4.6 Article

Scalable generation of high-titer recombinant adeno-associated virus type 5 in insect cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 80, 期 4, 页码 1874-1885

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.80.4.1874-1885.2006

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We established a method for production of recombinant adeno-associated virus type 5 (rAAV5) in insect cells by use of baculovirus expression vectors. One baculovirus harbors a transgene between the inverted terminal repeat sequences of type 5, and the second expresses Rep78 and Rep52. Interestingly, the replacement of type 5 Rep52 with type 1 Rep52 generated four times more rAAV5 particles. We replaced the N-terminal portion of type 5 VP1 with the equivalent portion of type 2 to generate infectious AAV5 particles. The rAAV5 with the modified VP1 required alpha 2-3 sialic acid for transduction, as revealed by a competition experiment with an analog of alpha 2-3 sialic acid. rAAV5-GFP/Neo with a 4.4-kb vector genome produced in HEK293 cells or Sf9 cells transduced COS cells with similar efficiencies. Surprisingly, Sf9-produced humanized Renilla green fluorescent protein (hGFP) vector with a 2.4-kb vector genome induced stronger GFP expression than the 293-produced one. Transduction of murine skeletal muscles with Sf9-generated rAAV5 with a 3.4-kb vector genome carrying a human secreted alkaline phosphatase (SEAP) expression cassette induced levels of SEAP more than 30 times higher than those for 293-produced vector 1 week after injection. Analysis of virion DNA revealed that in addition to a 2.4- or 3.4-kb single-stranded vector genome, Sf9-rAAV5 had more-abundant forms of approximately 4.7 kb, which appeared to correspond to the monomer duplex form of hGFP vector or truncated monomer duplex SEAP vector DNA. These results indicated that rAAV5 can be generated in insect cells, although the difference in incorporated virion DNA may induce different expression patterns of the transgene.

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

4.6
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