Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26404473›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2015

Optimizing the process of nucleofection for professional antigen presenting cells.

Christina Susanne Mullins, Tabea Wegner, Ernst Klar, Carl-Friedrich Classen, Michael Linnebacher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Delivery of mRNA for regulating functions of immune cells.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Christina Susanne MullinsMolecular Oncology and Immunotherapy, Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany. christina.mullins@uni-rostock.de.
Tabea WegnerMolecular Oncology and Immunotherapy, Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany. tabea.wegner@med.uni-rostock.de.
Ernst KlarMolecular Oncology and Immunotherapy, Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany. ernst.klar@med.uni-rostock.de.
Carl-Friedrich ClassenUniversity Children's Hospital Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 8, 18057, Rostock, Germany. carl-friedrich.classen@med.uni-rostock.de.
Michael LinnebacherMolecular Oncology and Immunotherapy, Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany. michael.linnebacher@med.uni-rostock.de.
University of Rostock · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn times of rapidly increasing numbers of immunological approaches entering the clinics, antigen delivery becomes a pivotal process. The genuine way of rendering antigen presenting cells (APC) antigen specific, largely influences the outcome of the immune response. Short peptides bear the demerit of HLA restriction, whereas the proper way of delivery for long peptide sequences is currently a matter of debate. Electroporation is a reliable method for antigen delivery, especially using nucleic acids. The nucleofection process is based on this approach with the twist of further ensuring delivery also into the nucleus. Beside the form of antigen, the type of APC used for immune response induction may be crucial. Dendritic cells (DC) are by far the most commonly used APC; however B cells have entered this field as well and have gained wide acceptance.

resultsIn this study, we compared B cells to DC with regard to nucleofection efficiency and intensity of resulting antigen expression. APC were transfected either with plasmid DNA containing the reporter gene green fluorescent protein (GFP) or directly with in vitro-transcribed (IVT) GPF mRNA as a surrogate antigen. Out of nearly 100 different nucleofection programs tested, the top five for each cell type were identified and validated using cells from cancer patients. Flow cytometric analyses of transfected cells determining GFP expression and viability revealed a reverse correlation of efficiency and viability. Finally, donor dependant variances were analyzed.

conclusionIn summary, nucleofection of both DC and B cells is feasible with plasmid DNA and IVT mRNA. And no differences with regard to nucleofectability were observed between the two cell types. Using IVT mRNA omits the danger of genomic integration and plasmid DNA constructs permit a more potent and longer lasting antigen expression.

Indexed as

B-LymphocytesCell Line, TumorDendritic CellsElectroporationFlow CytometryGene ExpressionGenes, ReporterGreen Fluorescent ProteinsHumansPlasmidsPrimary Cell CultureRNA, MessengerTransfectionGreen Fluorescent ProteinsRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID26404473
PMCPMC4581479
OpenAlexW1957264216

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.