Literature DB >> 14683589

Diverse effects of nanosecond pulsed electric fields on cells and tissues.

Stephen J Beebe1, Jody White, Peter F Blackmore, Yuping Deng, Kenneth Somers, Karl H Schoenbach.   

Abstract

The application of pulsed electric fields to cells is extended to include nonthermal pulses with shorter durations (10-300 ns), higher electric fields (< or =350 kV/cm), higher power (gigawatts), and distinct effects (nsPEF) compared to classical electroporation. Here we define effects and explore potential application for nsPEF in biology and medicine. As the pulse duration is decreased below the plasma membrane charging time constant, plasma membrane effects decrease and intracellular effects predominate. NsPEFs induced apoptosis and caspase activation that was calcium-dependent (Jurkat cells) and calcium-independent (HL-60 and Jurkat cells). In mouse B10-2 fibrosarcoma tumors, nsPEFs induced caspase activation and DNA fragmentation ex vivo, and reduced tumor size in vivo. With conditions below thresholds for classical electroporation and apoptosis, nsPEF induced calcium release from intracellular stores and subsequent calcium influx through store-operated channels in the plasma membrane that mimicked purinergic receptor-mediated calcium mobilization. When nsPEF were applied after classical electroporation pulses, GFP reporter gene expression was enhanced above that observed for classical electroporation. These findings indicate that nsPEF extend classical electroporation to include events that primarily affect intracellular structures and functions. Potential applications for nsPEF include inducing apoptosis in cells and tumors, probing signal transduction mechanisms that determine cell fate, and enhancing gene expression.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14683589     DOI: 10.1089/104454903322624993

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  DNA Cell Biol        ISSN: 1044-5498            Impact factor:   3.311


  58 in total

1.  Mechanisms for the intracellular manipulation of organelles by conventional electroporation.

Authors:  Axel T Esser; Kyle C Smith; T R Gowrishankar; Zlatko Vasilkoski; James C Weaver
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Gene transfer: how can the biological barriers be overcome?

Authors:  Jean-Michel Escoffre; Justin Teissié; Marie-Pierre Rols
Journal:  J Membr Biol       Date:  2010-07-10       Impact factor: 1.843

3.  Probing field-induced tissue polarization using transillumination fluorescent imaging.

Authors:  Bryan J Caldwell; Marcel Wellner; Bogdan G Mitrea; Arkady M Pertsov; Christian W Zemlin
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 4.033

4.  Manipulation of cell volume and membrane pore comparison following single cell permeabilization with 60- and 600-ns electric pulses.

Authors:  Olena M Nesin; Olga N Pakhomova; Shu Xiao; Andrei G Pakhomov
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2010-12-20

5.  Theoretical evaluation of voltage inducement on internal membranes of biological cells exposed to electric fields.

Authors:  Tadej Kotnik; Damijan Miklavcic
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2005-10-20       Impact factor: 4.033

6.  Transmembrane molecular transport during versus after extremely large, nanosecond electric pulses.

Authors:  Kyle C Smith; James C Weaver
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 3.575

Review 7.  Membrane perturbation by an external electric field: a mechanism to permit molecular uptake.

Authors:  J-M Escoffre; D S Dean; M Hubert; M-P Rols; C Favard
Journal:  Eur Biophys J       Date:  2007-06-19       Impact factor: 1.733

8.  Active mechanisms are needed to describe cell responses to submicrosecond, megavolt-per-meter pulses: cell models for ultrashort pulses.

Authors:  Kyle C Smith; James C Weaver
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 9.  What is (still not) known of the mechanism by which electroporation mediates gene transfer and expression in cells and tissues.

Authors:  Jean-Michel Escoffre; Thomas Portet; Luc Wasungu; Justin Teissié; David Dean; Marie-Pierre Rols
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 2.695

Review 10.  SOX1 Is a Backup Gene for Brain Neurons and Glioma Stem Cell Protection and Proliferation.

Authors:  Kouminin Kanwore; Xiao-Xiao Guo; Ayanlaja Abiola Abdulrahman; Piniel Alphayo Kambey; Iqra Nadeem; Dianshuai Gao
Journal:  Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 5.590

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.