Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they?
Some cationic peptides, referred to as CPPs (cell-penetrating peptides), have the ability to translocate across biological membranes in a non-disruptive way and to overcome the impermeable nature of the cell membrane. They have been successfully used for drug delivery into mammalian cells; however,...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Biochemical journal 2006-10, Vol.399 (1), p.1-7 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 7 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Biochemical journal |
container_volume | 399 |
creator | Henriques, Sónia Troeira Melo, Manuel Nuno Castanho, Miguel A R B |
description | Some cationic peptides, referred to as CPPs (cell-penetrating peptides), have the ability to translocate across biological membranes in a non-disruptive way and to overcome the impermeable nature of the cell membrane. They have been successfully used for drug delivery into mammalian cells; however, there is no consensus about the mechanism of cellular uptake. Both endocytic and non-endocytic pathways are supported by experimental evidence. The observation that some AMPs (antimicrobial peptides) can enter host cells without damaging their cytoplasmic membrane, as well as kill pathogenic agents, has also attracted attention. The capacity to translocate across the cell membrane has been reported for some of these AMPs. Like CPPs, AMPs are short and cationic sequences with a high affinity for membranes. Similarities between CPPs and AMPs prompted us to question if these two classes of peptides really belong to unrelated families. In this Review, a critical comparison of the mechanisms that underlie cellular uptake is undertaken. A reflection and a new perspective about CPPs and AMPs are presented. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1042/BJ20061100 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1570158</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>20205013</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c407t-495c1e884b978ab329b64e5ad0a9b97f7182534b07f88cb710b219cca3d684443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1Lw0AQxRdRbK1e_AMkJw9CdGazX_GgaPGTihc9L5tk066kSdxNlf73RlqsnjwMAzM_Ho_3CDlEOEVg9Oz6kQIIRIAtMkQmIVaSqm0yBCpYLIDigOyF8AaADBjskgGKlIuEiiF5Gtuqiltb286bztXTqLVt5wobIlMX_XRu7nLfZM5UP6_zaNZ8RoUrS-tt3UXG26ib2eXlPtkpTRXswXqPyOvtzcv4Pp483z2MryZxzkB2MUt5jlYplqVSmSyhaSaY5aYAk_anUqKiPGEZyFKpPJMIGcU0z01SCMUYS0bkYqXbLrK5LfLehDeVbr2bG7_UjXH676d2Mz1tPjRyCchVL3C8FvDN-8KGTs9dyPsoTG2bRdBCqYSj_B-kQIEDJj14sgL7sELwtvxxg6C_a9Kbmnr46Lf_DbruJfkCs_uNPw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20205013</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they?</title><source>PubMed Central (Open access)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek (Open access)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Henriques, Sónia Troeira ; Melo, Manuel Nuno ; Castanho, Miguel A R B</creator><creatorcontrib>Henriques, Sónia Troeira ; Melo, Manuel Nuno ; Castanho, Miguel A R B</creatorcontrib><description>Some cationic peptides, referred to as CPPs (cell-penetrating peptides), have the ability to translocate across biological membranes in a non-disruptive way and to overcome the impermeable nature of the cell membrane. They have been successfully used for drug delivery into mammalian cells; however, there is no consensus about the mechanism of cellular uptake. Both endocytic and non-endocytic pathways are supported by experimental evidence. The observation that some AMPs (antimicrobial peptides) can enter host cells without damaging their cytoplasmic membrane, as well as kill pathogenic agents, has also attracted attention. The capacity to translocate across the cell membrane has been reported for some of these AMPs. Like CPPs, AMPs are short and cationic sequences with a high affinity for membranes. Similarities between CPPs and AMPs prompted us to question if these two classes of peptides really belong to unrelated families. In this Review, a critical comparison of the mechanisms that underlie cellular uptake is undertaken. A reflection and a new perspective about CPPs and AMPs are presented.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0264-6021</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1470-8728</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1042/BJ20061100</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16956326</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Portland Press Ltd</publisher><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - metabolism ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; Cell Membrane ; Cell Membrane Permeability ; Peptides - metabolism ; Peptides - pharmacology ; Protein Transport ; Recombinant Proteins ; Review</subject><ispartof>Biochemical journal, 2006-10, Vol.399 (1), p.1-7</ispartof><rights>The Biochemical Society, London 2006</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c407t-495c1e884b978ab329b64e5ad0a9b97f7182534b07f88cb710b219cca3d684443</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c407t-495c1e884b978ab329b64e5ad0a9b97f7182534b07f88cb710b219cca3d684443</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1570158/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1570158/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16956326$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Henriques, Sónia Troeira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melo, Manuel Nuno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castanho, Miguel A R B</creatorcontrib><title>Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they?</title><title>Biochemical journal</title><addtitle>Biochem J</addtitle><description>Some cationic peptides, referred to as CPPs (cell-penetrating peptides), have the ability to translocate across biological membranes in a non-disruptive way and to overcome the impermeable nature of the cell membrane. They have been successfully used for drug delivery into mammalian cells; however, there is no consensus about the mechanism of cellular uptake. Both endocytic and non-endocytic pathways are supported by experimental evidence. The observation that some AMPs (antimicrobial peptides) can enter host cells without damaging their cytoplasmic membrane, as well as kill pathogenic agents, has also attracted attention. The capacity to translocate across the cell membrane has been reported for some of these AMPs. Like CPPs, AMPs are short and cationic sequences with a high affinity for membranes. Similarities between CPPs and AMPs prompted us to question if these two classes of peptides really belong to unrelated families. In this Review, a critical comparison of the mechanisms that underlie cellular uptake is undertaken. A reflection and a new perspective about CPPs and AMPs are presented.</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - metabolism</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Cell Membrane</subject><subject>Cell Membrane Permeability</subject><subject>Peptides - metabolism</subject><subject>Peptides - pharmacology</subject><subject>Protein Transport</subject><subject>Recombinant Proteins</subject><subject>Review</subject><issn>0264-6021</issn><issn>1470-8728</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1Lw0AQxRdRbK1e_AMkJw9CdGazX_GgaPGTihc9L5tk066kSdxNlf73RlqsnjwMAzM_Ho_3CDlEOEVg9Oz6kQIIRIAtMkQmIVaSqm0yBCpYLIDigOyF8AaADBjskgGKlIuEiiF5Gtuqiltb286bztXTqLVt5wobIlMX_XRu7nLfZM5UP6_zaNZ8RoUrS-tt3UXG26ib2eXlPtkpTRXswXqPyOvtzcv4Pp483z2MryZxzkB2MUt5jlYplqVSmSyhaSaY5aYAk_anUqKiPGEZyFKpPJMIGcU0z01SCMUYS0bkYqXbLrK5LfLehDeVbr2bG7_UjXH676d2Mz1tPjRyCchVL3C8FvDN-8KGTs9dyPsoTG2bRdBCqYSj_B-kQIEDJj14sgL7sELwtvxxg6C_a9Kbmnr46Lf_DbruJfkCs_uNPw</recordid><startdate>20061001</startdate><enddate>20061001</enddate><creator>Henriques, Sónia Troeira</creator><creator>Melo, Manuel Nuno</creator><creator>Castanho, Miguel A R B</creator><general>Portland Press Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20061001</creationdate><title>Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they?</title><author>Henriques, Sónia Troeira ; Melo, Manuel Nuno ; Castanho, Miguel A R B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c407t-495c1e884b978ab329b64e5ad0a9b97f7182534b07f88cb710b219cca3d684443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - metabolism</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Cell Membrane</topic><topic>Cell Membrane Permeability</topic><topic>Peptides - metabolism</topic><topic>Peptides - pharmacology</topic><topic>Protein Transport</topic><topic>Recombinant Proteins</topic><topic>Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Henriques, Sónia Troeira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melo, Manuel Nuno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castanho, Miguel A R B</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Biochemical journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Henriques, Sónia Troeira</au><au>Melo, Manuel Nuno</au><au>Castanho, Miguel A R B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they?</atitle><jtitle>Biochemical journal</jtitle><addtitle>Biochem J</addtitle><date>2006-10-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>399</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>7</epage><pages>1-7</pages><issn>0264-6021</issn><eissn>1470-8728</eissn><abstract>Some cationic peptides, referred to as CPPs (cell-penetrating peptides), have the ability to translocate across biological membranes in a non-disruptive way and to overcome the impermeable nature of the cell membrane. They have been successfully used for drug delivery into mammalian cells; however, there is no consensus about the mechanism of cellular uptake. Both endocytic and non-endocytic pathways are supported by experimental evidence. The observation that some AMPs (antimicrobial peptides) can enter host cells without damaging their cytoplasmic membrane, as well as kill pathogenic agents, has also attracted attention. The capacity to translocate across the cell membrane has been reported for some of these AMPs. Like CPPs, AMPs are short and cationic sequences with a high affinity for membranes. Similarities between CPPs and AMPs prompted us to question if these two classes of peptides really belong to unrelated families. In this Review, a critical comparison of the mechanisms that underlie cellular uptake is undertaken. A reflection and a new perspective about CPPs and AMPs are presented.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Portland Press Ltd</pub><pmid>16956326</pmid><doi>10.1042/BJ20061100</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0264-6021 |
ispartof | Biochemical journal, 2006-10, Vol.399 (1), p.1-7 |
issn | 0264-6021 1470-8728 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1570158 |
source | PubMed Central (Open access); MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek (Open access); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Anti-Bacterial Agents - metabolism Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology Cell Membrane Cell Membrane Permeability Peptides - metabolism Peptides - pharmacology Protein Transport Recombinant Proteins Review |
title | Cell-penetrating peptides and antimicrobial peptides: how different are they? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T16%3A34%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cell-penetrating%20peptides%20and%20antimicrobial%20peptides:%20how%20different%20are%20they?&rft.jtitle=Biochemical%20journal&rft.au=Henriques,%20S%C3%B3nia%20Troeira&rft.date=2006-10-01&rft.volume=399&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=7&rft.pages=1-7&rft.issn=0264-6021&rft.eissn=1470-8728&rft_id=info:doi/10.1042/BJ20061100&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E20205013%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20205013&rft_id=info:pmid/16956326&rfr_iscdi=true |