs. 3(c) and 3(d)]; nevertheless, both models could fit the lower-q data equally well down to ∼0.01 Å−1, with qualitatively consistent electron density profiles. We note that the asymmetry in the electron density profile revealed consistently from both models is crucial in the data fitting. We also attempted a seven-layer core–multishell model fitting by adding an additional thin layer to the center of the lipid tail region; the fitting result, however, reduces to that of the five-layer model.
Figs. 3(c) and 3(d) illustrate the best-fitted asymmetric Gaussian electron density profiles for the HSPC bilayer (Su et al., 2013, 2018), which is sandwiched by two PEGylated layers each of ca 45 Å thickness. We attribute the higher electron density sublayers dominated by the phospholipid heads and the mPEG in Figs. 3(c) and 3(d) to the inner leaflet of the bilayers. Presumably, the inner leaflet of the bilayer, owing to its smaller shell radius (hence smaller shell area), might have tighter packing of the phospholipids and mPEG chains, resulting in sublayers of higher electron density. In contrast, the outer leaflet of a larger shell radius and facing open solvent tends to have more broadened peaks of lower electron density. On cholesterol intercalation, all the characteristic density peaks of the inner and outer leaflets of the bilayer [Fig. 3(c)] are broadened from that of the neat HSPC liposomes [Fig. 3(d)], leading to an enlarged bilayer thickness and peak-to-peak (PtP) distance (between the two phospholipid head sublayers of the inner and outer leaflets). Consistently, the thicker cholesterol-intercalated bilayer, with presumably larger bending modulus, is found to have larger sizes as shown in Fig. S2 of the supporting information. These results suggest a significant association of the cholesterol with the alkyl chain zone. We note that the cholesterol–lipid interactions affect the global and local ordering of the bilayer concomitantly, as revealed from the nearly collapsed scattering hump at q ≃ 0.4 Å−1 (Su et al., 2013) and the much broadened hump at q ≃ 1.5 Å−1 (the characteristic peak that represents the 2D hexagonal packing of the gel phase) from that observed for the neat HSPC (Geisler et al., 2020; Sreij et al., 2019). Similar deteriorations in the scattering features are also consistently observed with the temperature-dependent SWAXS data of the pure PEGylated HSPC liposomes (Fig. S1), when the sample temperature increased from 25°C (gel phase) to 70°C (fluid phase).
3.3. Cholesterol effect on chain packing revealed by WAXS analysis
Neat HSPC liposomes were reported to have pre- and main gel-ordered-to-fluid-disordered Tpre = 47.8°C and Tm = 53.6°C, respectively (Kitayama et al., 2014). Shown in Fig. 4 are the WAXS data measured at 25, 40 and 70°C for the HSPC liposomes, with and without cholesterol. The neat PEGylated HSPC manifests a primary sharp peak of the 2D hexagonal packing centered at q2 = 1.517 Å−1 at 25 and 40°C, which is significantly reduced at 70°C [Fig. 4(b)]. The corresponding coherent length Lc ≃ 2π/Δq, deduced from the q2 peak width Δq, increases from 117 Å at 25°C to 163 Å at 40°C, showing a pre- to main ordering behavior similar to that mentioned previously. At 70°C, the q2 peak deteriorates significantly for a much reduced Lc = 36 Å, illustrating the gel-to-fluid From the q2 peak position, the deduced lipid–lipid d spacing D = 2π/q2 of the neat HSPC changes from 4.14 to 4.17 to 4.34 Å, for 25, 40 and 70°C; the corresponding area per lipid AL estimated from the 2D hexagonal packing with 16π2/( 31/2q22) (Geisler et al., 2020) increases from 39.6 to 40.2 to 43.5 Å2. The deduced feature sizes are summarized in Table 1.
temperatures at
|
In contrast, the WAXS data measured at 25°C for the HPSC q1 = 1.234 Å−1, q2 = 1.497 Å−1 and q3 = 1.788 Å−1; all three humps have similar small Lc values of 16–17 Å. We assign the q2 peak observed for the PEGylated HSPC liposomes with cholesterol to a deteriorated 2D hexagonal packing of the lipid–cholesterol complex. We notice that the q2 hump position of the with cholesterol shifts to lower q values as the temperature increases from 25 to 40 to 50 to 70°C. The values deduced for AL with cholesterol AL-chol are also larger than those of the corresponding without cholesterol, as shown in Table 1, especially in the fluid phase. The result suggests that cholesterol can interact substantially with the lipid chains, especially in the fluid phase of reduced lipid self-interactions.
with cholesterol exhibit a convoluted broad hump that can be decomposed into three broad humps centered atWe notice that q1 and q3 show little or no peak position shifting following the temperature changes, and the q1 peak even disappears at 50°C [Fig. 4(a)]. It is likely that these two peaks are associated with the packing of excess cholesterol phase segregated from the 2D hexagonal domains of the lipid–cholesterol complex, or an additional orthorhombic-like packing as suggested in previous reports (Sreij et al., 2019; Geisler et al., 2020). To further clarify the origin of these two peaks, we measured cholesterol-concentration-dependent SWAXS (Fig. S3). The results indeed show that the q1 and q3 peaks emerge with higher cholesterol content roughly above the molar ratio HSPC:mPEG:cholesterol = 9:1:2 (i.e. 20% cholesterol). The q1 peak of lower thermal stability may be associated with the 2D monolayer packing of cholesterol (Rapaport et al., 2001); the less temperature-dependent q3 peak, however, may be of different origin.
4. Conclusions
SAXS–WAXS and AF4 coupled with MALS, DLS and dRI are used to successfully determine the mass, size and bilayer structural features of the PEGylated HSPC AL and an increase in the size. These cholesterol effects show signs of saturation at higher cholesterol concentrations above ca 1:5 cholesterol:lipid molar ratio. Simultaneous SAXS–WAXS measurements correlate the concomitant structural changes in the inner and outer leaflets in the directions normal and parallel to the bilayer packing plane of the upon intercalation of cholesterol and the gel-to-fluid phase transition.
Cholesterol is found to significantly affect the lipid chain packing of the leading to thickening of the bilayer, an increase inSupporting information
Supporting figures and tables. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576723005393/tj5034sup1.pdf
Acknowledgements
We thank C.-L. Chang for assistance in SAXS–WAXS data collection, and Z.-Y. Wang and Y.-T. Liu for sample preparation. An insightful discussion with Dr B. W. Mansel on data analysis is acknowledged.
References
Ben-Nun, T., Ginsburg, A., Székely, P. & Raviv, U. (2010). J. Appl. Cryst. 43, 1522–1531. Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
Dominik, D., Grzegorz, C., Sebastian, K. & Marek, L. (2020). Langmuir, 36, 3826–3835. Google Scholar
Écija-Arenas, Á., Román-Pizarro, V. & Fernández-Romero, J. M. (2021). J. Chromatogr. A, 1636, 461798. Google Scholar
Faria, M. J., Machado, R., Ribeiro, A., Gonçalves, H., Real Oliveira, M. E. C. D., Viseu, T., das Neves, J. & Lúcio, M. (2019). Pharmaceutics, 11, 485. Google Scholar
Feigin, L. A. & Svergun, D. I. (1987). Structure Analysis by Small-Angle X-ray and Neutron Scattering New York: Plenum Press. Google Scholar
Geisler, R., Prévost, S., Dattani, R. & Hellweg, T. (2020). Crystals, 10, 401. Google Scholar
Hirai, M., Kimura, R., Takeuchi, K., Sugiyama, M., Kasahara, K., Ohta, N., Farago, B., Stadler, A. & Zaccai, G. (2013). Eur. Phys. J. E, 36, 74. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
Kitayama, H., Takechi, Y., Tamai, N., Matsuki, H., Yomota, C. & Saito, H. (2014). Chem. Pharm. Bull. 62, 58–63. Google Scholar
Li, T., Clulow, A. J., Nowell, C. J., Hawley, A., Cipolla, D., Rades, T. & Boyd, B. J. (2019). J. Colloid Interface Sci. 555, 361–372. Google Scholar
Lombardo, D. & Kiselev, M. A. (2022). Pharmaceutics, 14, 543. Google Scholar
Lorena, R.-M., Marina, I. G. & Fausto, S. (2012). Langmuir, 28, 12851–12860. Google Scholar
Mineart, K. P., Kelley, E. G., Nagao, M. & Prabhu, V. M. (2017). Soft Matter, 13, 5228–5232. Google Scholar
Mukherjee, A. & Hackley, V. A. (2018). Analyst, 143, 731–740. Google Scholar
Nakhaei, P., Margiana, R., Bokov, D. O., Abdelbasset, W. K., Jadidi Kouhbanani, M. A., Varma, R. S., Marofi, F., Jarahian, M. & Beheshtkhoo, N. (2021). Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 705886. Google Scholar
Parot, J., Caputo, F., Mehn, D., Hackley, V. A. & Calzolai, L. (2020). J. Controlled Release, 320, 495–510. Google Scholar
Rapaport, H., Kuzmenko, I., Lafont, S., Kjaer, K., Howes, P. B., Als-Nielsen, J., Lahav, M. & Leiserowitz, L. (2001). Biophys. J. 81, 2729–2736. Google Scholar
Schilt, Y., Berman, T., Wei, X., Barenholz, Y. & Raviv, U. (2016). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1860, 108–119. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Shih, O., Liao, K.-F., Yeh, Y.-Q., Su, C.-J., Wang, C.-A., Chang, J.-W., Wu, W.-R., Liang, C.-C., Lin, C.-Y., Lee, T.-H., Chang, C.-H., Chiang, L.-C., Chang, C.-F., Liu, D.-G., Lee, M.-H., Liu, C.-Y., Hsu, T.-W., Mansel, B., Ho, M.-C., Shu, C.-Y., Lee, F., Yen, E., Lin, T.-C. & Jeng, U. (2022). J. Appl. Cryst. 55, 340–352. Google Scholar
Shoji, K., Hayato, I., Takashi, H. & Hitoshi, M. (1998). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1374, 1–8. Google Scholar
Sreij, R., Dargel, C., Schweins, R., Prévost, S., Dattani, R. & Hellweg, T. (2019). Sci. Rep. 9, 5542. Google Scholar
Su, C.-J., Lee, M. T., Liao, K. F., Shih, O. & Jeng, U. S. (2018). Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 20, 26830–26836. Google Scholar
Su, C.-J., Wu, S.-S., Jeng, U.-S., Lee, M.-T., Su, A. C., Liao, K. F., Lin, W. Y., Huang, Y. S. & Chen, C. Y. (2013). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1828, 528–534. Google Scholar
Yang, C.-H., Lin, T.-L. & Jeng, U.-S. (2019). Langmuir, 35, 9483–9492. Google Scholar
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are cited.