Two bicyclic peptides, [W(WR)4K]-GFLG-[W(WR)8E] and [W(WR)4K]-[W(WR)4E], composed of alternate tryptophan (W) and arginine (R) residues in each monocyclic peptide building block connected through a lysine linker or a short cathepsin B tetrapeptide ligand, were synthesized. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values for a number of peptides were evaluated against different Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial strains. [W(WR)4K]-GFLG showed antibacterial activity against Gram-positive methicillin-resistant S. aureus (ATCC BAA-1556) and S. aureus (ATCC 29213) bacteria with MIC values of 16 µg/mL. The cytotoxicity of monocyclic peptide [W(WR)4K]-GFLG was evaluated against human liver (HepG2), kidney (HEK293), and lung (A549) cells after 24 h incubation, showing a CC50 > 300 µM. Furthermore, bicyclic peptides [W(WR)4K]-GFLG-[W(WR)8E] and [W(WR)4K]-[W(WR)4E] did not show any significant cytotoxicity at a concentration of 25 µM against human leukemia adenocarcinoma (CCRF-CEM) cells after 3 h incubation. These peptides were found to be effective molecular transporters for the delivery of a negatively charged phosphopeptide, enhancing the cellular delivery of a fluorescein (F´)-labeled phosphopeptide, F´-GpYEEI (F´-PP) (5 µM), by 6.5- and 4.5-fold, respectively, in CCRF-CEM cells after 3 h incubation when used at a concentration of 25 µM. These data suggest that these peptides can be used as cellular delivery tools.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Darwish et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: