3.8 Article

Myocardial gene transfer and long-term expression following intracoronary delivery of adeno-associated virus

期刊

JOURNAL OF GENE MEDICINE
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 316-324

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jgm.665

关键词

gene therapy; vector; heart; cardiovascular gene transfer; AAV

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adeno-associated viral vectors (AAV) can direct long-term gene expression in post-mitotic cells. Previous studies have established that long-term cardiac gene transfer results from intramuscular injection into the heart. Cardiac gene transfer after direct intracoronary delivery of AAV in vivo, however, has been minimal in degree, and indirect intracoronary delivery, an approach used in an increasing number of studies, appears to be receiving more attention. To determine the utility of indirect intracoronary gene transfer of AAV, we used aortic and pulmonary artery cross clamping followed by proximal aortic injection of AAV encoding enhanced green fluorescent protein (AAV.EGFP) at 10(11) DNase resistant particles (drp; high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) -purified) per rat. Gene expression was quantified by fluorescent microscopy at four time points up to 1 year after vector delivery, revealing 20-32% transmural gene expression in the left ventricle at each time point. Histological analysis revealed little or no inflammatory response and levels of transgene expression were low in liver and undetectable in lung. In subsequent studies in pigs, direct intracoronary delivery into the left circumflex coronary artery of AAV.EGFP (2.64-5.28 x 10(13) drp; HPLC-purified) resulted in gene expression in 3 of 4 pigs 8 weeks following injection with no inflammatory response in the heart. PCR analysis confirmed AAV vector presence in the left circumflex perfusion bed. These data indicate that intracoronary delivery of AAV vector is associated with transgene expression in the heart, providing a means to obtain long-term expression of therapeutic genes. Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

3.8
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