we are optimistic that glycolipid polymer systems may be
further engineered to completely block contents loss while
maintaining vesicular shape and size during freeze-drying.
Furthermore, though some glycosylated lipids are highly
immunogenic,21 mycobacteria-derived trehalose dimycolate
lipid (TDM) is itself nonimmunogenic when membrane
anchored, suggesting that synthetic trehalose lipids may be
similarly inert.22 We anticipate that the glycolipid polymer
stabilized membranes reported herein will be of use as
long-circulating drug carriers. Overall, these data indicate that
glycolipid polymers stabilize vesicular and supported lipid
membranes to anhydrobiotic and cryogenic conditions,
which has not been previously demonstrated with lipid
polymerization23 or any other strategy. Thus, membrane-
protection with glycolipids and related biomaterials holds
promise as an enabling technology for delivery and membrane-
based devices.24
Fig. 4 Supported lipid bilayers containing (A) 7 and (B) 9, mole
percent as indicated. Top rows (A) and (B): freshly formed SLBs;
bottom rows: after drying and rehydration, 10ꢀ magnification, scale
bar = 100 mm. FRAP in SLBs with 10% 9, before dehydration
(C) and after dehydration/rehydration (D), 40ꢀ magnification, scale
bar = 40 mm.
surface) during dehydration–rehydration, considerable surface
scarring occurred, whereas PE–polymer 9 preserved both
surface uniformity and membrane fluidity, as judged by
fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) at just
10 mole percent loading of 9 (Fig. 4), similar to prior reports
of protection of lipid monolayers by synthetic trehalose
lipids.12 As with vesicular membranes, polymeric glycolipid 9
offered superior anhydrobiotic SLB protection relative to
dimer 7, again suggesting that presentation of covalently
clustered sugars as afforded by the polymeric structure of 9
is key. Stabilization of membranes to physical insults over a
wide range of hydration is hugely enabling for the development
of bilayer-based devices.13 The current method provides a
strategy that may be suitable for stabilization of free-standing
membranes. Trehalose exhibits exceptional function among
disaccharides with regard to protection against anhydrobiotic
and cryogenic of SLBs,14 protein15 and vesicles,11 leading to its
use in pharmaceutical formulations;16,17 synthetic and native
trehalose lipids are known similarly to protect SLBs.12,18
Trehalose also possesses a number of unique physical properties:
it has the largest hydrated radius of any disaccharide, the
highest glass transition temperature, reversible, hydration-
dependent polymorphism, and kosmotropic function in water.
These physical properties are thought to allow trehalose to
protect biomolecular assemblies (such as membranes) in a
glassy solid sugar coating that is stable to varying hydration
levels.15 We are continuing to investigate the significance of
sugar structure to membrane stability, though we note that the
present trehalose-based system is conveniently accessible
and exhibits unprecedented stability over a wide range of
hydration. Our glycolipid strategy complements existing
stabilization approaches1,19 and allows access to neutral or
charged glycolipid polymer membranes that have unique
anhydrobiotic and cryogenic stability. PEG-protected vesicles
are the only marketed immunoevasive liposomal drug carriers
but cannot be freeze-dried without external protectant;1,20
Notes and references
1 T. Kaasgaard and T. L. Andresen, Expert Opin. Drug Delivery,
2010, 7, 225–243; M. L. Immordino, F. Dosio and L. Cattel, Int. J.
Nanomed., 2006, 1, 297–315.
2 T. M. Allen, C. Hansen, F. Martin, C. Redemann and A. Yau-
Young, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Biomembr., 1991, 1066, 29–36.
3 T. M. Allen and A. Chonn, FEBS Lett., 1987, 223, 42–46.
4 E. Reimhult and K. Kumar, Trends Biotechnol., 2008, 26, 82–89.
5 S. Srinivasachari, Y. Liu, G. Zhang, L. Prevette and
T. M. Reineke, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2006, 128, 8176–8184.
6 (a) J. M. G. Fernandez, C. O. Mellet, J. L. J. Blanco, J. F. Mota,
A. Gadelle, A. Coste-Sarguet and J. Defaye, Carbohydr. Res.,
1995, 268, 57–71; (b) J. Kalia and R. T. Raines, Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed., 2008, 47, 7523–7526.
7 A. Chen, D. Wu and C. S. Johnson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995, 117,
7965–7970.
8 Z. Huang and F. C. Szoka, Jr., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130,
15702–15712.
9 R. R. C. New, Liposomes: A Practical Approach, Oxford, NY,
1990.
10 R. B. Gennis, Biomembranes, 1990.
11 J. H. Crowe, L. M. Crowe, A. E. Oliver, N. Tsvetkova, W. Wolkers
and F. Tablin, Cryobiology, 2001, 43, 89–105.
12 C. W. Harland, Z. Botyanszki, D. Rabuka, C. R. Bertozzi and
R. Parthasarathy, Langmuir, 2009, 25, 5193–5198.
13 Y. Deng, Y. Wang, B. Holtz, J. Li, N. Traaseth, G. Veglia,
B. J. Stottrup, R. Elde, D. Pei, A. Guo and X. Y. Zhu, J. Am.
Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 6267–6271.
14 F. Albertorio, V. A. Chapa, X. Chen, A. J. Diaz and P. S. Cremer,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 10567–10574.
15 N. K. Jain and I. Roy, Protein Sci., 2009, 18, 24–36.
16 United States Pat., 6221385, 1997.
17 J. F. Willart and M. Descamps, Mol. Pharmacol., 2008, 5, 905–920.
18 C. W. Harland, D. Rabuka, C. R. Bertozzi and R. Parthasarathy,
Biophys. J., 2008, 94, 4718–4724.
19 S.-M. Lee, H. Chen, C. M. Dettmer, T. V. O’Halloran and
S. T. Nguyen, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 15096–15097.
20 G. L. Plosker, Drugs, 2008, 68, 2535–2551.
21 G. De Libero and L. Mori, Prog. Lipid Res., 2010, 49, 120–127.
22 R. L. Hunter, M. R. Olsen, C. Jagannath and J. K. Actor, Ann.
Clin. Lab Sci., 2006, 36, 371–386.
23 A. Mueller, B. Bondurant and D. F. O’Brien, Macromolecules,
2000, 33, 4799–4804.
24 F. Albertorio, A. J. Diaz, T. Yang, V. A. Chapa, S. Kataoka,
E. T. Castellana and P. S. Cremer, Langmuir, 2005, 21, 7476–7482.
c
This journal is The Royal Society of Chemistry 2011
Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 2853–2855 2855