Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

Targeting a Protein May Help Reverse Lymphedema

Lymphedema is the buildup of fluid in soft body tissues when the lymph system is damaged or blocked. Lymphedema occurs when lymph is not able to flow through the body the way that it should. Now, a 3D model developed by researchers at Cornell and collaborators

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Lymphedema is the buildup of fluid in soft body tissues when the lymph system is damaged or blocked. Lymphedema occurs when lymph is not able to flow through the body the way that it should. Now, a 3D model developed by researchers at Cornell and collaborators reveals targeting an unsuspected protein may reverse lymphedema.

The findings are published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in an article titled, “A 3D biomimetic model of lymphatics reveals cell–cell junction tightening and lymphedema via a cytokine-induced ROCK2/JAM-A complex.”

“Impaired lymphatic drainage and lymphedema are major morbidities whose mechanisms have remained obscure,” the researchers wrote. “To study lymphatic drainage and its impairment, we engineered a microfluidic culture model of lymphatic vessels draining interstitial fluid. This lymphatic drainage-on-chip revealed that inflammatory cytokines that are known to disrupt blood vessel junctions instead tightened lymphatic cell–cell junctions and impeded lymphatic drainage.”

The Cornell-led collaboration built a 3D in vitro model of a functional human lymphatic vessel that revealed a surprising mechanism that can jam up the necessary drainage: a protein expressed in lymphatic endothelial cells called rho-associated protein kinase 2 (ROCK2).

The researchers demonstrated that by inhibiting ROCK2 they can reverse the effects of lymphedema, creating a potential treatment for a condition that is estimated to affect up to 150 million people worldwide.

“Lymphedema has so many patients in the world,” said Esak (Isaac) Lee, lead author, Meinig Family Investigator in the Life Sciences, and assistant professor of biomedical engineering at Cornell Engineering. “Doctors usually suggest you wear a compression garment or do some physical therapy, like massage, to pump out all these fluids from your arms and legs. Unfortunately, there’s no FDA-approved drug because we don’t understand the mechanism of this disease.”

The team collaborated with researchers from Boston University (BU) and Harvard Medical School who were led by co-lead author Christopher Chen of BU.

Lee set out to create an in vitro model that could isolate several biological and biophysical factors, such as inflammatory cytokines, ROCK2 signal, and interstitial fluid pressure, while mimicking the drainage.

The researchers introduced inflammatory cytokines that are known to be expressed in lymphedema patients, such as interleukin-2 and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), which tighten the lymphatic junctions, leading to fluid buildup and lymphedema. While these cytokines had been previously known to disrupt blood vessel junctions, the model revealed they were actually tightening the junctions between lymphatic endothelial cells and impeding drainage.

When the researchers inhibited ROCK2, the lymphatic junctions loosened and the blood vessel junctions tightened under inflammation so that normal fluid drainage could resume.

“There are upwards of 170 to 180 different pan-ROCK inhibitors, but they generally come with serious side effects, such as hypotension, when these ROCK inhibitors block both ROCK1 and ROCK2, two isoforms of ROCK,” Lee said. “The side effects of inhibiting ROCK2, however, are minimal, because ROCK2 is more expressed in lymphatic cells than vascular muscle cells in blood vessels, where ROCK1 is highly expressed. This makes it a strong candidate for therapeutics that target lymphatic disease with less vascular toxicity.”

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →