Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBlum, G
dc.contributor.authorWeimer, RM
dc.contributor.authorEdgington, LE
dc.contributor.authorAdams, W
dc.contributor.authorBogyo, M
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-18T02:54:25Z
dc.date.available2020-12-18T02:54:25Z
dc.date.issued2009-07-28
dc.identifier.citationBlum, G., Weimer, R. M., Edgington, L. E., Adams, W. & Bogyo, M. (2009). Comparative Assessment of Substrates and Activity Based Probes as Tools for Non-Invasive Optical Imaging of Cysteine Protease Activity. PLOS ONE, 4 (7), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006374.
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/255549
dc.description.abstractRecent advances in the field of non-invasive optical imaging have included the development of contrast agents that report on the activity of enzymatic targets associated with disease pathology. In particular, proteases have proven to be ideal targets for development of optical sensors for cancer. Recently developed contrast agents for protease activity include both small peptides and large polymer-based quenched fluorescent substrates as well as fluorescently labeled activity based probes (ABPs). While substrates produce a fluorescent signal as a result of processing by a protease, ABPs are retained at the site of proteolysis due to formation of a permanent covalent bond with the active site catalytic residue. Both methods have potential advantages and disadvantages yet a careful comparison of substrates and ABPs has not been performed. Here we present the results of a direct comparison of commercially available protease substrates with several recently described fluorescent ABPs in a mouse model of cancer. The results demonstrate that fluorescent ABPs show more rapid and selective uptake into tumors as well as overall brighter signals compared to substrate probes. These data suggest that the lack of signal amplification for an ABP is offset by the increased kinetics of tissue uptake and prolonged retention of the probes once bound to a protease target. Furthermore, fluorescent ABPs can be used as imaging reagents with similar or better results as the commercially available protease substrates.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherPUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.titleComparative Assessment of Substrates and Activity Based Probes as Tools for Non-Invasive Optical Imaging of Cysteine Protease Activity
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0006374
melbourne.affiliation.departmentBiochemistry and Molecular Biology
melbourne.source.titlePLoS One
melbourne.source.volume4
melbourne.source.issue7
dc.rights.licenseCC BY
melbourne.elementsid1287857
melbourne.contributor.authorEdgington-Mitchell, Laura
dc.identifier.eissn1932-6203
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record