4.7 Article

Modification of nanostructured calcium carbonate for efficient gene delivery

期刊

COLLOIDS AND SURFACES B-BIOINTERFACES
卷 118, 期 -, 页码 111-116

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2014.03.007

关键词

Gene delivery; Nanoparticles; Calcium carbonate; Calcium phosphate; Co-precipitates

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21274113]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China (National Basic Research Program of China) [2011CB606202]
  3. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University) [IRT1030]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a facile method to modify nanostructured calcium carbonate (CaCO3) gene delivery systems by adding calcium phosphate (Cap) component was developed. CaCO3/CaP/DNA nanoparticles were prepared by the co-precipitation of Ca2+ ions with plasmid DNA in the presence of carbonate and phosphate ions. For comparison, CaCO3/DNA nanoparticles and Cap/DNA co-precipitates were also prepared. The effects of carbonate ion/phosphate ion (CO32-/PO43-) ratio on the particle size and gene delivery efficiency were investigated. With an appropriate CO32-/PO34- ratio, the co-existence of carbonate and phosphate ions could control the size of co-precipitates effectively, and CaCO3/CaP/DNA nanoparticles with a decreased size and improved stability could be obtained. The in vitro gene transfections mediated by different nanoparticles in 293T cells and HeLa cells were carried out, using pGL3-Luc as a reporter plasmid. The gene transfection efficiency of CaCO3/CaP/DNA nanoparticles could be significantly improved as compared with CaCO3/DNA nanoparticles and Cap/DNA co-precipitates. The confocal microscopy study indicated that the cellular uptake and nuclear localization of CaCO3/CaP/DNA nanoparticles were significantly enhanced as compared with unmodified CaCO3/DNA nanoparticles. (C) 2014 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

4.7
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