==== Front
Clin Transl Med
Clin Transl Med
10.1002/(ISSN)2001-1326
CTM2
Clinical and Translational Medicine
2001-1326
John Wiley and Sons Inc. Hoboken

10.1002/ctm2.1244
CTM21244
Review
Reviews
Boolean logic in synthetic biology and biomaterials: Towards living materials in mammalian cell therapeutics
BRESSLER et al.
Bressler Eric M. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7076-7560
1
Adams Sarah 1
Liu Rong 2
Colson Yolonda L. 2 ycolson@mgh.harvard.edu

Wong Wilson W. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8394-889X
1 wilwong@bu.edu

Grinstaff Mark W. 1 3 mgrin@bu.edu

1 Department of Biomedical Engineering and Biological Design Center Boston University Boston Massachusetts USA
2 Division of Thoracic Surgery Department of Surgery Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA
3 Department of Chemistry and Department of Biomedical Engineering Boston University Boston Massachusetts USA
* Correspondence
Yolonda L. Colson, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Email: ycolson@mgh.harvard.edu
Wilson W. Wong, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Email: wilwong@bu.edu
Mark W. Grinstaff, Department of Chemistry and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Email: mgrin@bu.edu

29 6 2023
7 2023
13 7 10.1002/ctm2.v13.7 e124406 4 2023
15 1 2023
14 4 2023
© 2023 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Shanghai Institute of Clinical Bioinformatics.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background: The intersection of synthetic biology and biomaterials promises to enhance safety and efficacy in novel therapeutics. Both fields increasingly employ Boolean logic, which allows for specific therapeutic outputs (e.g., drug release, peptide synthesis) in response to inputs such as disease markers or bio‐orthogonal stimuli. Examples include stimuli‐responsive drug delivery devices and logic‐gated chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells. In this review, we explore recent manuscripts highlighting the potential of synthetic biology and biomaterials with Boolean logic to create novel and efficacious living therapeutics.

Main body: Collaborations in synthetic biology and biomaterials have led to significant advancements in drug delivery and cell therapy. Borrowing from synthetic biology, researchers have created Boolean‐responsive biomaterials sensitive to multiple inputs including pH, light, enzymes and more to produce functional outputs such as degradation, gel‐sol transition and conformational change. Biomaterials also enhance synthetic biology, particularly CAR T and adoptive T cell therapy, by modulating therapeutic immune cells in vivo. Nanoparticles and hydrogels also enable in situ generation of CAR T cells, which promises to drive down production costs and expand access to these therapies to a larger population. Biomaterials are also used to interface with logic‐gated CAR T cell therapies, creating controllable cellular therapies that enhance safety and efficacy. Finally, designer cells acting as living therapeutic factories benefit from biomaterials that improve biocompatibility and stability in vivo.

Conclusion: By using Boolean logic in both cellular therapy and drug delivery devices, researchers have achieved better safety and efficacy outcomes. While early projects show incredible promise, coordination between these fields is ongoing and growing. We expect that these collaborations will continue to grow and realize the next generation of living biomaterial therapeutics.

The intersection of synthetic biology and biomaterials promises to enhance safety and efficacy in novel therapeutics. By using Boolean logic in both cellular therapy and drug delivery devices, researchers have achieved better safety and efficacy outcomes. We expect that these collaborations will continue to grow and realize the next generation of living biomaterial therapeutics.

biomaterials
boolean logic
CAR T cells
cell therapy
drug delivery
synthetic biology
National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases 10.13039/100000062 R01DK132576 National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering 10.13039/100000070 R01EB017722 R01EB029483 R01EB031904 National Cancer Institute 10.13039/100000054 U01CA265713 R01CA232708 F30CA257566 National Institute of General Medical Sciences 10.13039/100000057 T32GM130546 source-schema-version-number2.0
cover-dateJuly 2023
details-of-publishers-convertorConverter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.3.0 mode:remove_FC converted:30.06.2023
Bressler EM , Adams S , Liu R , Colson YL , Wong WW , Grinstaff MW . Boolean logic in synthetic biology and biomaterials: Towards living materials in mammalian cell therapeutics. Clin Transl Med. 2023;13 :e1244. 10.1002/ctm2.1244
==== Body
pmc1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The emerging collaboration of biomaterials and synthetic biology

The fields of biomaterials and synthetic biology are rapidly converging on overlapping areas of translational medicine. The rise of stimuli‐responsive materials and cell‐based computation has forged collaborative pathways between these largely independent fields. Biomaterials are one of the oldest disciplines in biomedical engineering, with roots as far back as antiquity when Egyptian physicians used sutures made from animal sinew and prostheses made of wood. 1 , 2 Meanwhile, synthetic biology emerged in the early 2000s with the creation of a toggle switch 3 and a repressilator 4 in Escherichia coli (E. coli). Despite the disparate origins of these fields, logic, inducibility, biocompatibility and ideal biodistribution and pharmacokinetics are universally desirable in therapeutic systems (Figure 1A,B).

FIGURE 1 Collaborative advances in synthetic biology and biomaterials. (A) Synthetic biology confers control over therapeutic systems via Boolean logic and inducibility. Shown is a split chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell that exhibits AND gate Boolean logic by splitting activation signals, requiring both for activation (figure adapted from Cho et al.) (left) and recombinase‐based inducible gene circuits (figure adapted from Weinberg et al.) (right) (B) Biomaterials offer biocompatibility via pegylation, encapsulation, biomimicry and rational design. Biomaterials also confer enhanced biodistribution and pharmacokinetics through targeted therapies and controlled release systems. (C–E) Existing technologies that harness strengths of both synthetic biology and biomaterials include (C) synthetic Boolean‐responsive nanoparticles (adapted from Zhang et al.), (D) CAR T cell‐releasing scaffolds (adapted from Grosskopf et al. and Agarwalla et al.), and (E) encapsulated designer cell therapies.

Modern biomaterials emerged from an inherent need for biocompatibility, localization, and pharmacokinetic control, from implants such as intraocular lenses, joint prostheses and stents 5 to polymers for controlled release. 6 , 7 Synthetic biology therapeutics promise substantial advantages over small molecule drugs and biologics. Early examples, free from the constraints of biocompatibility, pharmacokinetics and variable mechanical forces of the human body, demonstrate incredible displays of biocomputation and programmability, including Boolean logic at the gene and protein level and drug‐inducible systems. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 Although recent developments in biomaterials confer stimuli‐responsive properties and Boolean logic, even cutting‐edge biomaterials lack the precision and programmability of genetic circuits. Thus, in recent years, the marriage of these two disciplines has harnessed the programmability of synthetic biology with the biocompatibility and pharmacokinetic control of biomaterials. Further, there is a clear convergence towards Boolean‐logic and biocomputation in both fields. Recent advances include Boolean responsive nanocarriers 12 (Figure 1C), chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell encapsulating hydrogels 13 , 14 (Figure 1D) and alginate‐encapsulated designer therapeutic cells 15 , 16 (Figure 1E). Boolean‐responsive biopolymers and biomaterial accessories for cellular therapy herald the synergistic potential of these fields.

Herein, we briefly review developments in each field, focusing on collaborations between synthetic biology and biomaterials. We place a special focus on biomaterials for drug delivery and synthetic biology for modulation of therapeutic T cells because of considerable collaboration and clinical development in these areas. Finally, we examine how these developments apply to new fields within cellular therapeutics and drug delivery, particularly the development of living materials. While there are many developments in bacterial biomaterial systems, the topic has been reviewed elsewhere, and we have limited the current discussion to mammalian systems. 17 , 18 , 19

1.2 Smart and synthetic biomaterials for programmability in drug delivery

Biomaterials confer augmented control of pharmacokinetics, allowing clinicians and scientists to manipulate the ‘where’, ‘when’, and ‘how much’ of drug delivery. The current generation of drug delivery biomaterials includes polymer‐conjugated proteins, 20 biomimetic polymers 21 , 22 and drug depots such as hydrogels, 23 , 24 particles 25 , 26 , 27 or scaffolds. 28 , 29 While this approach has yielded many United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)‐approved drugs, achieving greater precision and site‐specific delivery requires programmable materials that respond to environmental or biological cues or user input.

Programmable, ‘smart’ biomaterials have arisen in recent years. Biomaterials exhibit responsiveness and even Boolean algebra through environmental inputs. 30 The need for ‘smart’ biomaterials arose from the natural limitations of traditional biomaterial systems. Once introduced to a biological system, traditional biomaterials interact with surrounding cells without opportunity for modulation or intervention, with potential adverse outcomes such as inflammatory response 31 and release of cargo in off‐target tissues. 32 Responsive biomaterials not only promise to ameliorate such limitations but also expand capabilities. These properties mimic many of the strengths of synthetic biology, demonstrating a clear need for programmability in biomaterials applications.

1.3 Cell‐based therapy enhanced by functional biomaterials

Synthetic biology champions programmability as its principal strength, affording control of synthetic gene circuits composed of layered Boolean logic gates via inputs such as small molecule drugs, biomarkers, light, and others. Though developed in bacteria, these systems are now optimized for mammalian cells, paving the way for synthetic biology within cellular therapy. The most prominent example is CAR T cells. CAR T cells express a synthetic receptor that activates natural T cell pathways upon binding a particular antigen. As of 2022, there are six FDA‐approved CAR T cell therapies for leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma. 33 Beyond cancer, both CAR and designer cells promise to expand cell therapy to endocrine and metabolic disorders, autoimmune diseases and infectious diseases. 15

With few exceptions, cell‐based therapies need a substrate for activation, recognition or encapsulation to attenuate the appropriate response. While natural or autologous materials may augment cellular therapy, biomaterials represent a low‐cost, off‐the‐shelf alternative. A prominent example among FDA‐approved therapies is T cell activation via magnetic beads coated with activating signals, replacing an antigen‐presenting cell. Another example in development is semi‐permeable encapsulation materials for in situ cell‐based manufacture of biologically active peptides (e.g., insulin from pancreatic β cells). 34 , 35

Current examples of synergy between biomaterials and synthetic biology systems demonstrate the potential for augmentation of existing therapeutic systems. The following sections cover specific technologies and explore how the fields can leverage these technologies to achieve larger, overarching goals of biomaterials and synthetic biology in the therapeutic space.

2 BOOLEAN LOGIC IN BIOMATERIALS

2.1 Environmentally responsive biomaterials: From analog materials to YES gates

Imparting logic into materials is a natural extension of environmentally responsive materials that have been in development for decades (Figure 2A). 30 , 36 Some of the earliest examples of environmentally responsive materials are polymers that change conformation upon exposure to pH, ionic or temperature changes, such as poly(aminocarboxylic acid), (hydroxyethyl)methacrylate (HEMA) and methacrylic acid (MAA) copolymers and N‐alkyl acrylamide polymers, respectively. 37 Countless physiologically responsive polymers have since been synthesized. Poly(lactic‐glycolic) acid (PLGA) micro‐ and nanoparticles are prototypical drug delivery devices that hydrolyze and release cargo at a faster rate at low pH. 38 Prominent FDA‐approved PLGA‐based drug depots include Lupron depot, Eligard and Zoladex among others. While environmentally responsive materials are abundant, most exhibit leaky behavior (Figure 2B). For instance, a reactive oxygen species‐sensitive hydrogel may release faster in the presence of hydroxide, but the release is not completely inhibited in a physiologic buffer. 24 OR‐gated materials may show an additive response instead of a consistent response regardless of inputs (Figure 2C), and AND‐gated materials often rely on sequential or ordered inputs (Figure 2D). Finally, programmable biomaterials typically exhibit dose‐dependent outputs, which mimic analog behavior. However, digital behavior requires responses that do not vary with input concentration (Figure 2E). Achieving programmability with biomaterials began with YES gates, or stimuli responsive biomaterials that exhibit explicit ON‐OFF behavior.

FIGURE 2 Building programmable, Boolean‐responsive biomaterials using stimuli‐responsive domains. (A) Stimuli responsive biomaterials utilize many inputs to achieve outputs via modulating the physical and chemical properties of the material. (B) YES gates in biomaterials often display leaky output. (C) AND gates are designed for simultaneous release, but many biomaterial AND gates utilize sequential release to match conditions of a physiologic scenario. (D) OR gates ideally exhibit all‐or‐nothing responses, but often result in additive responses instead, where presence of both signals leads to a larger effect. (E) Stimuli responsive materials usually respond in a concentration dependent manner, which emulates an analog signal. Digital signaling requires a single output strength regardless of input concentration. (F) An expansile nanoparticle releases cargo only when exposed to low pH. Adapted from Griset et al. (G) Polyethyleneimine‐CpG (PEI‐CpG) NPs loaded by adsorption into hydrogel/cryogel formulations, which are (H) synthetic polymers with cleavable domains create YES, OR, AND, and stacked logic gates. (I) Logic‐gated polymers from (G) are used as cleavable linkers in a hydrogel to enable logic‐gated degradation. (H and I) Adapted from Badeau et al. All data represented are idealized.

2.1.1 ON‐OFF behavior via physiologic cues

Physiologic conditions such as pH and enzyme concentration are used to drive ON‐OFF behavior in materials. Local pH varies within physiologic environments. Thus, engineered materials respond to distinct environments based on local pH. 39 Normal physiologic pH in blood and extracellular fluid maintains a tight distribution between 7.35–7.45. Meanwhile, the tumour microenvironment (TME) exhibits a pH range of 6.5–7.2, and lysosomes and endosomes measure between 5.0 and 6.5. Other environments such as the gastrointestinal tract, skin and vagina exhibit variable pH.

The earliest pH‐responsive materials rarely possessed the ON‐OFF characteristics necessary for building Boolean systems. These materials typically relied on varying breakdown kinetics via acid‐labile polymer backbones as targets for degradation. 40 pH‐responsive materials that exhibit a stepwise response to environmental changes (YES gate) often do so through protonation/deprotonation to trigger a distinct, reversible change. 30 , 41 For instance, Angelos et al. describe mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) with nanovalves that opened below pH 5.4 but exhibit no release at pH 6.5. 42 Gan et al. report MSNs with similar characteristics around pH 3, which switch between ON and OFF states by adjusting pH. 43 In 2009, Griset et al. report expansile polymeric nanoparticles, which swell at pH 5 but exhibit a tight structure at physiologic pH, retaining their cargo. When loaded with paclitaxel, the drug releases in low pH buffer only and retains nearly all drug in neutral buffer, demonstrating clear ON‐OFF behavior. 44 This system is efficacious in models of ovarian cancer, 45 pancreatic cancer 46 and mesothelioma 47 (Figure 2F).

West and Hubbell first described specific enzyme‐degradable polymeric block co‐polymers in 1999, establishing a new class of stimuli‐responsive biomaterials. 48 Like pH, enzymes exhibit heterogeneous distribution, enabling spatial and temporal control over cleavage. For instance, matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), hyaluronidase, cathepsin B and esterase are overexpressed in tumour tissue. 49 However, enzyme‐based responses can exhibit digital behavior as enzymes are more likely to be either present or absent, or active or repressed. Further, enzyme‐triggered materials are attractive due to mild reaction conditions and high substrate specificity. 50

MMP‐labile peptides are used for cell‐mediated structural remodeling of extracellular matrix (ECM)‐like scaffolds and as a trigger for material degradation. Koshy et al. created an MMP‐degradable, cell‐responsive cryogel that releases granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor to draw immune cells into the porous matrix. 51 Other enzymes, including hyaluronidase, cathepsin B and esterase, act as stimuli for the modulation of biomaterials. Li et al. report NPs made from hyaluronic acid (HA) coupled to the fluorophore chlorin e6 (HA‐Ce6 NPs). ‘ON/OFF’ degradation and fluorescence quenching and dequenching occur in the presence and absence of hyaluronidase in vitro and demonstrated anti‐tumour efficacy in a model of A549 lung cancer in vivo. 52

2.1.2 ON‐OFF behavior via bio‐orthogonal triggers

Bio‐orthogonal triggers (e.g., light, chemical inducers) confer direct control to the end‐user of a responsive material, potentially affording greater specificity and fewer off‐target effects. Photo‐sensitive biomaterials degrade or crosslink upon exposure to light, often near‐infrared light as it is low‐energy and penetrates tissue on the order of 1–2 centimeters. 53 Polymer networks, particularly, hydrogels, are common light‐responsive biomaterials. Several researchers report light‐inducible stiffening, 54 softening 55 and reversible 56 hydrogel networks, typically using o‐nitrobenzyl as a photodegradation tag and methacrylate or other functionalized molecules (thiol, dibenzocyclooctyne‐azide couples, or azobenzene) as a stiffening/crosslinking agent.

Ultrasound is another non‐invasive strategy for modulating biomaterial responses, chosen for its deep tissue penetration, millimeter‐scale spatial resolution, and high potential for clinical application. 57 Ultrasound produces pressure waves, which trigger many responses in engineered materials including controlled release and gelation. For instance, cryogels loaded with cytosine‐phosphodiester‐guanine‐oligonucleotide (CpG‐ODN) complexes exhibit ultrasound‐triggered release as a cancer vaccine. 58 Similarly, superhydrophobic meshes release small molecule drugs in response to high intensity focused ultrasound. 59

2.2 Boolean biomaterial logic gates

Environmentally responsive biomaterials effectively form YES gates. However, to build Boolean logic systems, biomaterials must respond to multiple inputs to form AND, OR, NIMPLY and other logic gates. Further, the materials must respond independently and not subsequently or in coordination. As the structure of responsive elements is distinct for each trigger, multi‐input responsive biomaterials typically utilize different categories of triggers to induce orthogonal reactions.

2.2.1 OR gates

An OR gate produces an output from sensing one of two inputs. While many multi‐stimuli‐responsive biomaterials systems exist, OR logic requires that either stimulus is sufficient to induce a response and that they induce the same response (e.g., disassembly of a particle, degradation of a hydrogel). There are many excellent reviews, which discuss multi‐stimuli‐responsive biomaterials, and the reader is referred to these articles. 60 , 61

OR‐gated biomaterials are a subset of multi‐stimuli‐responsive biomaterials. Guo et al. report dual responsive boronate‐phenolic acid capsules, which respond to either acidic pH or excess cis‐diols to induce disassembly of the capsule. The boronate‐phenolic ester network rapidly dissociates due to either low pH, which shifts the equilibrium between hydrophobic and hydrophilic properties of phenylboronic acid, or due to excess cis‐diols, which competes with cis‐diols incorporated into the capsule structure. 62 In another example, dual‐sensitive micelles composed of disulfide‐bonded poly(β‐amino ester)s exhibit faster doxorubicin release at low pH (<6.5) or in the presence of dithiothreitol (DTT). 63

While these materials form dual‐responsive systems that produce similar outputs from distinct inputs, compared to genetic circuits they still exhibit high levels of basal activity and analog responses based on the quantity of inducer present. For example, at 10 h, the boronate‐phenolic ester network capsules exhibit approximately 15% cargo release at pH 7.4 compared to approximately 60% at pH 5.0. Thus, a large pH change results in only a 4‐fold increase in release rate. 62 Nearly all dual‐responsive drug delivery materials display similar characteristics, unlike genetic circuits, which rely on tightly regulated transcriptional units and regularly achieve log‐scale fold‐change between ON and OFF states. Further, many systems, which resemble OR logic, do not possess an equivalent response for each input or exhibit analog responses to each input, demonstrating that more specific strategies are necessary to form the building blocks for biocomputation with these systems.

2.2.2 AND gates

AND gates require two inputs for a single output. Within biomaterials and synthetic biology, AND gates enhance specificity to increase efficacy and prevent off‐target toxicity. Strategies for creating AND‐gated biomaterials involve layered stimuli responses induced by pH, redox reactions, enzymes and light. Like stimuli‐responsive biomaterials, some of the earliest demonstrations of AND‐gated biomaterials were in MSNs. Dual‐controlled MSNs, synthesized by Angelos et al. use light‐responsive nanoimpellers and pH‐responsive nanovalves, which only release the contents of nanopores within the MSNs upon exposure to high pH AND light at 448 nm. 64 While this early demonstration laid the foundation for further development of AND‐gated materials, alkaline pH is rare in human physiology, and green light shows poor depth of penetration in tissue. Several years later, Chen et al. reported core‐shell MSNs from polycaprolactone (core) polyacrylic acid (shell) as esterase‐ and pH‐sensitive layers, respectively. These particles release doxorubicin only in the presence of low pH and esterase, achieving AND logic under physiologic conditions. The particles demonstrate specific in vitro cytotoxicity against neuroblastoma cells compared to non‐cancerous MRC‐5 human fetal lung fibroblasts. 65

AND logic is demonstrated in polymeric systems also. Wei et al. report a polymer micelle from a hydrazine functionalized poly(ethylene glycol)‐b‐poly(methyl methacrylate) (PEO‐b‐PMAA) copolymer attached to doxorubicin and crosslinked with dithiodiethanoic acid. DTT reduces the disulfide bonds and dissociates the particle structure, but under normal pH conditions the drug cargo remains covalently attached. The presence of low pH cleaves the drug from the polymer backbone, but intact particles retain the drug. Thus, the polymer micelle delivers doxorubicin in a pH‐ and reduction‐dependent manner, releasing most cargo only under low pH and high DTT conditions. However, the release of doxorubicin still occurs in a leaky manner in a 15 mM DTT solution. 66

2.3 Complex biocomputation with supramolecular materials

Materials biocomputation, performing multi‐input logic functions with biomaterials, is in its infancy. However, there is an explosion of interest in polymer materials exhibiting logic computation and programmability. 30 , 67 , 68 Such systems resemble early projects in synthetic biology, performing simple logic operations that are layered for complex computation. Unlike traditional stimuli‐responsive materials, these systems exhibit programmability, enabling diverse logic functionality with minimal changes to structure or inputs.

Early supramolecular logic gates were achieved via gel‐sol transitions based on distinct inputs. Komatsu et al. describe a hydrogel using a phosphate‐type hydrogelator, which undergoes a gel‐sol transition via temperature, pH, Ca2+ and light, demonstrating AND, OR, NAND and NOR logic responses. 69 Ikeda et al. demonstrate OR and AND logic via a nanofiber network, which collapses upon exposure to hydroxide. The networks were made redox sensitive and loaded with enzymes such as oxidases (e.g., glucose oxidase, GOx and choline oxidase, COx) or reductases (e.g., nitroreductase, NR). This enabled collapse upon addition of a substrate (e.g., glucose, choline, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide hydrogen (NADH)). The system exhibits OR‐gated collapse via GOx and COx encapsulation and AND‐gated collapse via mixing NR and GOx encapsulating gels. 70

Programmable polymer libraries use cross‐linkers spatially configured to induce biomaterial degradation upon exposure to triggers, with the ability to exhibit YES, OR and AND logic and all possible two‐layered combinations of those gates (Figure 2G, Badeau et al.). These hydrogels use linear or cyclic cross‐linkers that promote hydrogel structure unless fully cleaved, presenting an opportunity for logic functions by placing inducible cleavage sites in series (OR‐logic) or in parallel (AND logic). The group uses linkers cleaved by enzymes (MMPs), ortho‐nitrobenzyl esters and ultraviolet light and demonstrates release of small molecule drugs and live cells with high spatial and temporal specificity (Figure 2H). 71 Ruskowitz et al. utilize a similar hydrogel system to achieve modular release of tethered prodrugs via reduction reactions, enzymes or light, 72 and Gawade et al. demonstrate protein release from a homogeneous hydrogel material using light, enzymatic and reductant triggers to achieve YES, OR and AND logic and spatially controlled and sequential release. 73 Nanocarriers containing layered logic gates and sequential responsiveness using self‐immolative motifs, reported by Zhang et al., exhibit YES, OR, AND and multi‐layer logic and respond to pH, reductants, light and enzymes. Localized release of diverse cargo such as small molecules and RNA demonstrates anti‐tumour efficacy in vitro and in vivo. 12

3 CELLULAR LOGIC AND SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY ENHANCED WITH BIOMATERIALS

Synthetic biology re‐designs cells through genetic and physical engineering, creating a toolbox of tunable functionalities. Cells are retrofitted to sense and respond to biomarkers, enzymes, mechanical force, small molecules, or light, which allows changes in cell behavior driving behaviors such as protein synthesis, cell fate, communication, proliferation and migration (Figure 3A). Synthetic biology entered the clinic with the approval of CAR T cell therapy for relapsed and refractory leukemia and lymphoma. 74 CAR T cells are genetically modified T cells with a synthetic receptor that senses an antigen to initiate a T cell response, and new iterations of CAR design confer Boolean logic functionality (Figure 3B). While CAR T cells represent a major victory for synthetic biology, efficacy is limited to hematologic cancers. Successful treatment of solid tumours is limited by the lack of specific antigens, poor T cell persistence in the TME and off‐tumour antigen recognition, resulting in high morbidity and poor response rates. 75 Further, CAR T cells are prohibitively expensive to manufacture for widespread use. 76 Thus, increased safety and efficacy and decreased cost are necessary before therapeutic immune cells can be broadly adopted against cancer. Biomaterials promise to bring these therapies closer to that ideal through enhanced manufacturing and improved performance in vivo.

FIGURE 3 Synthetic biology improved with biomaterials. (A) Synthetic biology uses tools to build functionality into cells based on physiologic or synthetic inputs. This toolbox is employed via gene insertion, genetic circuits, protein circuits (adapted from Gao and Chong et al.), and/or multicellular computing (adapted from Tamsir et al.), and it enables synthesis, cell fate determination, communication, proliferation, and migration. (B) Traditional chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells form YES gates that activate in response to a specific antigen. Boolean‐gated CAR T cells activate only in response to combinations of antigens, which enhances sensitivity and specificity. Common logic gates include OR (either antigen activates the CAR), AND (both antigens necessary to activate the CAR), and NIMPLY (one antigen activates the CAR, but another overrides and inhibits the activation). (C) A synthetic amphiphilic ligand acts as a cancer vaccine that homes to lymph nodes and inserts itself into the membrane of dendritic cells. An OR‐gated CAR T cell is primed with the vaccine and then exhibits potent cytotoxicity against tumour cells (adapted from Ma et al.). (D) Designer cells are encapsulated in alginate microbeads, which confer immune protection and selective permeability to prevent an inflammatory and fibrotic reaction while allowing physiologic sensing and therapeutic output (adapted from Xie et al.).

Beyond CAR T cell therapy, there is a broad need for greater biocompatibility in synthetic biology‐driven cellular therapy for endocrine, autoimmune and infectious diseases. Designer cells such as insulin‐releasing cell implants may usher in a new era of diabetes treatment. However, allogeneic cells induce a robust immune response and therefore require improvements in biocompatibility for off‐the‐shelf therapies without the need for immune suppressive regimens. 35 Engineering biomaterials provides a pathway to biocompatible and scalable designer cell implants.

3.1 in vivo biomaterials enhancements for T cell therapy

All cells naturally exhibit complex, logic‐gated functionality for physiologic processes such as proliferation, differentiation, and migration. 77 For instance, T cell activation and proliferation requires primary and secondary co‐stimulation for activation and expansion. 78 Biomaterials are used to simulate these signals with off‐the‐shelf technologies that enable widespread adoption at low cost. Several reviews thoroughly cover biomaterials for adoptive T cell therapy (ACT) and CAR T cell manufacturing ex vivo. 34 , 79 In the following section, we describe recent developments in biomaterial technologies for enhancing the activity of CAR T cells and ACT in vivo. We place a specific emphasis on Boolean logic‐gated CAR T cells and examples of enhancement with biomaterials.

3.1.1 Biomaterials for modulation of therapeutic immune cell activity

Enhancing potency and specificity of T cell activity with biomaterials is emerging as a promising strategy against solid tumours. 74 In an early demonstration of material implants for enhancing T cell therapeutics, Stephan et al. describe a solid polymer matrix delivering CAR T cells to a tumour resection site. The alginate matrix forms a macroporous structure that facilitates the release and expansion of T cells via a collagen mimetic peptide, enabling egress, and silica microparticles releasing an IL‐15 superagonist, promoting proliferation in vivo. The scaffolds demonstrate potent anti‐tumour efficacy in murine models of breast cancer (4T1) and ovarian cancer (ID8). 80 Similar alginate scaffolds incorporating STING agonists eliminate heterogeneous tumours in orthotopic models of pancreatic cancer and melanoma. 81 Finally, nitinol films and stents carrying CAR T cells molded to the shape of a resection site, providing anti‐tumour efficacy or preventing occlusion of a stented area (e.g., pancreatic duct) with tumour ingrowth. 82

Other groups are developing CAR T cell releasing hydrogels. Hu et al. report hyaluronic acid hydrogels carrying CAR T cells, polymeric nanoparticles encapsulating IL‐15 and anti‐PDL1‐conjugated platelets. The hydrogels decrease overall tumour size in a murine model of melanoma and encourages T cell expansion in vivo. 83 Wang et al. describe GD2‐targeted CAR T cells released from an injectable chitosan‐polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel for control of retinoblastoma. The inclusion of a hydrogel delivery system limits toxicity in the retina via decreased inflammation and retinal detachment. 84 Grosskopf et al. show that transient injectable hydrogels deliver B7H3 CAR T cells and cultivate a locally pro‐inflammatory niche via release of IL‐15 and exhibit efficacy in murine models of human medulloblastoma. 13

Nanoparticles are a well‐established method of delivering materials to a tumour and shaping the immunomodulatory environment. 85 iRGD‐targeted liposomes, reported by Zhang et al. deliver immunomodulatory compounds that suppress regulatory T cell (Treg) activity and stimulate invariant natural killer T cells (iNKT). This opens a therapeutic window for CAR T cells to better invade and proliferate within the TME, resulting in increased survival in models of breast cancer and glioblastoma. 86 Tang et al. report protein nanogel particles that ‘backpack’ on T cells. The nanogels encapsulated an IL‐15 super‐agonist, which releases upon surface reduction of an activated T cell. Thus, T cells with nanogel backpacks exhibit robust proliferation in tumours and increased survival and tumour clearance in models of murine melanoma and glioblastoma. 87

3.1.2 Biomaterials for in situ generation of therapeutic T cells

Due to the expensive CAR T cell manufacturing process, in situ generation of CAR T cells or ACT is an attractive concept, allowing for off‐the‐shelf T cell therapy without allogeneic T cell transplant. ex vivo techniques for gene transfer to T cells (e.g., retroviral or lentiviral transduction) are poorly suited for in vivo use due to poor specificity, immunogenicity, and short half‐life, leading to a risk of random insertion in off‐target cells and insertional mutagenesis. Lentiviral vectors, for instance, are inactivated by human serum and lack selectivity for T cells. 88 , 89 While approaches for CD4 and CD8 targeted lentiviral vectors exist, such approaches involve viral vector generation and vectors specific to CD4+ and CD8+ T cells that may prove challenging to produce at scale. 90 , 91

Most non‐viral approaches for in situ CAR T or ACT generation utilize nanoparticles designed to home to secondary lymphoid organs such as the lymph nodes and spleen. 92 Smith et al. describe polymeric nanocarriers specifically targeted to CD3+ T cells. The particles contained DNA encoding a CAR and a piggyback transposase for stable integration. Systemic administration of the nanoparticles demonstrates efficacy comparable to ex vivo‐generated CARs in a model of murine leukemia. 93 The same group reports efficient delivery of mRNA to host T cells using similar nanocarriers. 94 Rurik et al. repurposed CAR T cells to fight cardiac fibrosis using ionizable lipid NPs to generate in situ mRNA CARs by targeting CD5+ cells towards fibroblast activating protein (FAP). The FAP CARs accumulate in the spleen and travel to heart tissue to reduce fibrosis and eliminate FAP‐expressing fibroblasts. 95

Scaffolded biomaterials also play a key role for in vivo manufacturing of CAR T cells. Agarwalla et al. utilize an alginate scaffold to produce functional CAR T cells in vivo. The scaffolds contain anti‐CD3 and anti‐CD28 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), interleukin 2 (IL‐2) and retrovirus to activate, expand and transduce T cells. This creates functional CAR T cells with similar characteristics to ex vivo manufacturing but with improved proportion of naïve, central memory and lymphoid homing T cells. The scaffolds outperform intravenously administered CAR T cells in multiple murine models of human lymphoma. 14

3.1.3 Logic‐gated CAR T cells enhanced by biomaterials

Logic‐computation is at the forefront of next generation CAR T cell technologies. Genetic logic in CAR T cells allows for enhanced specificity and sensitivity. Common logic gates include OR, 96 AND 97 and NIMPLY, 98 , 99 with cancer antigens as inputs and cellular responses as output. However, despite the success of logic CARs in preclinical models, several limitations still exist. For example, Roybal et al. report AND‐gated CAR T cells using a synNotch gene circuit that drives CAR expression for a tumour antigen upon binding to a priming antigen. This circuit enhanced specificity and mediated killing against dual‐antigen tumours while sparing single antigen tumours (which represented healthy tissue in the model). 100 However, Srivastava et al. later demonstrate that synNotch CAR T cells act more like IF, THEN logic gates instead of AND gates in a murine model of human lymphoma where tumour cells are intermixed with healthy tissue in the bone marrow. 101

Using logic‐gated CARs in conjunction with biomaterials promises to overcome deficits in logic CAR T cells by conferring spatial control, bio‐orthogonal input presentation, and enhanced in vivo activation. Huang et al. report DNA scaffolded particles for tunable protein loading and synNotch CAR T cell modulation. The scaffolds present in vivo priming signals and confer spatiotemporal control. The particles allow efficient and modular loading of therapeutic or immunomodulatory proteins such as checkpoint inhibitor mAbs, IL‐2 and costimulatory ligands. This system, when used in conjunction with an AND‐gate CAR T, which contains a SynNotch CAR, induces the expression of a conventional CAR. The particles present a bio‐orthogonal protein for priming, theoretically enhancing safety by localizing CAR T cell activity. The system exhibits efficacy and spatial control in a dual‐tumour model of myelogenous leukemia. 102

Biomaterials are also formulated into cancer vaccines that improve CAR T cell activity. Ma et al. describe a cancer vaccine that restimulates CAR T cells within the native lymph node. Designer amphiphile ligands decorated the surface of antigen presenting cells (APCs) via membrane insertion and prime CAR T cells for enhanced expansion and anti‐tumour efficacy. Systemically delivered vaccine as an albumin nanoparticle traffics to lymph nodes, and primes CAR T in vivo. The system demonstrates efficacy in immunocompetent models of mouse glioma and melanoma. They further utilized an OR‐gated CAR that targeted FITC or TRP1, a melanoma antigen. The OR logic gate allows for use of FITC or another bio‐orthogonal targeting ligand alongside an antigen of choice, where one scFv targets a tumour‐specific antigen and the other primes CAR T cells upon binding APCs (highlighted in Figure 3C). 103

3.2 Designer cell therapeutics for endocrine, autoimmune and infectious diseases

While CAR T cells for cancer receive significant attention and investment due to tremendous efficacy in humans and potential in oncology, cellular therapeutics are emerging for endocrine, 104 autoimmune, 105 fibrotic 106 , 107 and infectious diseases, 108 among others. Cellular systems offer tremendous advantages over traditional therapeutics due to sense‐and‐respond architectures afforded by genetically engineered systems, sometimes called ‘open‐loop’ genetic circuits. 109 Open‐loop circuits confer diverse functionality to the end user, taking inputs such as electricity, shear‐stress, chemicals, heat and light. 110 , 111 , 112 Other approaches utilize ‘closed‐loop’ genetic circuits which respond to natural disease biomarkers, allowing autonomous function in vivo. 15 Both open‐ and closed‐loop systems require a prolonged expression of therapeutic gene circuits. These systems require gene circuits stably integrated into autologous cells, immune‐protected allogeneic implants or efficient in situ transfection. As with CAR T cells, autologous cells are phenotypically variable from patient to patient, and they are expensive to produce. Biomaterials promise to enhance the delivery of these cells by providing an immune‐privileged environment and enhanced, tissue‐specific gene delivery.

3.2.1 Biomaterials for therapeutic cell delivery and in situ therapeutic manufacturing

Without utilizing autologous cells, lifelong immunosuppression must accompany cellular implants to prevent allorecognition and rejection long term. Islet of Langerhans transplantation from cadaveric donors results in substantial transplant mass loss and requires immune suppressive regimens. 113 Alginate membranes for encapsulation and immune protection of implanted, allogeneic pancreatic beta cells were investigated in the 1980s. 114 However, while transplanted cells are protected, the materials induce host immune responses, which lead to fibrosis and eventual failure of the implant. 35 , 115 A combinatorial screen of covalent chemical modifications yielded alginate derivatives, which elicit substantially reduced immune reactions in non‐human primates via inhibition of macrophage recognition. 116 These alginate derivatives encapsulate functional stem‐cell derived pancreatic beta cells for at least 174 days in immunocompetent mice. 16

An alternative approach is in situ generation of therapeutic cells. To circumvent ex vivo manufacture of therapeutic cells, some groups utilize transient in situ production of designer cells via hydrodynamic transfection of plasmid DNA. 117 , 118 Stable integration of DNA via nanocarriers or transient dosing with mRNA lipid nanoparticles, as demonstrated with CAR T cells, may confer cell‐type specificity and prolonged expression to these systems. Nanoparticles functionalized with cell‐specific antibodies achieve cell type specificity, 94 , 95 and prolonged expression can be realized via transposase integration. 93 These technologies offer a path to in situ and autologous production of cell‐type specific, stably integrated gene circuits.

3.2.2 Designer cell implants for endocrine disorders

The goal of type 1 diabetes (T1D) therapeutics is blood glucose control without patient intervention. With the availability of functional pancreatic beta cells from human pluripotent stem cells 119 and the development of designer cells that effectively regulate insulin in vivo, 120 strategies for integrating these cells and circuits in vivo are of paramount importance.

Closed‐loop designer cells bypass reliance on stem‐cell derived beta cells and allow fine‐tuned responses and external intervention via open‐loop safety switches. 104 Most T1D designer cell therapies rely on alginate encapsulation methods for implantation without immune rejection, demonstrating the power of synthetic biology and biomaterials to achieve fine‐tuned physiologic responsiveness while maintaining biocompatibility. Xie et al. achieved closed‐loop insulin secretion and corrected hyperglycemia in T1D mice (highlighted in Figure 3D). They also corrected type 2 diabetes (T2D)‐related hyperglycemia via the release of glucagon‐like peptide 1. Alginate microbeads prevent immune rejection of the encapsulated cells. 120 The Fussenegger group report similar insulin‐secreting cell implants that rely on open‐loop inputs such as oral drugs (rapamycin) 117 and piezoelectric signaling. 121 Additionally, designer cells have been reported that reverse diabetic ketoacidosis in mice by sensing extracellular pH and releasing insulin in response. 122

Beyond diabetes, Rössger et al. report closed‐loop genetic circuits for treating obesity. Alginate microencapsulated cells detect fatty acid levels and produce the appetite‐suppressing peptide hormone pramlintide. Mice on high‐fat diets show significantly improved lipid levels and body weight when treated with the encapsulated designer cells. 123 Designer cells can also regulate the control of thyroid hormones via expression of a thyroid stimulating hormone‐receptor antagonist. 124

3.2.3 Designer cell implants for autoimmunity

Autoimmunity is an emerging target of engineered cell therapy. Strategies to expand autoantigen‐specific regulatory T cells (Tregs) have generated considerable interest in adoptive cell therapy for autoimmune disease. 125 Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are being explored for several autoimmune applications including graft‐versus‐host disease, T1D and organ transplant rejection. 126 CARs expressed in regulatory T cells (CAR Treg) are commonly deployed in preclinical studies of collitis, 127 transplant rejection 128 and multiple sclerosis. 129 Currently, no studies exist demonstrating the synergy of CAR Tregs and biomaterials. However, similar limitations apply to CAR T cells for cancer and CAR Tregs for autoimmunity, particularly if Treg isolation is imperfect and there are contaminating effector T cells in the therapeutic bolus. 130 Biomaterials could offer similar benefits to CARs in the autoimmune space, conferring spatiotemporal control, proliferation and sensitivity to achieve efficacy with a wide margin of safety.

Designer cells offer another pathway for the treatment of autoimmune diseases through synthetic biology and biomaterials. Schukur et al. report encapsulated logic‐gated HEK293T cells to ameliorate psoriatic flares in immunocompetent BALB/c mice. The HEK293T cells quantify tumour necrosis factor and IL‐22 levels using AND‐gated synthetic signaling cascades to drive anti‐inflammatory IL‐4 and IL‐10 expression. This ‘cytokine converter’ demonstrates improved skin morphology in murine models of established psoriasis. 131

3.2.4 Designer cell implants for infectious disease

Both T cell therapies and designer cell circuits are in development for infectious diseases. For instance, anti‐HIV CARs have been studied for decades. 105 While anti‐HIV CARs present different challenges compared to CAR T cells for cancer immunotherapy, the high cost and poor scalability of ex vivo CAR T manufacturing are shared obstacles that could be improved with biomaterials. 92 Using alginate‐microencapsulation, Liu et al. report a closed‐loop genetic circuit in mammalian cells to sense bacteria via Toll‐like receptors and express lyostaphin to target methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), curing 100% of mice subjected to acute MRSA infections. 132 Sedlmayer et al. describe quorum‐quenching cells to dissolve traditionally antibiotic resistant Pseudomomas aeruginosa biofilms. 133

4 OPPORTUNITIES FOR SYNERGY IN DUALLY INTERACTIVE LIVING MATERIALS

Within mammalian therapeutics, no examples of dually interactive and programmable materials and synthetic biology systems exist. All examples utilize programmable materials, which impart useful properties onto cells or vice‐versa, a one‐way interaction. Mammalian genetic circuits suffer from considerable restrictions due to the potential for toxicity, the need for impeccable pharmacokinetic control, and the difficulty in engineering biocompatible, non‐immunogenic platforms. 15 , 112 Developing dually interactive systems, where feedback loops and logic operations are engineered into both materials and cells, harnesses the power of programmability at the genetic and extracellular level. Imparting programmability to complex multicellular factories, which sense and respond to biological cues in vivo, allows dynamic modulation of the delivery vessel and the cellular response (Figure 4).

FIGURE 4 Living materials made from mammalian cell‐biomaterial hybrids. Existing technologies are converging on living material implants, which sense and respond to physiologic or pathologic stimuli and change internal properties and output based on these sensing mechanisms. Living material systems would feature response modules, which facilitate interaction between cell and biomaterial, biomaterial and environment, and environment and cell to dynamically respond and change form.

Living materials promise to create bidirectional interaction between cells and materials to unlock diverse functionality in synthetic systems, affording direct, real‐time control over outputs such as mechanical actuation, differentiation, ECM remodeling, in situ materials processing and many more. 134 Work in non‐mammalian systems offers a glimpse into the potential of living biomaterials in mammalian cell‐based therapeutics. Self‐assembled biofilms made from E. coli genetically engineered to produce an amyloid curli nanofiber demonstrate the possibility of cell‐driven production of synthetic, composite living materials. 135 Genetic engineering produces programmable biofilms and hydrogels that demonstrate nanoparticle templating, 136 quorum sensing from cell‐to‐cell molecular communication, 137 materials synthesis 138 and patterning. 139

Self‐assembled composite living materials combined with closed‐loop designer cells will form the basis for long sought‐after technologies such as programmable tissue regeneration, artificial endocrine tissue and eventually whole organs or organisms. We envision sophisticated therapeutics integrated into tissue and capable of modulating multiple inputs and outputs simultaneously. By leveraging the strengths of biomaterials and synthetic biology, new possibilities emerge in therapeutic systems. Advancement will require considerable development and investment in better tools in both genetic circuit design and stimuli‐responsive biomaterials. Stimuli‐responsive biomaterials produced by designer cells will be of substantial value, and logic imparted into protein systems will confer an additional layer of control. 140 In summary the marriage of biomaterials and synthetic biology will continue to afford new living materials and functionality with potentially unprecedented performance.

The purpose of this review is to stimulate discussions, highlight recent approaches and success and provide further motivation for the development of programmable living materials and their use in medicine. The potential for programmable living materials exceeds our vision. Continued collaborative, interdisciplinary research will enable novel platforms for achieving longstanding goals in cellular therapeutics.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

E.M.B., S.A., Y.L.C., W.W. and M.W.G. are co‐inventors on a patent application, and the application is available for licensing.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported in part by BU and the National Institutes of Health (grant numbers: U01CA265713 WWW, YLC, MWG; R01CA232708 MWG, YLC; R01EB017722 MWG, YLC; R01DK132576 WWW; T32GM130546 EMB; and F30 CA257566 EMB). Select depictions of cells and medical equipment in Figures 1, 3 and 4 were inspired by and/or adapted from images from Servier Medical Art by Servier under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
==== Refs
REFERENCES

1 Huebsch N , Mooney DJ . Inspiration and application in the evolution of biomaterials. Nature. 2009;462 :426‐432.19940912
2 Ratner BD , ASH FJS , Lemons JE . Biomaterials Science: An Introduction to Materials in Medicine. 2nd ed. Elsevier Academic Press; 2004.
3 Gardner TS , Cantor CR , Collins JJ . Construction of a genetic toggle switch in Escherichia coli. Nature. 2000;403 :339‐342.10659857
4 Elowitz MB , Leibler S . A synthetic oscillatory network of transcriptional regulators. Nature. 2000;403 :335‐338.10659856
5 Ratner BD , Zhang G . A history of biomaterials. In: Wagner WR , Sakiyama‐Elbert SE , Zhang G , Yaszemski MJ , eds. Biomaterials Science. 4th ed. Academic Press; 2020:21‐34.
6 Folkman J , Long DM . The use of silicone rubber as a carrier for prolonged drug therapy. J Surg Res. 1964;4 :139‐142.14130164
7 Langer R , Brem H , Falterman K , Klein M , Folkman J . Isolations of a cartilage factor that inhibits tumor neovascularization. Science. 1976;193 :70‐72.935859
8 Moon TS , Lou C , Tamsir A , Stanton BC , Voigt CA . Genetic programs constructed from layered logic gates in single cells. Nature. 2012;491 :249‐253.23041931
9 Weinberg BH , Pham NTH , Caraballo LD , et al. Large‐scale design of robust genetic circuits with multiple inputs and outputs for mammalian cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35 :453‐462.28346402
10 Cho JH , Collins JJ , Wong WW . Universal chimeric antigen receptors for multiplexed and logical control of T cell responses. Cell. 2018;173 :1426‐1438.e1411.29706540
11 Tamsir A , Tabor JJ , Voigt CA . Robust multicellular computing using genetically encoded NOR gates and chemical ‘wires’. Nature. 2011;469 :212‐215.21150903
12 Zhang P , Gao Di , An K , et al. A programmable polymer library that enables the construction of stimuli‐responsive nanocarriers containing logic gates. Nat Chem. 2020;12 :381‐390.32152477
13 Grosskopf AK , Labanieh L , Klysz DD , et al. Delivery of CAR‐T cells in a transient injectable stimulatory hydrogel niche improves treatment of solid tumors. Sci Adv. 2022;8 :eabn8264.35394838
14 Agarwalla P , Ogunnaike EA , Ahn S , et al. Bioinstructive implantable scaffolds for rapid in vivo manufacture and release of CAR‐T cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2022;40:1250‐1258.35332339
15 Mahameed M , Fussenegger M . Engineering autonomous closed‐loop designer cells for disease therapy. iScience. 2022;25 :103834.35243222
16 Vegas AJ , Veiseh O , Gürtler M , et al. Long‐term glycemic control using polymer‐encapsulated human stem cell–derived beta cells in immune‐competent mice. Nat Med. 2016;22 :306‐311.26808346
17 Tang T‐C , An B , Huang Y , et al. Materials design by synthetic biology. Nat Rev Mater. 2020;6 :332‐350.
18 Gilbert C , Ellis T . Biological engineered living materials: growing functional materials with genetically programmable properties. ACS Synth Biol. 2019;8 :1‐15.30576101
19 Nguyen PQ , Courchesne N‐MD , Duraj‐Thatte A , Praveschotinunt P , Joshi NS . Engineered living materials: prospects and challenges for using biological systems to direct the assembly of smart materials. Adv Mater. 2018;30 :1704847.
20 Ekladious I , Colson YL , Grinstaff MW . Polymer–drug conjugate therapeutics: advances, insights and prospects. Nat Rev Drug Discovery. 2019;18 :273‐294.30542076
21 Balijepalli AS , Grinstaff MW . Poly‐amido‐saccharides (PASs): functional synthetic carbohydrate polymers inspired by nature. Acc Chem Res. 2020;53 :2167‐2179.32892620
22 Xiao R , Zeng J , Bressler EM , Lu W , Grinstaff MW . Synthesis of bioactive (1→6)‐β‐glucose branched poly‐amido‐saccharides that stimulate and induce M1 polarization in macrophages. Nat Commun. 2022;13 :4661.35945224
23 Chen Yi , Pang X‐H , Dong C‐M . Dual stimuli‐responsive supramolecular polypeptide‐based hydrogel and reverse micellar hydrogel mediated by host–guest chemistry. Adv Funct Mater. 2010;20 :579‐586.
24 Wang C , Wang J , Zhang X , et al. In situ formed reactive oxygen species–responsive scaffold with gemcitabine and checkpoint inhibitor for combination therapy. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10 :eaan3682.29467299
25 Colson YL , Grinstaff MW . Biologically responsive polymeric nanoparticles for drug delivery. Adv Mater. 2012;24 :3878‐3886.22988558
26 Anselmo AC , Mitragotri S . Nanoparticles in the clinic: an update. Bioeng Transl Med. 2019;4 :e10143.31572799
27 Bressler EM , Kim J , Shmueli RB , et al. Biomimetic peptide display from a polymeric nanoparticle surface for targeting and antitumor activity to human triple‐negative breast cancer cells. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2018;106 :1753‐1764.29424479
28 Kaplan JA , Liu R , Freedman JD , et al. Prevention of lung cancer recurrence using cisplatin‐loaded superhydrophobic nanofiber meshes. Biomaterials. 2016;76 :273‐281.26547283
29 Bressler EM , Chu N‐Q , Sabatelle RC , et al. Doxorubicin‐loaded polymeric meshes prevent local recurrence after sarcoma resection while avoiding cardiotoxicity. Cancer Res. 2022; 82 :4474‐4484.36169924
30 Badeau BA , Deforest CA . Programming stimuli‐responsive behavior into biomaterials. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2019;21 :241‐265.30857392
31 Ode Boni BO , Lamboni L , Souho T , Gauthier M , Yang G . Immunomodulation and cellular response to biomaterials: the overriding role of neutrophils in healing. Mater Horiz. 2019;6 :1122‐1137.
32 Sousa De Almeida M , Susnik E , Drasler B , Taladriz‐Blanco P , Petri‐Fink A , Rothen‐Rutishauser B . Understanding nanoparticle endocytosis to improve targeting strategies in nanomedicine. Chem Soc Rev. 2021;50 :5397‐5434.33666625
33 Irvine DJ , Maus MV , Mooney DJ , Wong WW . The future of engineered immune cell therapies. Science. 2022;378 :853‐858.36423279
34 Cardle II , Cheng EL , Jensen MC , Pun SH . Biomaterials in chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell process development. Acc Chem Res. 2020;53 :1724‐1738.32786336
35 Scharp DW , Marchetti P . Encapsulated islets for diabetes therapy: history, current progress, and critical issues requiring solution. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2014;67‐68 :35‐73.
36 Peppas NA , Langer R . New challenges in biomaterials. Science. 1994;263 :1715‐1720.8134835
37 Peppas NA . Physiologically responsive hydrogels. J Bioact Compat Polym. 1991;6 :241‐246.
38 Binauld S , Stenzel MH . Acid‐degradable polymers for drug delivery: a decade of innovation. Chem Commun. 2013;49 :2082‐2102.
39 Deirram N , Zhang C , Kermaniyan SS , Johnston APR , Such GK . pH‐responsive polymer nanoparticles for drug delivery. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2019;40 :1800917.
40 Zhuo S , Zhang F , Yu J , Zhang X , Yang G , Liu X . pH‐sensitive biomaterials for drug delivery. Molecules. 2020;25 :5649.33266162
41 Tao W , Wang J , Parak WJ , Farokhzad OC , Shi J . Nanobuffering of pH‐responsive polymers: a known but sometimes overlooked phenomenon and its biological applications. ACS Nano. 2019;13 :4876‐4882.30985108
42 Angelos S , Khashab NM , Yang Y‐W , et al. pH clock‐operated mechanized nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131 :12912‐12914.19705840
43 Gan Qi , Lu X , Yuan Y , et al. A magnetic, reversible pH‐responsive nanogated ensemble based on Fe3O4 nanoparticles‐capped mesoporous silica. Biomaterials. 2011;32 :1932‐1942.21131045
44 Griset AP , Walpole J , Liu R , Gaffey A , Colson YL , Grinstaff MW . Expansile nanoparticles: synthesis, characterization, and in vivo efficacy of an acid‐responsive polymeric drug delivery system. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131 :2469‐2471.19182897
45 Gilmore D , Schulz M , Liu R , et al. Cytoreductive surgery and intraoperative administration of paclitaxel‐loaded expansile nanoparticles delay tumor recurrence in ovarian carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20 :1684‐1693.23128939
46 Herrera VL , Colby AH , Tan GAl , et al. Evaluation of expansile nanoparticle tumor localization and efficacy in a cancer stem cell‐derived model of pancreatic peritoneal carcinomatosis. Nanomedicine. 2016;11 :1001‐1015.27078118
47 Chu N‐Q , Liu R , Colby A , et al. Paclitaxel‐loaded expansile nanoparticles improve survival following cytoreductive surgery in pleural mesothelioma xenografts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;160 :e159‐e168.32044093
48 West JL , Hubbell JA . Polymeric biomaterials with degradation sites for proteases involved in cell migration. Macromolecules. 1999;32 :241‐244.
49 Wang M , Gao B , Wang X , Li W , Feng Y . Enzyme‐responsive strategy as a prospective cue to construct intelligent biomaterials for disease diagnosis and therapy. Biomater Sci. 2022;10 :1883‐1903.35293402
50 Wang Y , Byrne JD , Napier ME , Desimone JM . Engineering nanomedicines using stimuli‐responsive biomaterials. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2012;64 :1021‐1030.22266128
51 Koshy ST , Ferrante TC , Lewin SA , Mooney DJ . Injectable, porous, and cell‐responsive gelatin cryogels. Biomaterials. 2014;35 :2477‐2487.24345735
52 Li W , Zheng C , Pan Z , et al. Smart hyaluronidase‐actived theranostic micelles for dual‐modal imaging guided photodynamic therapy. Biomaterials. 2016;101 :10‐19.27262027
53 Henderson TA , Morries L . Near‐infrared photonic energy penetration: can infrared phototherapy effectively reach the human brain? Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015;11 :2191‐2208.26346298
54 Guvendiren M , Burdick JA . Stiffening hydrogels to probe short‐ and long‐term cellular responses to dynamic mechanics. Nat Commun. 2012;3 :792.22531177
55 Deforest CA , Anseth KS . Cytocompatible click‐based hydrogels with dynamically tunable properties through orthogonal photoconjugation and photocleavage reactions. Nat Chem. 2011;3 :925‐931.22109271
56 Lee IN , Dobre O , Richards D , et al. Photoresponsive hydrogels with photoswitchable mechanical properties allow time‐resolved analysis of cellular responses to matrix stiffening. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10 :7765‐7776.29430919
57 Ahmadi A , Hosseini‐Nami S , Abed Z , et al. Recent advances in ultrasound‐triggered drug delivery through lipid‐based nanomaterials. Drug Discovery Today. 2020;25 :2182‐2200.33010479
58 Shih T‐Yu , Najibi AJ , Bartlett AL , Li AW , Mooney DJ . Ultrasound‐triggered release reveals optimal timing of CpG‐ODN delivery from a cryogel cancer vaccine. Biomaterials. 2021;279 :121240.34753036
59 Yohe ST , Kopechek JA , Porter TM , Colson YL , Grinstaff MW . Triggered drug release from superhydrophobic meshes using high‐intensity focused ultrasound. Adv Healthc Mater. 2013;2 :1204‐1208.23592698
60 Cheng Ru , Meng F , Deng C , Klok H‐A , Zhong Z . Dual and multi‐stimuli responsive polymeric nanoparticles for programmed site‐specific drug delivery. Biomaterials. 2013;34 :3647‐3657.23415642
61 Zhang Y‐M , Liu Y‐H , Liu Yu . Cyclodextrin‐based multistimuli‐responsive supramolecular assemblies and their biological functions. Adv Mater. 2020;32 :1806158.
62 Guo J , Sun H , Alt K , et al. Boronate–phenolic network capsules with dual response to acidic pH and cis‐diols. Adv Healthc Mater. 2015;4 :1796‐1801.26088356
63 Chen J , Qiu X , Ouyang J , Kong J , Zhong W , Xing MMQ . pH and reduction dual‐sensitive copolymeric micelles for intracellular doxorubicin delivery. Biomacromolecules. 2011;12 :3601‐3611.21853982
64 Angelos S , Yang Y‐W , Khashab NM , Stoddart JF , Zink JI . Dual‐controlled nanoparticles exhibiting AND logic. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131 :11344‐11346.19624127
65 Chen X , Soeriyadi AH , Lu X , Sagnella SM , Kavallaris M , Gooding JJ . Dual bioresponsive mesoporous silica nanocarrier as an “AND” logic gate for targeted drug delivery cancer cells. Adv Funct Mater. 2014;24 :6999‐7006.
66 Wei C , Guo J , Wang C . Dual stimuli‐responsive polymeric micelles exhibiting “AND” logic gate for controlled release of adriamycin. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2011;32 :451‐455.21433198
67 Rodrigo‐Navarro A , Sankaran S , Dalby MJ , Del Campo A , Salmeron‐Sanchez M . Engineered living biomaterials. Nat Rev Mater. 2021;6 :1175‐1190.
68 Kowalski PS , Bhattacharya C , Afewerki S , Langer R . Smart biomaterials: recent advances and future directions. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2018;4 :3809‐3817.33429614
69 Komatsu H , Matsumoto S , Tamaru S‐I , Kaneko K , Ikeda M , Hamachi I . Supramolecular hydrogel exhibiting four basic logic gate functions to fine‐tune substance release. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131 :5580‐5585.19331364
70 Ikeda M , Tanida T , Yoshii T , et al. Installing logic‐gate responses to a variety of biological substances in supramolecular hydrogel–enzyme hybrids. Nat Chem. 2014;6 :511‐518.24848237
71 Badeau BA , Comerford MP , Arakawa CK , Shadish JA , Deforest CA . Engineered modular biomaterial logic gates for environmentally triggered therapeutic delivery. Nat Chem. 2018;10 :251‐258.29461528
72 Ruskowitz ER , Comerford MP , Badeau BA , Deforest CA . Logical stimuli‐triggered delivery of small molecules from hydrogel biomaterials. Biomater Sci. 2019;7 :542‐546.30556545
73 Gawade PM , Shadish JA , Badeau BA , Deforest CA . Logic‐based delivery of site‐specifically modified proteins from environmentally responsive hydrogel biomaterials. Adv Mater. 2019;31 :1902462.
74 Majzner RG , Mackall CL . Clinical lessons learned from the first leg of the CAR T cell journey. Nat Med. 2019;25 :1341‐1355.31501612
75 Sterner RC , Sterner RM . CAR‐T cell therapy: current limitations and potential strategies. Blood Cancer J. 2021;11 :69.33824268
76 Hay AE , Cheung MC . CAR T‐cells: costs, comparisons, and commentary. J Med Econ. 2019;22 :613‐615.30747012
77 Ankit , Bhatnagar MR . Boolean AND and OR logic for cell signalling gateways: a communication perspective. IET Nanobiotechnol. 2018;12 :1130‐1139.30964026
78 Chen L , Flies DB . Molecular mechanisms of T cell co‐stimulation and co‐inhibition. Nat Rev Immunol. 2013;13 :227‐242.23470321
79 Dunn ZS , Mac J , Wang P . cell immunotherapy enhanced by designer biomaterials. Biomaterials. 2019;217 :119265.31271861
80 Stephan SB , Taber AM , Jileaeva I , Pegues EP , Sentman CL , Stephan MT . Biopolymer implants enhance the efficacy of adoptive T‐cell therapy. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33 :97‐101.25503382
81 Smith TT , Moffett HF , Stephan SB , et al. Biopolymers codelivering engineered T cells and STING agonists can eliminate heterogeneous tumors. J Clin Invest. 2017;127 :2176‐2191.28436934
82 Coon ME , Stephan SB , Gupta V , Kealey CP , Stephan MT . Nitinol thin films functionalized with CAR‐T cells for the treatment of solid tumours. Nat Biomed Eng. 2020;4 :195‐206.31819155
83 Hu Q , Li H , Archibong E , et al. Inhibition of post‐surgery tumour recurrence via a hydrogel releasing CAR‐T cells and anti‐PDL1‐conjugated platelets. Nat Biomed Eng. 2021;5 :1038‐1047.33903744
84 Wang K , Chen Y , Ahn S , et al. GD2‐specific CAR T cells encapsulated in an injectable hydrogel control retinoblastoma and preserve vision. Nat Cancer. 2020;1 :990‐997.33898999
85 Feng X , Xu W , Li Z , Song W , Ding J , Chen X . Immunomodulatory nanosystems. Adv Sci. 2019;6 :1900101.
86 Zhang F , Stephan SB , Ene CI , Smith TT , Holland EC , Stephan MT . Nanoparticles that reshape the tumor milieu create a therapeutic window for effective T‐cell therapy in solid malignancies. Cancer Res. 2018;78 :3718‐3730.29760047
87 Tang Li , Zheng Y , Melo MB , et al. Enhancing T cell therapy through TCR‐signaling‐responsive nanoparticle drug delivery. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36 :707‐716.29985479
88 Depolo NJ , Reed JD , Sheridan PL , et al. VSV‐G pseudotyped lentiviral vector particles produced in human cells are inactivated by human serum. Mol Ther. 2000;2 :218‐222.10985952
89 White M , Whittaker R , Gándara C , Stoll EA . A guide to approaching regulatory considerations for lentiviral‐mediated gene therapies. Hum Gene Ther Methods. 2017;28 :163‐176.28817344
90 Pfeiffer A , Thalheimer FB , Hartmann S , et al. In vivo generation of human CD19‐CAR T cells results in B‐cell depletion and signs of cytokine release syndrome. EMBO Mol Med. 2018;10 :e9158.30224381
91 Zhou Qi , Uhlig KM , Muth A , et al. Exclusive transduction of human CD4+ T cells upon systemic delivery of CD4‐targeted lentiviral vectors. J Immunol. 2015;195 :2493‐2501.26232436
92 Parayath NN , Stephan MT . In situ programming of CAR T cells. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2021;23 :385‐405.33863239
93 Smith TT , Stephan SB , Moffett HF , et al. In situ programming of leukaemia‐specific T cells using synthetic DNA nanocarriers. Nat Nanotechnol. 2017;12 :813‐820.28416815
94 Parayath NN , Stephan SB , Koehne AL , Nelson PS , Stephan MT . In vitro‐transcribed antigen receptor mRNA nanocarriers for transient expression in circulating T cells in vivo. Nat Commun. 2020;11 :6080.33247092
95 Rurik JG , Tombácz I , Yadegari A , et al. CAR T cells produced in vivo to treat cardiac injury. Science. 2022;375 :91‐96.34990237
96 Hegde M , Mukherjee M , Grada Z , et al. Tandem CAR T cells targeting HER2 and IL13Rα2 mitigate tumor antigen escape. J Clin Invest. 2016;126 :3036‐3052.27427982
97 Kloss CC , Condomines M , Cartellieri M , Bachmann M , Sadelain M . Combinatorial antigen recognition with balanced signaling promotes selective tumor eradication by engineered T cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31 :71‐75.23242161
98 Fedorov VD , Themeli M , Sadelain M . PD‐1‐ and CTLA‐4‐based inhibitory chimeric antigen receptors (iCARs) divert off‐target immunotherapy responses. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5 :215ra172.
99 Cho JH , Okuma A , Sofjan K , Lee S , Collins JJ , Wong WW . Engineering advanced logic and distributed computing in human CAR immune cells. Nat Commun. 2021;12 :792.33542232
100 Roybal KT , Rupp LJ , Morsut L , et al. Precision tumor recognition by T cells with combinatorial antigen‐sensing circuits. Cell. 2016;164 :770‐779.26830879
101 Srivastava S , Salter AI , Liggitt D , et al. Logic‐gated ROR1 chimeric antigen receptor expression rescues T cell‐mediated toxicity to normal tissues and enables selective tumor targeting. Cancer Cell. 2019;35 :489‐503.e8.e488.30889382
102 Huang X , Williams JZ , Chang R , et al. DNA scaffolds enable efficient and tunable functionalization of biomaterials for immune cell modulation. Nat Nanotechnol. 2021;16 :214‐223.33318641
103 Ma L , Dichwalkar T , Chang JYH , et al. Enhanced CAR–T cell activity against solid tumors by vaccine boosting through the chimeric receptor. Science. 2019;365 :162‐168.31296767
104 Xie M , Aubel D , Fussenegger M . Closed‐loop control systems – the quest for precision therapies for diabetes. Curr Opin Syst Biol. 2017;5 :32‐40.
105 Maldini CR , Ellis GI , Riley JL . CAR T cells for infection, autoimmunity and allotransplantation. Nat Rev Immunol. 2018;18 :605‐616.30046149
106 Amor C , Feucht J , Leibold J , et al. Senolytic CAR T cells reverse senescence‐associated pathologies. Nature. 2020;583 :127‐132.32555459
107 Aghajanian H , Kimura T , Rurik JG , et al. Targeting cardiac fibrosis with engineered T cells. Nature. 2019;573 :430‐433.31511695
108 Hale M , Mesojednik T , Romano Ibarra GS , et al. Engineering HIV‐resistant, anti‐HIV chimeric antigen receptor T cells. Mol Ther. 2017;25 :570‐579.28143740
109 Mansouri M , Fussenegger M . Therapeutic cell engineering: designing programmable synthetic genetic circuits in mammalian cells. Protein Cell. 2022;13 :476‐489.34586617
110 Strittmatter T , Argast P , Buchman P , Krawczyk K , Fussenegger M . Control of gene expression in engineered mammalian cells with a programmable shear‐stress inducer. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2021;118 :4751‐4759.34506645
111 Mansouri M , Fussenegger M . Synthetic biology‐based optogenetic approaches to control therapeutic designer cells. Curr Opin Syst Biol. 2021;28 :100396.
112 Madderson O , Teixeira AP , Fussenegger M . Emerging mammalian gene switches for controlling implantable cell therapies. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2021;64 :98‐105.34216875
113 Roep BO . Improving clinical islet transplantation outcomes. Diabetes Care. 2020;43 :698‐700.32198283
114 Lim F , Sun AM . Microencapsulated islets as bioartificial endocrine pancreas. Science. 1980;210 :908‐910.6776628
115 King A , Sandler S , Andersson A . The effect of host factors and capsule composition on the cellular overgrowth on implanted alginate capsules. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;57 :374‐383.11523032
116 Vegas AJ , Veiseh O , Doloff JC , et al. Combinatorial hydrogel library enables identification of materials that mitigate the foreign body response in primates. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34 :345‐352.26807527
117 Mahameed M , Xue S , Stefanov B‐A , Hamri GC‐El , Fussenegger M . Engineering a rapid insulin release system controlled by oral drug administration. Adv Sci. 2022;9 :2105619.
118 Franko N , Teixeira AP , Xue S , Charpin‐El Hamri G , Fussenegger M . Design of modular autoproteolytic gene switches responsive to anti‐coronavirus drug candidates. Nat Commun. 2021;12 :6786.34811361
119 Pagliuca FW , Millman JR , Gürtler M , et al. Generation of functional human pancreatic β cells in vitro. Cell. 2014;159 :428‐439.25303535
120 Xie M , Ye H , Wang H , et al. Beta cell mimetic designer cells provide closed‐loop glycemic control. Science. 2016;354 :1296‐1301.27940875
121 Zhao H , Xue S , Hussherr M‐D , Teixeira AP , Fussenegger M . Autonomous push button–controlled rapid insulin release from a piezoelectrically activated subcutaneous cell implant. Sci Adv. 2022;8 :eabm4389.35704573
122 Ausländer D , Ausländer S , Charpin‐El Hamri G , et al. A synthetic multifunctional mammalian pH sensor and CO2 transgene‐control device. Mol Cell. 2014;55 :397‐408.25018017
123 Rössger K , Charpin‐El‐Hamri G , Fussenegger M . A closed‐loop synthetic gene circuit for the treatment of diet‐induced obesity in mice. Nat Commun. 2013;4 :2825.24281397
124 Saxena P , Charpin‐El Hamri G , Folcher M , Zulewski H , Fussenegger M . Synthetic gene network restoring endogenous pituitary–thyroid feedback control in experimental Graves’ disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113 :1244‐1249.26787873
125 Dominguez‐Villar M , Hafler DA . Regulatory T cells in autoimmune disease. Nat Immunol. 2018;19 :665‐673.29925983
126 Perdigoto AL , Chatenoud L , Bluestone JA , Herold KC . Inducing and administering tregs to treat human disease. Front Immunol. 2015;6 :654.26834735
127 Elinav E , Adam N , Waks T , Eshhar Z . Amelioration of colitis by genetically engineered murine regulatory T cells redirected by antigen‐specific chimeric receptor. Gastroenterology. 2009;136 :1721‐1731.19208357
128 Macdonald KG , Hoeppli RE , Huang Q , et al. Alloantigen‐specific regulatory T cells generated with a chimeric antigen receptor. J Clin Invest. 2016;126 :1413‐1424.26999600
129 Fransson M , Piras E , Burman J , et al. CAR/FoxP3‐engineered T regulatory cells target the CNS and suppress EAE upon intranasal delivery. J Neuroinflammation. 2012;9 :1‐12.22212381
130 Weber EW , Maus MV , Mackall CL . The emerging landscape of immune cell therapies. Cell. 2020;181 :46‐62.32243795
131 Schukur L , Geering B , Charpin‐El Hamri G , Fussenegger M . Implantable synthetic cytokine converter cells with AND‐gate logic treat experimental psoriasis. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7 :318ra201‐318ra201.
132 Liu Y , Bai P , Woischnig A‐K , et al. Immunomimetic designer cells protect mice from MRSA infection. Cell. 2018;174 :259‐270.e11.e211.29937224
133 Sedlmayer F , Jaeger T , Jenal U , Fussenegger M . Quorum‐quenching human designer cells for closed‐loop control of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Nano Lett. 2017;17 :5043‐5050.28703595
134 Liu AP , Appel EA , Ashby PD , et al. The living interface between synthetic biology and biomaterial design. Nat Mater. 2022;21 :390‐397.35361951
135 Chen AY , Zhong C , Lu TK . Engineering living functional materials. 2015;1 :8‐11.
136 Nguyen PQ , Botyanszki Z , Tay PKR , Joshi NS . Programmable biofilm‐based materials from engineered curli nanofibres. Nat Commun. 2014;5 :4945.25229329
137 Liu Y , Wu H‐C , Chhuan M , et al. Functionalizing soft matter for molecular communication. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2015;1 :320‐328.26501127
138 Chen AY , Deng Z , Billings AN , et al. Synthesis and patterning of tunable multiscale materials with engineered cells. Nat Mater. 2014;13 :515‐523.24658114
139 Kalyoncu E , Ahan RE , Ozcelik CE , Seker UOS . Genetic logic gates enable patterning of amyloid nanofibers. Adv Mater. 2019;31 :1902888.
140 Gao XJ , Chong LS , Kim MS , Elowitz MB . Programmable protein circuits in living cells. Science. 2018;361 :1252‐1258.30237357