Effect of Combination of Different Antibiotics and Promoters for Expressing Recombinant Darbepoetin in Stable CHO K-1 Cell Line

Evaluating Antibiotic Combinations to Improve Yield and Quality of Darbepoetin

Authors

  • Dwi purno Widekdo Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia
  • Nashi Widodo Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1126-498X
  • Muhaimin Rifa'i Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5731-2951
  • Yoga Dwi Jatmiko Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9872-8478

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11594/

Keywords:

Antibiotics resistance, Clone selection, Promoter, protein recombinant, protein expression

Abstract

Antibiotics are key for successful molecular cloning techniques. Different antibiotics have different mechanisms of action, which leads to cell heath and a viable number of passages. Moreover, the suitability of the promoter also plays an important role in achieving a higher level of protein titter in the stable cell platform. Therefore, with plenty of options of antibiotics and promoters available, we need to determine the best combination of antibiotics and promoters, particularly for specific proteins of interest. Darbepoetin is a recombinant therapeutics protein with extra glycosylation to increase the half-life in the blood; this drug is used for the administration of CKD and leukemia patients. Blasticidin-S and puromycin were used as antibiotics, and CMV and EF-1 promoters were used in this experiment to evaluate the expression of recombinant darbepoetin for the protein model. CHO K-1 cell line was transfected with a plasmid carrying a combination of promoter and antibiotics genes; after 14 days, the level of specific protein expression was evaluated using the western blot technique. A single clone cell was obtained using the serial dilution method to evaluate the clonality and expression of the protein of interest. This study successfully obtained a single clone from stable pool transfection. This result suggested that a combination of puromycin antibiotics and EF-1 promoter has promising expression compared to Blasticidin-S antibiotics with CMV promoter. For further conclusion, an analytical comparison of both combinations needed to be done.

Author Biography

  • Dwi purno Widekdo, Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia

    Department of Biology, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang 65145, Indonesia

References

1. Qin JY, Zhang L, Clift KL et al. (2010) Systematic com-parison of constitutive promoters and the doxycycline-inducible promoter. PLoS One 5 (5): e10611. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010611.

2. Tossolini I, Gugliotta A, López DF et al.(2022) Screening of CHO-K1 endogenous promoters for expressing re-combinant proteins in mammalian cell cultures. Plasmid 2022: 119–120, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.plasmid.2022.102620.

3. Ebadat S, Ahmadi S, Ahmadi M et al. (2017) Evaluating the efficiency of CHEF and CMV promoter with IRES and Furin/2A linker sequences for monoclonal antibody expression in CHO cells. PLoS One 12(10): e0185967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185967.

4. Tihanyi B, Nyitray L (2020) Recent advances in CHO cell line development for recombinant protein production. Drug Discov. Today Technology 38 (20): 25–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ddtec.2021.02.003.

5. Wang W, Jia YL, Li YC et al. (2017) Impact of different promoters, promoter mutation, and an enhancer on re-combinant protein expression in CHO cells. Scientific Reports 7(1): 10416. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-10966-y.

6. Wang X, Xu Z, Tian Z et al. (2017) The EF-1α promoter maintains high-level transgene expression from episomal vectors in transfected CHO-K1 cells. Journal Cell Molec-ular Medicine. 21(11): 3044-3054. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.13216.

7. Bento FM, Takeshita D, Sacramento CB et al. (2024) Overexpression of the selectable marker blasticidin S de-aminase gene is toxic to human keratinocytes and murine BALB/MK cells. BMC Biotechnolology 4: 29. doi: 10.1186/1472-6750-4-29.

8. Guo RL, Lee YT, Byrnes C, and Miller JL (2017) Puro-mycin Selection Confounds the RNA-Seq Profiles of Primary Human Erythroblasts. Transcriptomics 5 (1): 10–12. doi: 10.4172/2329-8936.1000140.

9. Guo C, Fordjour FK, Tsai SJ, Morrell JC, Gould SJ (2021) Choice of selectable marker affects recombinant protein expression in cells and exosomes. Journal Biolo-gy Chemistry 297 (1): 100838. doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2021.100838.

10. ATUM (2023) DNA2.0® Gene Design and Synthesis. Recite from https://www.atum.bio/gene-design-and-synthesis/.

11. Lessard JC (2013) Molecular Cloning, 1st ed., vol. 529. USA, Elsevier Inc.

12. Bergkessel M, Guthrie C (2013) Colony PCR. Methods in Enzymology 529: 299-309. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-418687-3.00025-2.

13. Kachkin DV, Khorolskaya JI, Ivanova JS, Rubel AA (2020) An Efficient Method for Isolation of Plasmid DNA for Transfection of Mammalian Cell Cultures. Methods Protocol 3 (4): 69. doi: 10.3390/mps3040069.

14. Wagner EM (2013) Monitoring gene expression: quanti-tative real-time rt-PCR (2013). Methods in Molecular Bi-ology, vol.1027, pp. 19-45, 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-1-60327-369-5_2.

15. Santoso A, Septiyani EP, Meiyanto E et al. (2013) Ex-pression of Modified Recombinant Human Erythropoietin in CHO K1 Cells and it’s In Vitro Proliferation Assay in TF-1 Cells. Indonesian Journal Pharmacology. 25 (1): 9-166. doi:10.14499/indonesianjpharm25iss1pp9.

16. Omasa T, Onitsuka M, Kim WD (2010) Cell engineering and cultivation of chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology 11 (3): 233-40. doi: 10.2174/138920110791111960.

17. Peñalber-Johnstone C, Ge X, Tran K et al. (2017) Opti-mizing cell-free protein expression in CHO: Assessing small molecule mass transfer effects in various reactor configurations. Biotechnology Bioengineering 114 (7): 1478-1486. doi: 10.1002/bit.26282.

18. Kalkan AK, Palaz F, Sofija S et al. (2023) Improving recombinant protein production in CHO cells using the CRISPR-Cas system. Biotechnology Advance 64 :1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2023.108115.

19. Le Fourn V, Girod P-A, Buceta M et al. (2013) CHO cell engineering to prevent polypeptide aggregation and im-prove therapeutic protein secretion. Metabolic Engineer-ing 21: 91-102. doi: 10.1016/j.ymben.2012.12.003.

20. Wang X, Xu Z, Tian Z et al. (2017) The EF-1α promoter maintains high-level transgene expression from episomal vectors in transfected CHO-K1 cells. J Cell Mol Med 21(11): 3044-3054. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.13216.

21. Guo C, Fordjour FK, Tsai SJ et al. (2001) Choice of selectable marker affects recombinant protein expression in cells and exosomes. J Biol Chem 297(1): 100838. doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2021.100838.

22. Nehlsen K, Schucht R, da-Gama-Norton L et al. (2009) Recombinant protein expression by targeting pre-selected chromosomal loci. BMC Biotechnol 9(100): 1-12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6750-9-100.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-26

Issue

Section

Articles