ArticleJournal of biomedicine & biotechnology2006
Nucleofection: a new method for cutaneous gene transfer?
Article in Journal of biomedicine & biotechnology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- HaCaT Keratinocytes: A Differentiation-Competent Platform for Episomal Replication of HPV Type 11.Viruses · 2026Article
- Nucleic acid direct delivery to fibroblasts: a review of nucleofection and applications.Journal of biological engineering · 2022Review
- Improved cell-penetrating zinc-finger nuclease proteins for precision genome engineering.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2015Article
- Electroporation formulation for cell therapy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2014Article
- Competitive electroporation formulation for cell therapy.Cancer gene therapy · 2011Article
- Enhanced collateral growth by double transplantation of gene-nucleofected fibroblasts in ischemic hindlimb of rats.PloS one · 2011Article
- Astrocytic responses to DNA delivery using nucleofection.Neurochemical research · 2010Article
- High-level antigen expression and sustained antigen presentation in dendritic cells nucleofected with wild-type viral mRNA but not DNA.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2008Article
- Nonviral vector gene modification of stem cells for myocardial repair.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransfection efficacy after nonviral gene transfer in primary epithelial cells is limited. The aim of this study was to compare transfection efficacy of the recently available method of nucleofection with the established transfection reagent FuGENE6.
methodsPrimary human keratinocytes (HKC), primary human fibroblasts (HFB), and a human keratinocyte cell line (HaCaT) were transfected with reporter gene construct by FuGENE6 or Amaxa Nucleofector device. At corresponding time points, beta-galactosidase expression, cell proliferation (MTT-Test), transduction efficiency (X-gal staining), cell morphology, and cytotoxicity (CASY) were determined.
resultsTransgene expression after nucleofection was significantly higher in HKC and HFB and detected earlier (3 h vs. 24 h) than in FuGENE6. After lipofection 80%-90% of the cells remained proliferative without any influence on cell morphology. In contrast, nucleofection led to a decrease in keratinocyte cell size, with only 20%-42% proliferative cells.
conclusionRelated to the method-dependent increase of cytotoxicity, transgene expression after nucleofection was earlier and higher than after lipofection.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.