4.4 Article

Evaluation of IRES-mediated, cell-type-specific cytotoxicity of poliovirus using a colorimetric cell proliferation assay

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGICAL METHODS
卷 155, 期 1, 页码 44-54

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.09.020

关键词

Cytopathogenicity; Cytotoxicity; Poliovirus; MTS-based assay; CD155; Gliomas

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health [N01-CO-12400]
  2. Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PVS-RIPO is it recombinant oncolytic poliovirus designed for clinical application to target CD155 expressing malignant gliomas and other malignant diseases. PVS-RIPO does not replicate in healthy neurons and is therefore non-pathogenic in rodent and non-human primate models of poliomyelitis. A tetrazolium salt dye-based cellular assay was developed and qualified to define the cytotoxicity of virus preparations on susceptible cells and to explore the target cell specificity of PVS-RIPO. In this assay, PVS-RIPO inhibited proliferation of U87-MG astrocytoma cells in a dose-dependent manner. However, HEK293 cells were much less susceptible to cell killing by PVS-RIPO. In contrast, the Sabin type 1 live attenuated poliovirus vaccine strain (PV(1)S) was cytotoxic to both HEK293 and U87-MG cells. The correlation between expression of CD155 and cytotoxicity was also explored using six different cell lines. There was little or no expression of CD155 and PVS-RIPO-induced cytotoxicity in Jurkat and Daudi cells. HEK293 was the only cell line tested that showed CD155 expression and resistance to PVS-RIPO cytotoxicity. The results indicate that differential cytotoxicity measured by the colorimetric assay can be used to evaluate the cytotoxicity and cell-type specificity of recombinant strains of poliovirus and to demonstrate lot to lot consistency during the manufacture of viruses intended for clinical use. (c) 2008 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

4.4
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