ArticleCancers2020
The Efficiency of Gene Electrotransfer in Breast-Cancer Cell Lines Cultured on a Novel Collagen-Free 3D Scaffold.
Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcriptomic analysis of the immune response toMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Article
- Electric Fields Regulate In Vitro Surface Phosphatidylserine Exposure of Cancer Cells via a Calcium-Dependent Pathway.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Development of Scaffolds from Bio-Based Natural Materials for Tissue Regeneration Applications: A Review.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Effect of Experimental Electrical and Biological Parameters on Gene Transfer by Electroporation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Cancer microcell initiation and determination.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Growth environment influences B16.F10 mouse melanoma cell response to gene electrotransfer.Bioelectrochemistry (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Review
- Osteogenic Response of MC3T3-E1 and Raw264.7 in the 3D-Encapsulated Co-Culture Environment.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2021Article
- Electric Field Based Therapies in Cancer Treatment.Cancers · 2020Article
- Electroporation as the Immunotherapy Strategy for Cancer in Veterinary Medicine: State of the Art in Latin America.Vaccines · 2020Review
- Electroporation-Based Treatments in Urology.Cancers · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Gene Electro-Transfer (GET) is a powerful method of DNA delivery with great potential for medical applications. Although GET has been extensively studied in vitro and in vivo, the optimal parameters remain controversial. 2D cell cultures have been widely used to investigate GET protocols, but have intrinsic limitations, whereas 3D cultures may represent a more reliable model thanks to the capacity of reproducing the tumor architecture. Here we applied two GET protocols, using a plate or linear electrode, on 3D-cultured HCC1954 and MDA-MB231 breast cancer cell lines grown on a novel collagen-free 3D scaffold and compared results with conventional 2D cultures. To evaluate the electrotransfer efficiency, we used the plasmid pEGFP-C3 encoding the enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) reporter gene. The novel 3D scaffold promoted extracellular matrix deposition, which particularly influences cell behavior in both in vitro cell cultures and in vivo tumor tissue. While the transfection efficiency was similar in the 2D-cultures, we observed significant differences in the 3D-model. The transfection efficiency in the 3D vs 2D model was 44% versus 15% (
Indexed as
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.