Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16925580›Full record

ArticleCancer science2006

Optimized ultrasound-mediated gene transfection in cancer cells.

Loreto B Feril, Ryohei Ogawa, Katsuro Tachibana, Takashi Kondo

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer science, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A review of low-intensity ultrasound for cancer therapy.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2015
    Review
  6. Improving ultrasound gene transfection efficiency by controlling ultrasound excitation of microbubbles.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2013
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Loreto B FerilDepartment of Anatomy, Fukuoka University School of Medicine, Fukuoka, Japan. feril@adm.fukuoka-u.ac.jp
Ryohei Ogawa
Katsuro Tachibana
Takashi Kondo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ultrasound-mediated gene transfection (sonotransfection) is a promising physical method for gene therapy, especially for cancer gene therapy. To investigate the optimal sonotransfection conditions and to determine whether the optimal transfection rate using sonotransfection is comparable to that of electrotransfection or liposome-mediated transfection, we sonicated different cancer cell lines (U937, HeLa, PC-3, Meth A and T-24) using a 1-MHz unfocused ultrasound at different intensities, pulse repetition frequencies and exposure times. The ideal ultrasound conditions were noted to be at 1.5 Watt/cm(2) pulsed at 0.5 Hz with a duty factor of 50%. The results showed that transfection rate increased with the number of pulses, and peaked between 10 and 15 pulses before it started to decline. Using such optimal conditions, we have shown that sonotransfection is superior to electrotransfection and liposome-mediated transfection at the fixed conditions used in the present study. These findings suggest that sonotransfection could be a better alternative to other non-viral methods (e.g. electroporation and liposome-mediated transfection) of gene transfection, particularly in cancer gene therapy.

Indexed as

Gene Transfer TechniquesUltrasonicsGenetic TherapyHumansNeoplasmsTransfectionTumor Cells, Cultured

Identifiers

PMID16925580
PMCPMC11159609

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.