4.5 Article

Simplified production and concentration of HIV-1-based lentiviral vectors using HYPERFlask vessels and anion exchange membrane chromatography

期刊

BMC BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6750-9-10

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH grants [R01 NS044832, P01 HL076100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: During the past twelve years, lentiviral (LV) vectors have emerged as valuable tools for transgene delivery because of their ability to transduce nondividing cells and their capacity to sustain long-term transgene expression in target cells in vitro and in vivo. However, despite significant progress, the production and concentration of high-titer, high-quality LV vector stocks is still cumbersome and costly. Methods: Here we present a simplified protocol for LV vector production on a laboratory scale using HYPERFlask vessels. HYPERFlask vessels are high-yield, high-performance flasks that utilize a multilayered gas permeable growth surface for efficient gas exchange, allowing convenient production of high-titer LV vectors. For subsequent concentration of LV vector stocks produced in this way, we describe a facile protocol involving Mustang Q anion exchange membrane chromatography. Results: Our results show that unconcentrated LV vector stocks with titers in excess of 108 transduction units (TU) per ml were obtained using HYPERFlasks and that these titers were higher than those produced in parallel using regular 150-cm(2) tissue culture dishes. We also show that up to 500 ml of an unconcentrated LV vector stock prepared using a HYPERFlask vessel could be concentrated using a single Mustang Q Acrodisc with a membrane volume of 0.18 ml. Up to 5.3 x 1010 TU were recovered from a single HYPERFlask vessel. Conclusion: The protocol described here is easy to implement and should facilitate high-titer LV vector production for preclinical studies in animal models without the need for multiple tissue culture dishes and ultracentrifugation-based concentration protocols.

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