Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts

Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of membrane biology 2015-04, Vol.248 (2), p.273-283
Hauptverfasser: Mars, Tomaz, Strazisar, Marusa, Mis, Katarina, Kotnik, Nejc, Pegan, Katarina, Lojk, Jasna, Grubic, Zoran, Pavlin, Mojca
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 283
container_issue 2
container_start_page 273
container_title The Journal of membrane biology
container_volume 248
creator Mars, Tomaz
Strazisar, Marusa
Mis, Katarina
Kotnik, Nejc
Pegan, Katarina
Lojk, Jasna
Grubic, Zoran
Pavlin, Mojca
description Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several advantages in gene therapy. Gene therapy is one of the most sought-after tools in modern medicine. Its progress is, however, limited due to the lack of suitable gene transfer techniques. To obtain better insight into the transfection potential of the presently used techniques, two non-viral transfection methods—lipofection and electroporation—were compared. The parameters that can influence transfection efficiency and cell viability were systematically approached and compared. Cultured myoblasts were transfected with the pEGFP-N1 plasmid either using Lipofectamine 2000 or with electroporation. Various combinations for the preparation of the lipoplexes and the electroporation media, and for the pulsing protocols, were tested and compared. Transfection efficiency and cell viability were inversely proportional for both approaches. The appropriate ratio of Lipofectamine and plasmid DNA provides optimal conditions for lipofection, while for electroporation, RPMI medium and a pulsing protocol using eight pulses of 2 ms at E  = 0.8 kV/cm proved to be the optimal combination. The transfection efficiencies for the optimal lipofection and optimal electrotransfection protocols were similar (32 vs. 32.5 %, respectively). Both of these methods are effective for transfection of primary human myoblasts; however, electroporation might be advantageous for in vivo application to skeletal muscle.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753515391</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1753515391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-c4e45ef479c5b0255785a0adda0757de8f9b00a3b228398223440064ee72b7d13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhq0KRLctP6AXZIkLl5TxV5wc0bK0lRaBROFqOckYUiX2YidU--_rVVpUIVXiYo9nnnk99kvIOYMLBqDfJwAueAFMFrUuy0IdkRWTOcMkly_IKpd5wUvBjslJSrcATOtSviLHXCkhhdQrMm0GbKcYpmh9cjnsg6fWd3Tb78Lj-duvcEfXYdzZaJsB6ca5vu3Rt3vqQqTXnv7oswa9RI_0Iw79H4x7Ghz9GvvR5vBqHq2nn_ehGWya0hl56eyQ8PXDfkq-f9rcrK-K7ZfL6_WHbdFKraa8olTopK5b1UCeWVfKgu06C1rpDitXNwBWNJxXoq44F1IClBJR80Z3TJySd4vuLobfM6bJjH1qcRisxzAnw7QSiilR_wdalrVUgnGR0bf_oLdhjj4_5EBVgrOqhEyxhWpjSCmiM7vlMwwDc3DPLO6Z7J45uGdU7nnzoDw3I3Z_Ox7tygBfgJRL_ifGJ1c_q3oP8nij7A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1668321860</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Mars, Tomaz ; Strazisar, Marusa ; Mis, Katarina ; Kotnik, Nejc ; Pegan, Katarina ; Lojk, Jasna ; Grubic, Zoran ; Pavlin, Mojca</creator><creatorcontrib>Mars, Tomaz ; Strazisar, Marusa ; Mis, Katarina ; Kotnik, Nejc ; Pegan, Katarina ; Lojk, Jasna ; Grubic, Zoran ; Pavlin, Mojca</creatorcontrib><description>Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several advantages in gene therapy. Gene therapy is one of the most sought-after tools in modern medicine. Its progress is, however, limited due to the lack of suitable gene transfer techniques. To obtain better insight into the transfection potential of the presently used techniques, two non-viral transfection methods—lipofection and electroporation—were compared. The parameters that can influence transfection efficiency and cell viability were systematically approached and compared. Cultured myoblasts were transfected with the pEGFP-N1 plasmid either using Lipofectamine 2000 or with electroporation. Various combinations for the preparation of the lipoplexes and the electroporation media, and for the pulsing protocols, were tested and compared. Transfection efficiency and cell viability were inversely proportional for both approaches. The appropriate ratio of Lipofectamine and plasmid DNA provides optimal conditions for lipofection, while for electroporation, RPMI medium and a pulsing protocol using eight pulses of 2 ms at E  = 0.8 kV/cm proved to be the optimal combination. The transfection efficiencies for the optimal lipofection and optimal electrotransfection protocols were similar (32 vs. 32.5 %, respectively). Both of these methods are effective for transfection of primary human myoblasts; however, electroporation might be advantageous for in vivo application to skeletal muscle.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-2631</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1424</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25534347</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Biochemistry ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Cell Survival ; Cells, Cultured ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; Disease ; DNA ; Electroporation - methods ; Gene Expression ; Gene therapy ; Gene Transfer Techniques ; Genes, Reporter ; Human Physiology ; Humans ; Infant ; Life Sciences ; Lipids ; Muscular system ; Myoblasts - metabolism ; Primary Cell Culture ; Transfection - methods ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>The Journal of membrane biology, 2015-04, Vol.248 (2), p.273-283</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-c4e45ef479c5b0255785a0adda0757de8f9b00a3b228398223440064ee72b7d13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-c4e45ef479c5b0255785a0adda0757de8f9b00a3b228398223440064ee72b7d13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25534347$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mars, Tomaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strazisar, Marusa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mis, Katarina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotnik, Nejc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pegan, Katarina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lojk, Jasna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grubic, Zoran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pavlin, Mojca</creatorcontrib><title>Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts</title><title>The Journal of membrane biology</title><addtitle>J Membrane Biol</addtitle><addtitle>J Membr Biol</addtitle><description>Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several advantages in gene therapy. Gene therapy is one of the most sought-after tools in modern medicine. Its progress is, however, limited due to the lack of suitable gene transfer techniques. To obtain better insight into the transfection potential of the presently used techniques, two non-viral transfection methods—lipofection and electroporation—were compared. The parameters that can influence transfection efficiency and cell viability were systematically approached and compared. Cultured myoblasts were transfected with the pEGFP-N1 plasmid either using Lipofectamine 2000 or with electroporation. Various combinations for the preparation of the lipoplexes and the electroporation media, and for the pulsing protocols, were tested and compared. Transfection efficiency and cell viability were inversely proportional for both approaches. The appropriate ratio of Lipofectamine and plasmid DNA provides optimal conditions for lipofection, while for electroporation, RPMI medium and a pulsing protocol using eight pulses of 2 ms at E  = 0.8 kV/cm proved to be the optimal combination. The transfection efficiencies for the optimal lipofection and optimal electrotransfection protocols were similar (32 vs. 32.5 %, respectively). Both of these methods are effective for transfection of primary human myoblasts; however, electroporation might be advantageous for in vivo application to skeletal muscle.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biochemistry</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Cell Survival</subject><subject>Cells, Cultured</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>Disease</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>Electroporation - methods</subject><subject>Gene Expression</subject><subject>Gene therapy</subject><subject>Gene Transfer Techniques</subject><subject>Genes, Reporter</subject><subject>Human Physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Lipids</subject><subject>Muscular system</subject><subject>Myoblasts - metabolism</subject><subject>Primary Cell Culture</subject><subject>Transfection - methods</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0022-2631</issn><issn>1432-1424</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhq0KRLctP6AXZIkLl5TxV5wc0bK0lRaBROFqOckYUiX2YidU--_rVVpUIVXiYo9nnnk99kvIOYMLBqDfJwAueAFMFrUuy0IdkRWTOcMkly_IKpd5wUvBjslJSrcATOtSviLHXCkhhdQrMm0GbKcYpmh9cjnsg6fWd3Tb78Lj-duvcEfXYdzZaJsB6ca5vu3Rt3vqQqTXnv7oswa9RI_0Iw79H4x7Ghz9GvvR5vBqHq2nn_ehGWya0hl56eyQ8PXDfkq-f9rcrK-K7ZfL6_WHbdFKraa8olTopK5b1UCeWVfKgu06C1rpDitXNwBWNJxXoq44F1IClBJR80Z3TJySd4vuLobfM6bJjH1qcRisxzAnw7QSiilR_wdalrVUgnGR0bf_oLdhjj4_5EBVgrOqhEyxhWpjSCmiM7vlMwwDc3DPLO6Z7J45uGdU7nnzoDw3I3Z_Ox7tygBfgJRL_ifGJ1c_q3oP8nij7A</recordid><startdate>20150401</startdate><enddate>20150401</enddate><creator>Mars, Tomaz</creator><creator>Strazisar, Marusa</creator><creator>Mis, Katarina</creator><creator>Kotnik, Nejc</creator><creator>Pegan, Katarina</creator><creator>Lojk, Jasna</creator><creator>Grubic, Zoran</creator><creator>Pavlin, Mojca</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150401</creationdate><title>Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts</title><author>Mars, Tomaz ; Strazisar, Marusa ; Mis, Katarina ; Kotnik, Nejc ; Pegan, Katarina ; Lojk, Jasna ; Grubic, Zoran ; Pavlin, Mojca</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-c4e45ef479c5b0255785a0adda0757de8f9b00a3b228398223440064ee72b7d13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biochemistry</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Cell Survival</topic><topic>Cells, Cultured</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>Disease</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>Electroporation - methods</topic><topic>Gene Expression</topic><topic>Gene therapy</topic><topic>Gene Transfer Techniques</topic><topic>Genes, Reporter</topic><topic>Human Physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Lipids</topic><topic>Muscular system</topic><topic>Myoblasts - metabolism</topic><topic>Primary Cell Culture</topic><topic>Transfection - methods</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mars, Tomaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strazisar, Marusa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mis, Katarina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotnik, Nejc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pegan, Katarina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lojk, Jasna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grubic, Zoran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pavlin, Mojca</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of membrane biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mars, Tomaz</au><au>Strazisar, Marusa</au><au>Mis, Katarina</au><au>Kotnik, Nejc</au><au>Pegan, Katarina</au><au>Lojk, Jasna</au><au>Grubic, Zoran</au><au>Pavlin, Mojca</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of membrane biology</jtitle><stitle>J Membrane Biol</stitle><addtitle>J Membr Biol</addtitle><date>2015-04-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>248</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>273</spage><epage>283</epage><pages>273-283</pages><issn>0022-2631</issn><eissn>1432-1424</eissn><abstract>Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several advantages in gene therapy. Gene therapy is one of the most sought-after tools in modern medicine. Its progress is, however, limited due to the lack of suitable gene transfer techniques. To obtain better insight into the transfection potential of the presently used techniques, two non-viral transfection methods—lipofection and electroporation—were compared. The parameters that can influence transfection efficiency and cell viability were systematically approached and compared. Cultured myoblasts were transfected with the pEGFP-N1 plasmid either using Lipofectamine 2000 or with electroporation. Various combinations for the preparation of the lipoplexes and the electroporation media, and for the pulsing protocols, were tested and compared. Transfection efficiency and cell viability were inversely proportional for both approaches. The appropriate ratio of Lipofectamine and plasmid DNA provides optimal conditions for lipofection, while for electroporation, RPMI medium and a pulsing protocol using eight pulses of 2 ms at E  = 0.8 kV/cm proved to be the optimal combination. The transfection efficiencies for the optimal lipofection and optimal electrotransfection protocols were similar (32 vs. 32.5 %, respectively). Both of these methods are effective for transfection of primary human myoblasts; however, electroporation might be advantageous for in vivo application to skeletal muscle.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>25534347</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-2631
ispartof The Journal of membrane biology, 2015-04, Vol.248 (2), p.273-283
issn 0022-2631
1432-1424
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1753515391
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Biochemistry
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Cell Survival
Cells, Cultured
Child
Child, Preschool
Deoxyribonucleic acid
Disease
DNA
Electroporation - methods
Gene Expression
Gene therapy
Gene Transfer Techniques
Genes, Reporter
Human Physiology
Humans
Infant
Life Sciences
Lipids
Muscular system
Myoblasts - metabolism
Primary Cell Culture
Transfection - methods
Young Adult
title Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T16%3A39%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Electrotransfection%20and%20Lipofection%20Show%20Comparable%20Efficiency%20for%20In%20Vitro%20Gene%20Delivery%20of%20Primary%20Human%20Myoblasts&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20membrane%20biology&rft.au=Mars,%20Tomaz&rft.date=2015-04-01&rft.volume=248&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=273&rft.epage=283&rft.pages=273-283&rft.issn=0022-2631&rft.eissn=1432-1424&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00232-014-9766-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1753515391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1668321860&rft_id=info:pmid/25534347&rfr_iscdi=true