agents, and is broadly multi-drug resistant. As such, this may
satisfy urgent needs in hospitals for new therapeutics, since
this strain has been identified as the most prevalent cause of
hospital-associated infections in the United States, and almost
no current antibiotics can effectively target it. g5 also potently
inhibits B. anthracis, which is known to cause the highly lethal
condition, anthrax. The findings may suggest that g5 has the
potential for use in bio-defence in the future. In the mean time,
all the g-AApeptides have excellent selectivity for bacteria
than human blood cells, since the majority of them has H50
of more than 500 mg mlꢀ1; even the most hemolytic sequence
g5 still have a selectivity of at least 60-fold. This is because
mammalian cell membranes are almost neutrally charged,
while bacterial membranes are negatively charged, which
favors more for electrostatic interactions with cationic
g-AApeptide sequences.
which is unique in the development of antimicrobial AApeptides.
Such approach avoids tedious and sometimes ineffective
secondary structure development in the design of other classes
of antimicrobial peptidomimetics. Coupled with virtually
limitless side chain variation, bioavailability and enhanced
stability, it is very straightforward to further tune the anti-
microbial activity and selectivity of g-AApeptides by changing
hydrophobicity and hydrophilicity of building blocks and
backbone lengths. This would be particularly effective if
resistance to these compounds were ever observed, allowing
rapid change and alteration to circumnavigate any such
occurrence. These findings will also shed further light on the
design and optimization of other non-natural antimicrobial
oligomers in the future. For example, other class of pepti-
domimetics with alternative hydrophobic and hydrophilic
residues could be potential antimicrobial agents since their
backbones are different from natural a-peptides. Comprehensive
One of the biggest challenges for conventional antibiotics is
their susceptibility to the development of resistance, which
quickly abolishes their efficacy. This situation has become
more severe in recent years, and may lead to outbreaks of
deadly infectious diseases that are untreatable. To investigate
the potential for bacteria to develop resistance against the
treatment of g-AApeptides, methicillin-resistant S. aureus
(ATCC 33592) was serially passaged in half-MIC concentrations
of g5, and new MIC values were determined every 24 h. As a
positive control, parallel cultures were exposed to serial 2-fold
dilutions of the antibiotic norfloxacin (Fig. S3w).16 After 17
days, virtually no change in the MIC occurred for g5 over the
17 passages, whereas the MIC for norfloxacin started to
increase after just three passages, and developed to profound
resistance after 17 (MIC increased 4 20-fold). These results
demonstrate that MRSA strains do not readily develop resistance
to g-AApeptide g5. Although additional studies to assess the
ability of bacteria to evolve resistance to g5 are required, we
suggest that this preliminary data indicates that g5 may
actually mimic natural antimicrobial peptides which are
notoriously difficult to develop resistance towards. This
augments the potential of g5 as a new generation of antibiotic
lead compounds.
studies of
a wide variety of g-AApeptides containing
hydrophobic and amphiphilic building blocks of different
functional groups, positions, and ratio are currently
underway. Further investigation of bactericidal mechanisms
is also ongoing.
This work is supported by USF start-up fund (JC) and NIH
1R01AI080626-01A2 (LNS).
Notes and references
1 A. K. Marr, W. J. Gooderham and R. E. Hancock, Curr. Opin.
Pharmacol., 2006, 6, 468–472.
2 R. E. Hancock and H. G. Sahl, Nat. Biotechnol., 2006, 24,
1551–1557.
3 M. N. Alekshun and S. B. Levy, Cell, 2007, 128, 1037–1050.
4 N. P. Chongsiriwatana, J. A. Patch, A. M. Czyzewski,
M. T. Dohm, A. Ivankin, D. Gidalevitz, R. N. Zuckermann and
A. E. Barron, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2008, 105,
2794–2799.
5 R. W. Scott, W. F. DeGrado and G. N. Tew, Curr. Opin.
Biotechnol., 2008, 19, 620–627.
6 M. Zaiou, J. Mol. Med., 2007, 85, 317–329.
7 A. Violette, S. Fournel, K. Lamour, O. Chaloin, B. Frisch,
J. P. Briand, H. Monteil and G. Guichard, Chem. Biol., 2006,
13, 531–538.
8 G. N. Tew, R. W. Scott, M. L. Klein and W. F. Degrado, Acc.
Chem. Res., 2009, 43, 30–39.
The antimicrobial mechanism of g-AApeptides in disrupting
bacterial membranes was also assessed by fluorescence micro-
scopy (Fig. S4w) using a double staining method with DAPI
and PI. DAPI stains all bacterial cells irrespective of their
viability, whereas PI only stains injured or dead cells with
damaged membranes.17,18 After incubation with g-AApeptide
g5 for 2 h, strongly PI-stained red fluorescent E. coli and
B. subtilis were observed, demonstrating the membranes of
these bacteria had been disrupted. The aggregation of dead
cells is consistent to previously reported observation.18
In summary, we reported the identification of a new class of
antimicrobial peptidomimetics-g-AApeptides, with potency
and broad-spectrum activity far superior to previous reported
a-peptides.15 These g-AApeptides likely inhibit bacterial
growth by mimicking conventional antimicrobial peptides
through membrane disruption. This is an important observation
as it suggests the potential for virtually no development of
resistance towards these agents. Additionally, although more
extensive studies are needed, our initial attempt has demonstrated
the ease and effectiveness of building block-joining strategy,
9 S. A. Fowler and H. E. Blackwell, Org. Biomol. Chem., 2009, 7,
1508–1524.
10 M. A. Schmitt, B. Weisblum and S. H. Gellman, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2007, 129, 417–428.
11 B. P. Mowery, S. E. Lee, D. A. Kissounko, R. F. Epand,
R. M. Epand, B. Weisblum, S. S. Stahl and S. H. Gellman,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 15474–15476.
12 A. Ivankin, L. Livne, A. Mor, G. A. Caputo, W. F. Degrado,
M. Meron, B. Lin and D. Gidalevitz, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2010,
49, 8462–8465.
13 Y. Niu, Y. Hu, X. Li, J. Chen and J. Cai, New J. Chem., 2011, 35,
542–545.
14 Y. Niu, A. Jones, H. Wu, G. Varani and J. Cai, Org. Biomol.
Chem., 2011, 9, 6604–6609.
15 S. Padhee, Y. Hu, Y. Niu, G. Bai, H. Wu, F. Costanza, L. West,
L. Harrington, L. N. Shaw, C. Cao and J. Cai, Chem. Commun.,
2011, 47, 9729–9731.
16 S. Choi, A. Isaacs, D. Clements, D. Liu, H. Kim, R. W. Scott,
J. D. Winkler and W. F. DeGrado, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.,
2009, 106, 6968–6973.
17 T. Matsunaga, M. Okochi and S. Nakasono, Anal. Chem., 1995,
67, 4487–4490.
18 C. Chen, F. Pan, S. Zhang, J. Hu, M. Cao, J. Wang, H. Xu,
X. Zhao and J. R. Lu, Biomacromolecules, 2010, 11, 402–411.
c
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 12197–12199 12199