4.7 Article

Tuning the Buffering Capacity of Polyethylenimine with Glycerol Molecules for Efficient Gene Delivery: Staying In or Out of the Endosomes

Journal

MACROMOLECULAR BIOSCIENCE
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages 622-635

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/mabi.201400463

Keywords

buffering capacity; endosomal escape; glycerol; polyethylenimine; proton sponge

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIF) [NRF-2014R1A1A2007163]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Endosomal escape is a major bottleneck for efficient non-viral gene delivery. This paper presents the development of two novel non-viral vectors by cross-linking glycerol molecules with low molecular weight polyethylenimine (PEI). The vectors, namely, HG-PEI (45 mol% glycerol content) and LG-PEI (9 mol% glycerol content) have apparently similar DNA binding, DNA unpacking and cellular uptake abilities but differ in buffering capacity. The cellular uptake and subsequent transfection efficiency of LG-PEI is superior to commercially available PEI 25k. Interestingly, although the cellular uptake of HG-PEI is higher than that of PEI 25k, the transgene expression by HG-PEI-mediated transfection is very low. Inhibitor and co-localization studies demonstrate the mechanism of endocytosis and formation of endosomes prone to lysosomal lysis of HG-PEI polyplexes as a consequence of its weak buffering capacity. Importantly, when the lysosomal lysis is inhibited, the transgene expression of HG-PEI-mediated transfection increases by 9-fold of its initial capacity which is comparable to the transfection efficiency of PEI 25k. These results indicated that the buffering capacity of the polymers primarily impacts endosomal escape and subsequent transfection efficiency. Furthermore, this study highlights the significance of cross-linkers in optimizing the buffering capacity when designing polymers for gene delivery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available