4.5 Article

Highly efficient adenovirus-mediated gene transfer to cardiac myocytes after single-pass coronary delivery

期刊

HUMAN GENE THERAPY
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 1015-1022

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/10430340050015329

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Efficient and homogeneous gene transfer to cardiac myocytes is a major target in myocardial gene therapy. The aim of this study was to determine the conditions permitting efficient, homogeneous, adenovirus-mediated gene transfer to cardiac myocytes, with a view to application during coronary artery catheterization. Gene transfer to adult rat ventricular myocytes was conducted using type 5 adenoviruses carrying the lacZ reporter gene, Adenovirus delivery via coronary arteries was performed on isolated perfused rat hearts, and gene transfer efficiency was analyzed on whole ventricles, freshly isolated myocytes, and cultured myocytes. Single-pass delivery of 1 X 10(9) PFU associated with 1 min of no-flow yielded only I +/- 0.5% of positive myocytes. Pretreatment by histamine perfusion (10(-5) M final concentration) increased this value to 30 +/- 9% (p < 0.001), and pretreatment by Ca2+-free buffer perfusion increased it to 67 +/- 8% (p < 0.001). Combination of the two pretreatments had no additional effect. Increasing the viral dose to 3 X 10(9) PFU increased transfection efficiency only in permeabilized vessels. The 1-min no-flow period after adenovirus delivery was crucial for efficient gene transfer: despite histamine pretreatment, only 2 +/- 1% positive myocytes were observed without flow interruption (p < 0.05 versus 1 min of no-flow). Gene transfer was shown to occur in situ during cardiac perfusion, rather than during heart digestion or myocyte isolation. This study shows that highly efficient adenovirus-mediated gene transfer to cardiac myocytes in situ can be achieved by single-pass intracoronary vector delivery, provided that vascular permeability is first increased and coronary flow is briefly interrupted.

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

4.5
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