Comparison of gene-transfer efficiency in human embryonic stem cells
Cao F., Xie X., Gollan T., Zhao L., Narsinh K., Lee RJ.
Animal Study, published in Mol Imaging Biol (2010) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Animal Study
- Journal
- Mol Imaging Biol (2010)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 19551446
- PMCID
- PMC2803751
- DOI
- 10.1007/s11307-009-0236-x
- Citations
- 48
Abstract (original English)
Technologies designed to allow manipulation and modification of human embryonic stem (hES) cells are numerous and vary in the complexity of their methods, efficiency, reliability, and safety. The most commonly studied and practiced of these methods include electroporation, lipofection, nucleofection, and lentiviral transduction. However, at present, it is unclear which protocol offers the most efficient and reliable method of gene transfer to hES cells. In this study, a bi-fusion construct with ubiquitin promoter driving enhanced green fluorescent protein reporter and the firefly luciferase (pUb-eGFP-Fluc) along with neomycin selection marker was used for in vitro and in vivo studies. In vitro studies examined the transfection efficiency and viability of each technique using two hES cell lines (male H1 and female H9 cells). Lentiviral transduction demonstrated the highest efficiency (H1: 25.3 +/- 4.8%; H9: 22.4 +/- 6.5%) with >95% cell viability. Nucleofection demonstrated transfection efficiency of 16.1 +/- 3.6% (H1) and 5.8 +/- 3.2% (H9). However, minimal transfection efficiency was observed with electroporation (2.1 +/- 0.4% (H1) and 1.9 +/- 0.3% (H9)) and lipofection (1.5 +/- 0.5% (H1) and 1.3 +/- 0.2% (H9); P < 0.05 vs. lentiviral transduction). Electroporation also demonstrated the highest cell death (62 +/- 11% (H1) and 42 +/- 10% (H9)) followed by nucleofection (25 +/-
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.