4.8 Article

Quantification of plasmid DNA copies in the nucleus after lipoplex and polyplex transfection

期刊

JOURNAL OF CONTROLLED RELEASE
卷 135, 期 2, 页码 166-174

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2008.12.016

关键词

Cell fractionation; Drug delivery; Gene therapy; Intracellular trafficking; Iodixanol

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 EB003008]
  2. Whitaker Foundation Graduate Fellowship to RC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nuclear uptake of plasmid DNA is one of the many cellular barriers that limit the efficiency of non-viral gene delivery systems. We have determined the number of plasmids that reach the nucleus of a transfected cell using an internally standardized quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay. We isolated nuclei using two different protocols: a density gradient technique and a detergent-based method. The density gradient procedure yielded nuclei with substantially less adhering plasmids on the outside of the nuclei. Using the density gradient protocol we determined that cells transfected with Lipofectamine (TM) lipoplexes or polyethylenimine polyplexes contained between 75 and 50,000 plasmids/nucleus, depending on the applied plasmid dose. Any increase above 3000 plasmids/nucleus resulted in only marginal increases in transgene expression. Furthermore, lipoplex-delivered plasmids were More efficiently expressed, on the basis of protein expression per plasmid number in the nucleus, than polyplex-delivered plasmids. This indicates that polymer may remain bound to some plasmids in the nucleus. Lastly, by sorting transfected cells into high- and low-expressing sub-populations, we observe that a sub-population of cells contain 3x greater plasmids/nucleus but express nearly 100x more transgene than other cells within a single transfection reaction. Taken together these results suggest the importance of considering the processes downstream from nuclear entry for strategies to improve the efficiency of gene transfer reagents. (c) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据