Literature DB >> 29702143

Prolonging pulse duration in ultrasound-mediated gene delivery lowers acoustic pressure threshold for efficient gene transfer to cells and small animals.

Dominic M Tran1, James Harrang1, Shuxian Song1, Jeremy Chen1, Bryn M Smith1, Carol H Miao2.   

Abstract

While ultrasound-mediated gene delivery (UMGD) has been accomplished using high peak negative pressures (PNPs) of 2 MPa or above, emerging research showed that this may not be a requirement for microbubble (MB) cavitation. Thus, we investigated lower-pressure conditions close to the MB inertial cavitation threshold and focused towards further increasing gene transfer efficiency and reducing associated cell damage. We created a matrix of 21 conditions (n = 3/cond.) to test in HEK293T cells using pulse durations spanning 18 μs-36 ms and PNPs spanning 0.5-2.5 MPa. Longer pulse duration conditions yielded significant increase in transgene expression relative to sham with local maxima between 20 J and 100 J energy curves. A similar set of 17 conditions (n = 4/cond.) was tested in mice using pulse durations spanning 18 μs-22 ms and PNPs spanning 0.5-2.5 MPa. We observed local maxima located between 1 J and 10 J energy curves in treated mice. Of these, several low pressure conditions showed a decrease in ALT and AST levels while maintaining better or comparable expression to our positive control, indicating a clear benefit to allow for effective transfection with minimized tissue damage versus the high-intensity control. Our data indicates that it is possible to eliminate the requirement of high PNPs by prolonging pulse durations for effective UMGD in vitro and in vivo, circumventing the peak power density limitations imposed by piezo-materials used in US transducers. Overall, these results demonstrate the advancement of UMGD technology for achieving efficient gene transfer and potential scalability to larger animal models and human application.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gene transfer; Liver; Microbubble; Nonviral gene delivery; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29702143      PMCID: PMC6110264          DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2018.04.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Control Release        ISSN: 0168-3659            Impact factor:   9.776


  41 in total

1.  Mechanisms of contrast agent destruction.

Authors:  J E Chomas; P Dayton; J Allen; K Morgan; K W Ferrara
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.725

2.  Physical parameters influencing optimization of ultrasound-mediated DNA transfection.

Authors:  Vladimir G Zarnitsyn; Mark R Prausnitz
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.998

3.  Efficient microbubble- and ultrasound-mediated plasmid DNA delivery into a specific rat liver lobe via a targeted injection and acoustic exposure using a novel ultrasound system.

Authors:  Shuxian Song; Misty Noble; Samuel Sun; Liping Chen; Andrew A Brayman; Carol H Miao
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  Mechanism of intracellular delivery by acoustic cavitation.

Authors:  Robyn K Schlicher; Harish Radhakrishna; Timothy P Tolentino; Robert P Apkarian; Vladimir Zarnitsyn; Mark R Prausnitz
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  Ultrasound enhances gene delivery of human factor IX plasmid.

Authors:  Carol H Miao; Andrew A Brayman; Keith R Loeb; Peiqing Ye; Ling Zhou; Pierre Mourad; Lawrence A Crum
Journal:  Hum Gene Ther       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.695

6.  Multiparameter evaluation of in vivo gene delivery using ultrasound-guided, microbubble-enhanced sonoporation.

Authors:  Galina Shapiro; Andrew W Wong; Maxim Bez; Fang Yang; Sarah Tam; Lisa Even; Dmitriy Sheyn; Shiran Ben-David; Wafa Tawackoli; Gadi Pelled; Katherine W Ferrara; Dan Gazit
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 9.776

7.  Explorations of high-intensity therapeutic ultrasound and microbubble-mediated gene delivery in mouse liver.

Authors:  S Song; Z Shen; L Chen; A A Brayman; C H Miao
Journal:  Gene Ther       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 5.250

8.  Effect of genome size on AAV vector packaging.

Authors:  Zhijian Wu; Hongyan Yang; Peter Colosi
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 11.454

9.  Ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction-mediated gene delivery into canine livers.

Authors:  Misty L Noble; Christian S Kuhr; Scott S Graves; Keith R Loeb; Samuel S Sun; George W Keilman; Kyle P Morrison; Marla Paun; Rainer F Storb; Carol H Miao
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 11.454

10.  Systemic delivery of messenger RNA for the treatment of pancreatic cancer using polyplex nanomicelles with a cholesterol moiety.

Authors:  Satoshi Uchida; Hiroaki Kinoh; Takehiko Ishii; Akitsugu Matsui; Theofilus Agrios Tockary; Kaori Machitani Takeda; Hirokuni Uchida; Kensuke Osada; Keiji Itaka; Kazunori Kataoka
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 12.479

View more
  9 in total

1.  Ultrasound-targeted cationic microbubble-mediated gene transfection and inhibition of retinal neovascularization.

Authors:  Ming-Xing Wu; Yu Zhou; Xi-Yuan Zhou; Yan Xu
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  A Comparison of Focused and Unfocused Ultrasound for Microbubble-Mediated Gene Delivery.

Authors:  Cynthia D Anderson; Chad B Walton; Ralph V Shohet
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 3.  Ultrasonic particles: An approach for targeted gene delivery.

Authors:  Aidan P G Walsh; Henry N Gordon; Karlheinz Peter; Xiaowei Wang
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2021-10-15       Impact factor: 17.873

4.  Ultrasound-mediated gene delivery of factor VIII plasmids for hemophilia A gene therapy in mice.

Authors:  Shuxian Song; Meghan J Lyle; Misty L Noble-Vranish; Dominic M Min-Tran; James Harrang; Weidong Xiao; Evan C Unger; Carol H Miao
Journal:  Mol Ther Nucleic Acids       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 8.886

Review 5.  Synergies between therapeutic ultrasound, gene therapy and immunotherapy in cancer treatment.

Authors:  Nisi Zhang; James Wang; Josquin Foiret; Zhifei Dai; Katherine W Ferrara
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 6.  Recent Advances in Stimulus-Responsive Nanocarriers for Gene Therapy.

Authors:  Cheng Yu; Long Li; Pei Hu; Yan Yang; Wei Wei; Xin Deng; Lu Wang; Franklin R Tay; Jingzhi Ma
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2021-05-16       Impact factor: 16.806

7.  Ultrasound-Mediated Gene Therapy in Swine Livers Using Single-Element, Multi-lensed, High-Intensity Ultrasound Transducers.

Authors:  Misty L Noble-Vranish; Shuxian Song; Kyle P Morrison; Dominic M Tran; Ryan R Sun; Keith R Loeb; George W Keilman; Carol H Miao
Journal:  Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 6.698

8.  Transcutaneous Ultrasound-Mediated Nonviral Gene Delivery to the Liver in a Porcine Model.

Authors:  Dominic M Tran; Feng Zhang; Kyle P Morrison; Keith R Loeb; James Harrang; Masaki Kajimoto; Francisco Chavez; Li Wu; Carol H Miao
Journal:  Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 6.698

9.  Enhanced Radiosensitization for Cancer Treatment with Gold Nanoparticles through Sonoporation.

Authors:  Shao-Lun Lu; Wei-Wen Liu; Jason Chia-Hsien Cheng; Lien-Chieh Lin; Churng-Ren Chris Wang; Pai-Chi Li
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-11-08       Impact factor: 5.923

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.