Targeted protein delivery for stimulating tissue repair has been a core focus of the field of tissue engineering for several decades. While many promising protein therapeutics exist, achieving sustained and localized protein delivery to injured tissues remains a challenge. Over the past 25 years, significant breakthroughs have been made in biomaterial-based strategies to improve targeted protein delivery. Protein delivery vehicles that leverage affinity interactions between proteins and materials present an effective approach for modulating the spatiotemporal release of proteins within sites of tissue injury. Stimuli-responsive polymers also enable protein release to be tailored to respond to cell- and tissue-level changes. In this article, we highlight some of the major recent advances in biomaterial strategies for targeted protein delivery with a focus on affinity-based protein delivery systems. We also discuss the future of protein delivery for tissue repair, in which we envision protein delivery strategies that can be tuned in response to the dynamic microenvironment of injured tissues.
Impact Statement
Achieving targeted protein delivery to injured tissues is a core focus of the field of tissue engineering and has enormous clinical potential. This article highlights significant advances made in biomaterial-based protein delivery strategies over the last 25 years and how they will influence research in the next 25 years. These advances will enable protein release rates to be tuned with increased flexibility to deliberately address the challenges of the dynamic injury environment and ultimately lead to better solutions for patients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ShieldsL.B., RaqueG.H., GlassmanS.D., et al.Adverse effects associated with high-dose recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 use in anterior cervical spine fusion. Spine, 31, 542, 2006.
2.
CaiY., XuM., YuanM., LiuZ., and YuanW.Developments in human growth hormone preparations: sustained-release, prolonged half-life, novel injection devices, and alternative delivery routes. Int J Nanomed, 9, 3527, 2014.
3.
RitgerP.L., and PeppasN.A.A simple equation for description of solute release I. Fickian and non-fickian release from non-swellable devices in the form of slabs, spheres, cylinders or discs. J Control Release, 5, 23, 1987.
4.
RitgerP.L., and PeppasN.A.A simple equation for description of solute release II. Fickian and anomalous release from swellable devices. J Control Release, 5, 37, 1987.
5.
GoA., and LangerR.Modeling monomer release from bioerodible polymers. J Control Release, 33, 55, 1995.
6.
AlonsoM.J., GuptaR.K., MinC., SiberG.R., and LangerR.Biodegradable microspheres as controlled-release tetanus toxoid delivery systems. Vaccine, 12, 299, 1994.
7.
CohenS., YoshiokaT., LucarelliM., HwangL.H., and LangerR.Controlled delivery systems for proteins based on poly (lactic/glycolic acid) microspheres. Pharmaceut Res, 8, 713, 1991.
8.
LiechtyW.B., ScheuerleR.L., Vela RamirezJ.E., and PeppasN.A.Uptake and function of membrane-destabilizing cationic nanogels for intracellular drug delivery. Bioeng Transl Med, 4, 17, 2019.
9.
ChengJ., TeplyB.A., SherifiI., et al.Formulation of functionalized PLGA–PEG nanoparticles for in vivo targeted drug delivery. Biomaterials, 28, 869, 2007.
10.
WuJ., KamalyN., ShiJ., et al.Development of multinuclear polymeric nanoparticles as robust protein nanocarriers. Angew Chem Int Ed, 53, 8975, 2014.
11.
PakulskaM.M., DonaghueI.E., ObermeyerJ.M., et al.Encapsulation-free controlled release: electrostatic adsorption eliminates the need for protein encapsulation in PLGA nanoparticles. Sci Adv, 2, e1600519, 2016.
12.
HettiaratchiM.H., MillerT., TemenoffJ.S., GuldbergR.E., and McDevittT.C.Heparin microparticle effects on presentation and bioactivity of bone morphogenetic protein-2. Biomaterials, 35, 7228, 2014.
13.
AbbahS.A., LiuJ., GohJ.C.H., and WongH.-K.Enhanced control of in vivo bone formation with surface functionalized alginate microbeads incorporating heparin and human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Tissue Eng Part A, 19, 350, 2012.
14.
TaylorS.J., McDonaldIII, J.W., and Sakiyama-ElbertS.E.Controlled release of neurotrophin-3 from fibrin gels for spinal cord injury. J Control Release, 98, 281, 2004.
15.
Sakiyama-ElbertS.E., and HubbellJ.A.Controlled release of nerve growth factor from a heparin-containing fibrin-based cell ingrowth matrix. J Control Release, 69, 149, 2000.
16.
SinghS., WuB.M., and DunnJ.C.The enhancement of VEGF-mediated angiogenesis by polycaprolactone scaffolds with surface cross-linked heparin. Biomaterials, 32, 2059, 2011.
17.
NihL.R., GojginiS., CarmichaelS.T., and SeguraT.Dual-function injectable angiogenic biomaterial for the repair of brain tissue following stroke. Nat Mater, 17, 642, 2018.
Sakiyama-ElbertS.E., and HubbellJ.A.Development of fibrin derivatives for controlled release of heparin-binding growth factors. J Control Release, 65, 389, 2000.
20.
MartinoM.M., and HubbellJ.A.The 12th–14th type III repeats of fibronectin function as a highly promiscuous growth factor-binding domain. FASEB J, 24, 4711, 2010.
21.
MartinoM.M., BriquezP.S., RangaA., LutolfM.P., and HubbellJ.A.Heparin-binding domain of fibrin (ogen) binds growth factors and promotes tissue repair when incorporated within a synthetic matrix. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 110, 4563, 2013.
22.
HettiaratchiM.H., RouseT., ChouC., et al.Enhanced in vivo retention of low dose BMP-2 via heparin microparticle delivery does not accelerate bone healing in a critically sized femoral defect. Acta Biomater, 59, 21, 2017.
23.
HettiaratchiM.H., ChouC., ServiesN., et al.Competitive protein binding influences heparin-based modulation of spatial growth factor delivery for bone regeneration. Tissue Eng Part A, 23, 683, 2017.
24.
TellierL.E., MillerT., McDevittT.C., and TemenoffJ.S.Hydrolysis and sulfation pattern effects on release of bioactive bone morphogenetic protein-2 from heparin-based microparticles. J Mater Chem B, 3, 8001, 2015.
25.
SmithR.A., MuraliS., RaiB., et al.Minimum structural requirements for bmp-2-binding of heparin oligosaccharides. Biomaterials, 184, 41, 2018.
26.
MartinoM.M., TortelliF., MochizukiM., et al.Engineering the growth factor microenvironment with fibronectin domains to promote wound and bone tissue healing. Sci Transl Med, 3, 100ra89, 2011.
27.
VulicK., and ShoichetM.S.Tunable growth factor delivery from injectable hydrogels for tissue engineering. J Am Chem Soc, 134, 882, 2011.
28.
VulicK., PakulskaM.M., SonthaliaR., RamachandranA., and ShoichetM.S.Mathematical model accurately predicts protein release from an affinity-based delivery system. J Control Release, 197, 69, 2015.
29.
ParkerJ., MitrousisN., and ShoichetM.S.Hydrogel for simultaneous tunable growth factor delivery and enhanced viability of encapsulated cells in vitro. Biomacromolecules, 17, 476, 2016.
30.
DelplaceV., Ortin-MartinezA., TsaiE.L.S., AminA.N., WallaceV., and ShoichetM.S.Controlled release strategy designed for intravitreal protein delivery to the retina. J Control Release, 293, 10, 2019.
31.
PakulskaM.M., VulicK., and ShoichetM.S.Affinity-based release of chondroitinase ABC from a modified methylcellulose hydrogel. J Control Release, 171, 11, 2013.
32.
HettiaratchiM.H., O'MearaM.J., TealC.J., PayneS.L., PickeringA.J., and ShoichetM.S.Local delivery of stabilized chondroitinase abc degrades chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans in stroke-injured rat brains. J Control Release, 297, 14, 2019.
33.
NoriS., KhazaeiM., AhujaC.S., et al.Human oligodendrogenic neural progenitor cells delivered with chondroitinase ABC facilitate functional repair of chronic spinal cord injury. Stem Cell Rep, 11, 1433, 2018.
34.
PakulskaM.M., VulicK., TamR.Y., and ShoichetM.S.Hybrid crosslinked methylcellulose hydrogel: a predictable and tunable platform for local drug delivery. Adv Mater, 27, 5002, 2015.
35.
PakulskaM.M., TatorC.H., and ShoichetM.S.Local delivery of chondroitinase ABC with or without stromal cell-derived factor 1α promotes functional repair in the injured rat spinal cord. Biomaterials, 134, 13, 2017.
36.
IshiharaJ., FukunagaK., IshiharaA., et al.Matrix-binding checkpoint immunotherapies enhance antitumor efficacy and reduce adverse events. Sci Transl Med, 9, eaan0401, 2017.
37.
MartinoM.M., BriquezP.S., GüçE., et al.Growth factors engineered for super-affinity to the extracellular matrix enhance tissue healing. Science, 343, 885, 2014.
38.
HuynhV., and WylieR.G.Competitive affinity release for lon-term delivery of antibodies from hydrogels. Angew Chem Int Ed, 57, 3406, 2018.
39.
LangerR., and PeppasN.Chemical and physical structure of polymers as carriers for controlled release of bioactive agents: a review. J Macromol Sci Part C, 23, 61, 1983.
40.
KoshyS.T., ZhangD.K., GrolmanJ.M., StaffordA.G., and MooneyD.J.Injectable nanocomposite cryogels for versatile protein drug delivery. Acta Biomater, 65, 36, 2018.
41.
ObermeyerJ.M., TuladharA., PayneS.L., HoE., MorsheadC.M., and ShoichetM.S.Local delivery of BDNF enables behavioural recovery and tissue repair in stroke-injured rats. Tissue Eng Part A [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2018.0215, 2019.
42.
Elliott DonaghueI., TatorC.H., and ShoichetM.S.Local delivery of neurotrophin-3 and anti-NogoA promotes repair after spinal cord injury. Tissue Eng Part A, 22, 733, 2016.
43.
TuladharA., PayneS.L., and ShoichetM.S.Harnessing the potential of biomaterials for brain repair after stroke. Front Mater, 5, 14, 2018.
44.
HettiaratchiM.H., FührmannT., and ShoichetM.S.Recent advances in regenerative medicine approaches for spinal cord injuries. Curr Opin Biomed Eng, 4, 40, 2017.
45.
AndersonM.A., O'SheaT.M., BurdaJ.E., et al.Required growth facilitators propel axon regeneration across complete spinal cord injury. Nature, 561, 396, 2018.
46.
FührmannT., AnandakumaranP.N., PayneS.L., et al.Combined delivery of chondroitinase ABC and human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neuroepithelial cells promote tissue repair in an animal model of spinal cord injury. Biomed Mater, 13, 024103, 2018.
47.
LeeT.T., GarcíaJ.R., PaezJ.I., et al.Light-triggered in vivo activation of adhesive peptides regulates cell adhesion, inflammation and vascularization of biomaterials. Nat Mater, 14, 352, 2015.
48.
FisherS.A., TamR.Y., FokinaA., MahmoodiM.M., DistefanoM.D., and ShoichetM.S.Photo-immobilized EGF chemical gradients differentially impact breast cancer cell invasion and drug response in defined 3D hydrogels. Biomaterials, 178, 751, 2018.
49.
MitragotriS., BlankschteinD., and LangerR.Ultrasound-mediated transdermal protein delivery. Science, 269, 850, 1995.
50.
AnnamalaiR.T., TurnerP.A., CarsonW.F., LeviB., KunkelS., and StegemannJ.P.Harnessing macrophage-mediated degradation of gelatin microspheres for spatiotemporal control of BMP2 release. Biomaterials, 161, 216, 2018.
51.
KimS., and HealyK.E.Synthesis and characterization of injectable poly (N-isopropylacrylamide-co-acrylic acid) hydrogels with proteolytically degradable cross-links. Biomacromolecules, 4, 1214, 2003.
52.
LutolfM., Lauer-FieldsJ., SchmoekelH., et al.Synthetic matrix metalloproteinase-sensitive hydrogels for the conduction of tissue regeneration: engineering cell-invasion characteristics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 100, 5413, 2003.
53.
ZischA.H., LutolfM.P., EhrbarM., et al.Cell-demanded release of VEGF from synthetic, biointeractive cell ingrowth matrices for vascularized tissue growth. FASEB J, 17, 2260, 2003.
54.
LutolfM.P., WeberF.E., SchmoekelH.G., et al.Repair of bone defects using synthetic mimetics of collagenous extracellular matrices. Nat Biotechnol, 21, 513, 2003.
55.
JhaA.K., TharpK.M., BrowneS., et al.Matrix metalloproteinase-13 mediated degradation of hyaluronic acid-based matrices orchestrates stem cell engraftment through vascular integration. Biomaterials, 89, 136, 2016.
56.
RuskowitzE.R., ComerfordM.P., BadeauB.A., and DeForestC.A.Logical stimuli-triggered delivery of small molecules from hydrogel biomaterials. Biomater Sci, 7, 542, 2018.
57.
BadeauB.A., ComerfordM.P., ArakawaC.K., ShadishJ.A., and DeForestC.A.Engineered modular biomaterial logic gates for environmentally triggered therapeutic delivery. Nat Chem, 10, 251, 2018.
58.
PakulskaM.M., MierschS., and ShoichetM.S.Designer protein delivery: from natural to engineered affinity-controlled release systems. Science, 351, aac4750, 2016.
