Apoptin from chicken anemia virus has been demonstrated to have apoptotic activity and to be able to specifically kill several types of tumor cells including the cell lines HeLa, Saos-2, lung cancer cells H1299 and HepG2 [
9-
11,
13,
14,
19]. Apoptin is not only p53 and Bcl
- independent, but also does not require specific post-modification in order to be able to induce apoptosis [
7]. Therefore, apoptin has great potential to be developed into a protein drug that will be useful as part of the cancer therapy armory. In this context, previously studies have shown that fusing the TAT peptide to apoptin, in order to create a recombinant protein vehicle, which allows protein uptake by cells, improves protein translocation into the cell and increases Saos-2 cell killing [
19]. This approach is a useful was of overcoming problems associated with the delivery of apoptin into cells without affecting the anti-cancer activity of the protein. However, up to the present, few studies have investigated anti-cancer activity using such a recombinant TAT-Apoptin protein. The main reason for this lack of progress is the poor expression and low protein solubility of TAT-Apoptin. Previous studies have shown that the large-scale production of recombinant TAT-Apoptin using a prokaryotic expression is difficult and therefore this has become a bottle-neck [
17,
18]. Even today, in spite of the fact that many eukaryotic expression systems are well established, various factors, such as cost-effectiveness, insertional mutagenesis and transient expression, still need to be resolved for these systems. Taking the above into consideration, the effective production of TAT-Apoptin protein using a prokaryotic system is a crucial key step in developing this protein drug as an anti-tumor therapy. Therefore, in this study, the specific aim was to develop a prokaryotic expression system that allowed the efficient production of recombinant TAT-Apoptin protein. Using a prokaryotic expression system to express heterologous recombinant protein has several advantages including time-savings, cost-effectiveness, ease of production, simplified characterization and others. It is for these reasons that
E. coli is the most used expression system when evaluating the expression of a foreign protein [
20]. Indeed, the above points are some of the critical factors associated with choosing a suitable production system when developing a protein drug. To this end, problems associated with having a truly effective system for the large-scale production of apoptin protein still needed to be explored.
To improve protein expression and to enhance the solubility of any protein produced in an
E. coli expression system, a number of strategies are available. These include cultivation parameters, the effect of fusing the protein to an affinity tag and the optimization of codon usage of foreign gene for
E. coli. All of these have been frequently employed to improve the amount of recombinant protein recovered [
17,
18,
21-
23]. In the present study, we first explored the effect of two different fusion tags on TAT-Apoptin expression, although others remain available, are untested as yet and may further improve the yield in the future. The presence of a GST fusion tag was found to significantly improve the yield of TAT-Apoptin compared to a 6

×

His tag (Figures

and ). In a previous study, Liu
et al successfully overcame the problem of less efficient expression in
E. coli of porcine circovirus (PCV) by fusing the maltose-binding protein (MBP) to an 8xHis tag [
23]. The main mechanism by which the MBP-8xHis tag improved protein expression remains unclear. However, one possibility is improved protein solubility [
24]. Similarly, in our previous study, the addition of a GST tag to the CAV VP1 protein also improved expression in
E. coli significantly compared to a His

×

6 tag [
21]. Thus it would seem that some fusion tags are able to improve expression of soluble protein in
E. coli compared to other tags, perhaps by aiding the correct folding of their fused partner [
21,
24].
Next we investigated which of three different
E. coli strains, BL21(DE3), BL21(DE3)pLysS and BL21(DE3)Codonplus-RP, was able to improve protein production and yield. With both GST-TAT-Apoptin and His-TAT-Apoptin, BL21(DE3) was preferred and produced more TAT-Apoptin protein than either BL21(DE3)pLysS or BL21(DE3)Codonplus-RP (Figure ). It is worth noting that BL21(DE3)pLysS has a higher growth rate than BL21(DE3) or BL21(DE3)Codonplus-RP when expressing His-TAT-Apoptin (Figure ). This discrepancy may involve either poor protein stability or the cytotoxic nature of His-TAT-Apoptin when present in BL21(DE3) and BL21(DE3)Codonplus-RP. These results are similar to those obtained for the production of GST-VP1 protein from CAV in
E. coli at low expression levels [
21]. BL21(DE3)pLysS superiority may be due to the presence in the strain of the
pLysS plasmid during protein induction [
17,
21]. This difference may enable BL21(DE3)pLysS to tolerate cytotoxicity associated with the expression of T7 lysozyme by attenuating the transcription leakage by T7 RNA polymerase [
17,
21]. However, this phenomenon was not important when GST-TAT-Apoptin was expressed and the growth profiles of the three strains producing GST-TAT-Apoptin were almost identical on induction by IPTG. In this area, it is possible that the cytotoxicity of GST-TAT-Apoptin may be less that that of His-TAT-Apoptin in BL21(DE3) and BL21(DE3)Codonplus-RP [
21]. Furthermore, the phenomenon of “protein burden” may not have been encountered when BL21(DE3) was used to express GST-TAT-Apoptin [
25]. It was concluded that BL21(DE3) is the preferred choice for expression of GST-TAT-Apoptin.
Rosenberg
et al have proposed that the abundance of a rare codon near the 5’-end of the gene might affect the efficiency of protein translation [
26]. If this is true, then the approach used in the present study to modify the codon usage in the gene ought to improve the expression of full-length apoptin protein. When Genscript OptimumGene
TM bioinformatic software was used to identify rare codons in
E. coli that exist in the wild-type CAV VP3 gene, the pinpointed amino acid residues included arginine, leucine, proline and lysine; these are commonly found in the N-terminus and C-terminus regions of the apoptin protein. After codon optimization of CAV VP3 gene, TAT-Apoptin
opt was fused with both tags and successful expressed in
E. coli (Figure , C). The amount of expressed GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt in
E. coli was substantially higher than that of GST-TAT-Apoptin and His-TAT-Apoptin
opt when BL21(DE3) or BL21(DE3)pLysS were used (Figure , C and Table

). Thus codon optimization within VP3 gene of the rare codons in
E. coli was able to improve the expression level of TAT-Apoptin; specifically translation efficiency was improved without the need to supply extra copies of the rare tRNA genes [
27,
28]. Interestingly, in terms of growth, BL21(DE3) and BL21(DE3)pLysS performed almost identically when expressing GST-TAT-Apoptin (Figure ). However, the growth rate of BL21(DE3)pLysS was significantly slower than that of BL21(DE3) when expressing GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt (Figure ). This might be explained in terms of the “protein burden” within BL21(DE3)pLysS when it is producing GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt at a relatively high level early during induction and this protein burden may eventually result in BL21(DE3)pLysS undergoing growth arrest. The growth profile of BL21(DE3) expressing GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt may involve the balancing of the steady-state growth conditions for the strain with the yield and also suggests that this strain had reached the maximum possible growth rate; as a result the growth profile of BL21(DE3) during the expression of GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt did not significantly change (Table

, Figures

and ). In contrast, when producing His-TAT-Apoptin
opt, the growth profiles of BL21(DE3) and BL21(DE3)pLysS were very similar to the situation when the strains were producing His-TAT-Apoptin (Figures

and ). One possible explanation for this is that the level of produced His-TAT-Apoptin or His-TAT-Apoptin
opt did not reach the threshold value where there was a protein burden and therefore no growth arrest occurred.
| Table 1Summary of the productivities of the various TAT-Apoptin proteins expressed in the range ofE. colistrains |
The presence of a fusion tag and optimization of the codon usage within the gene were both useful strategies for improving the production of TAT-Apoptin (Table

). When compared, the increase level in yield obtained when a fusion tag was used seems to be greater than that derived from codon optimization (Table

). Specifically, the yield was only increased from 7.1

mg/ml (GST-TAT-Apoptin) to 8.9

mg/ml (GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt) was expressed in BL21(DE3).
In order to improve the protein stability of TAT-Apoptin, various cultivation parameters were adjusted. Although a cultivation temperature of 37

°C was able to produce a higher growth rate and greater protein yield, this temperature did not produce a high yield of soluble protein. When 25

°C was used or when a lower IPTG concentration was used (0.1

mM of IPTG), it was not only possible to obtain a similar expression level of TAT-Apoptin within 6

hrs (compared to 4

hrs), but there was also a significant improvement in protein solubility (Figures

, ). Recovering soluble TAT-Apoptin using the GST tag as an affinity ligand during the purification process is highly convenient in terms of downstream processing. After GST affinity chromatography, approximately 80% of the GST-TAT-Apoptin produced by the
E. coli was recovered and recovery of GST-TAT-Apoptin even reached over 90% with one batch (Figure ). The purified target protein can then be subjected to further purification steps in order to obtain a protein drug with high purity.
In this study, human premyelocytic leukemia HL-60 cells were used to evaluate the apoptotic activity of the
E. coli-expressed TAT-Apoptin. Apoptosis was induced when the HL-60 cells were co-cultured with 90 ug/ml of GST column purified GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt. There was a 10% increase in apoptosis compared to the non-apoptosis control (Figure ). However, this is less apoptosis than that induced by CHX, which is the positive apoptosis control. Previous studies have reported that approximately 70% of tumor cells undergoing apoptosis in the presence of apoptin [
11]. This discrepancy may be a result of differences in the tumor cell lines used, which may have different levels of tolerance with respect to apoptin. In addition, the TAT-Apoptin carried the GST fusion tag had not undergo protease cleavage before use and the presence of the tag may have affected the protein drug's apoptotic activity during co-culture with the tumor cells. Nevertheless, it is clear that the
E. coli-expressed GST-TAT-Apoptin
opt produced in the present study does retain its anti-tumor cell activity and the ability to induce apoptosis.