Joel C Sunshine1, Corey J Bishop, Jordan J Green. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Biomedical Engineering, 400 N. Broadway, Smith Building 5017, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA.
Abstract
Nonviral systems for nucleic acid delivery offer a host of potential advantages compared with viruses, including reduced toxicity and immunogenicity, increased ease of production and less stringent vector size limitations, but remain far less efficient than their viral counterparts. In this article we review recent advances in the delivery of nucleic acids using polymeric and inorganic vectors. We discuss the wide range of materials being designed and evaluated for these purposes while considering the physical requirements and barriers to entry that these agents face and reviewing recent novel approaches towards improving delivery with respect to each of these barriers. Furthermore, we provide a brief overview of past and ongoing nonviral gene therapy clinical trials. We conclude with a discussion of multifunctional nucleic acid carriers and future directions.
Nonviral systems for nucleic acid delivery ofn class="Chemical">fer a host of potential advantages compared with viruses, including reduced toxicity and immunogenicity, increased ease of production and less stringent vector size limitations, but remain far less efficient than their viral counterparts. In this article we review recent advances in the delivery of nucleic acids using polymeric and inorganic vectors. We discuss the wide range of materials being designed and evaluated for these purposes while considering the physical requirements and barriers to entry that these agents face and reviewing recent novel approaches towards improving delivery with respect to each of these barriers. Furthermore, we provide a brief overview of past and ongoing nonviral gene therapy clinical trials. We conclude with a discussion of multifunctional nucleic acid carriers and future directions.
Authors: Yan Geng; Paul Dalhaimer; Shenshen Cai; Richard Tsai; Manorama Tewari; Tamara Minko; Dennis E Discher Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2007-03-25 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: B Sangro; G Mazzolini; M Ruiz; J Ruiz; J Quiroga; I Herrero; C Qian; A Benito; J Larrache; C Olagüe; J Boan; I Peñuelas; B Sádaba; J Prieto Journal: Cancer Gene Ther Date: 2010-08-06 Impact factor: 5.987
Authors: Suzie H Pun; Frederik Tack; Nathalie C Bellocq; Jianjun Cheng; Brendan H Grubbs; Gregory S Jensen; Mark E Davis; Marcus Brewster; Michel Janicot; Boudewijn Janssens; Wim Floren; Annette Bakker Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2004-07-09 Impact factor: 4.742
Authors: Allison Lange; Ryan E Mills; Christopher J Lange; Murray Stewart; Scott E Devine; Anita H Corbett Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2006-12-14 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Kshitij Gupta; Kirill A Afonin; Mathias Viard; Virginia Herrero; Wojciech Kasprzak; Ioannis Kagiampakis; Taejin Kim; Alexey Y Koyfman; Anu Puri; Marissa Stepler; Alison Sappe; Vineet N KewalRamani; Sarina Grinberg; Charles Linder; Eliahu Heldman; Robert Blumenthal; Bruce A Shapiro Journal: J Control Release Date: 2015-07-04 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Corey J Bishop; Rebecca L Majewski; Toni-Rose M Guiriba; David R Wilson; Nupura S Bhise; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa; Jordan J Green Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 8.947