Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17598924›Full record

ArticleBMC molecular biology2007

Gene expression profiles in skeletal muscle after gene electrotransfer.

Pernille Hojman, John R Zibert, Hanne Gissel, Jens Eriksen, Julie Gehl

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC molecular biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. DNA-based delivery of G-CSF as a durable and efficacious approach to treat severe chronic neutropenia.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025
    Article
  4. Transcriptomic analysis of the immune response toMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Pernille HojmanLaboratory of the Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Herlev, Denmark. pehm@heh.regionh.dk <pehm@heh.regionh.dk>
John R Zibert
Hanne Gissel
Jens Eriksen
Julie Gehl
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKAarhus University · DKGentofte Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGene transfer by electroporation (DNA electrotransfer) to muscle results in high level long term transgenic expression, showing great promise for treatment of e.g. protein deficiency syndromes. However little is known about the effects of DNA electrotransfer on muscle fibres. We have therefore investigated transcriptional changes through gene expression profile analyses, morphological changes by histological analysis, and physiological changes by force generation measurements. DNA electrotransfer was obtained using a combination of a short high voltage pulse (HV, 1000 V/cm, 100 mus) followed by a long low voltage pulse (LV, 100 V/cm, 400 ms); a pulse combination optimised for efficient and safe gene transfer. Muscles were transfected with green fluorescent protein (GFP) and excised at 4 hours, 48 hours or 3 weeks after treatment.

resultsDifferentially expressed genes were investigated by microarray analysis, and descriptive statistics were performed to evaluate the effects of 1) electroporation, 2) DNA injection, and 3) time after treatment. The biological significance of the results was assessed by gene annotation and supervised cluster analysis.Generally, electroporation caused down-regulation of structural proteins e.g. sarcospan and catalytic enzymes. Injection of DNA induced down-regulation of intracellular transport proteins e.g. sentrin. The effects on muscle fibres were transient as the expression profiles 3 weeks after treatment were closely related with the control muscles. Most interestingly, no changes in the expression of proteins involved in inflammatory responses or muscle regeneration was detected, indicating limited muscle damage and regeneration. Histological analysis revealed structural changes with loss of cell integrity and striation pattern in some fibres after DNA+HV+LV treatment, while HV+LV pulses alone showed preservation of cell integrity. No difference in the force generation capacity was observed in the muscles 2 weeks after DNA electrotransfer.

conclusionThe small and transient changes found in the gene expression profiles are of great importance, as this demonstrates that DNA electrotransfer is safe with minor effects on the muscle host cells. These findings are essential for introducing the DNA electrotransfer to muscle for clinical use. Indeed the HV+LV pulse combination used has been optimised to ensure highly efficient and safe DNA electrotransfer.

Indexed as

ElectroporationGene Expression ProfilingAnimalsCluster AnalysisDNAGene Transfer TechniquesMiceMuscle, SkeletalOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymerase Chain ReactionTime FactorsDNA

Identifiers

PMID17598924
PMCPMC1925113
OpenAlexW2159303347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.