Journal: Autophagy
Article Title: GNS561, a clinical-stage PPT1 inhibitor, is efficient against hepatocellular carcinoma via modulation of lysosomal functions.
doi: 10.1080/15548627.2021.1988357
Figure Lengend Snippet: Figure 5. GNS561 targets PPT1. (A) Nano differential scanning fluorimetry assays comparing GNS561 + PPT1 and HCQ + PPT1 against the apo-PPT1 ligand. Data represent the mean first derivative values (solid lines) ± SEM (shaded areas) of two experiments. SD from the mean is indicated by the light-color shading around the mean-line. Tm were determined by detecting the maximum of the first derivative of the fluorescence ratios. ΔTm values of each compound condition were determined by subtracting average Tm of PPT1 (in the respective buffer) by the average Tm of the respective compound condition. (B) PPT1 enzymatic activity of HepG2 cells treated with GNS561 for 3 h. HCQ and HDSF were used as positive controls. The results were compared to the diluent of GNS561 (control condition). (C) Representative immunoblotting of LC3-II in HepG2 cells treated with GNS561 for 16 h in the presence or absence of NtBuHA (8 mM). GAPDH was used as a loading control. Fold changes of normalized LC3-II level were calculated against the control condition (diluent of GNS561 + diluent of NtBuHA). (D) Cell viability percent against the control condition (diluent of GNS561 + diluent of NtBuHA) after 24 h of treatment with GNS561 in the presence or absence of NtBuHA (8 mM). (E) Fold change of normalized LC3-II (norm LC3-II) level were calculated against the control condition (diluent of GNS561) in HepG2 cells WT or siRNA-PPT1 treated by GNS561 for 24 h. GAPDH was used as a loading control. (F) Ratio of norm LC3-II between siRNA-PPT1 and WT HepG2 cells treated by GNS561 for 24 h. (G) Cell viability percent against the control condition (diluent of GNS561) after 24 h of treatment with GNS561 of WT and siRNA-PPT1 HepG2 cells. (H) Staining of lysosomes (LAMP2, green), MTOR (red) and nucleus (4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole [DAPI], blue) after treatment with GNS561 and two positive controls, EAD1 and HCQ, for 16 h. Pearson correlation coefficient between MTOR and LAMP2 was represented using scatter dot plot representation. In (B), (C), (D), (E), (F) and (G), data represent the mean + SEM. For comparison, Student t-test was used for (C), (D), (E), and (G) and one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post hoc analysis was performed for (B), (F) and (H). For all studies except (A), n ≥ 3 biological replicates. *represents significant difference, at least p < 0.05.
Article Snippet: Mammalian Cell Lysis Buffer (GE Healthcare, 28–941279), 4-methylumbelliferyl-β-D-6-thiopalmitoylglucoside (Moscerdam, EM06650), Z-VAD-FMK (Bio Techne, FMK001), sorafenib (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Sc357,801), hexadecanesulfonyl fluoride (HDSF; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, sc-221,708), human PPT1 (OriGene Technologies, TP721098), DC661 (Vagdevi Innoscience), Triton X-100 (Dutscher, 091584B) and cOmpleteTM Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Roche, 4,693,132,001) were used.
Techniques: Nano Differential Scanning Fluorimetry, Fluorescence, Activity Assay, Control, Western Blot, Staining, Comparison