ArticlePeerJ2025
Chitosan-DNA nanoparticles: synthesis and optimization for long-term storage and effective delivery.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physico-biochemical Properties of Chitosan-poly(ACS omega · 2025Article
- Immune Modulation with Oral DNA/RNA Nanoparticles.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chitosan nanoparticles (CsNPs) are an effective and inexpensive approach for DNA delivery into live cells. However, most CsNP synthesis protocols are not optimized to allow long-term storage of CsNPs without loss of function. Here, we describe a protocol for CsNP synthesis, lyophilization, and sonication, to store CsNPs and maintain transfection efficiency. Methods: The size and zeta potential of CsNPs were analyzed by dynamic light scattering (DLS) and the morphology of CsNPs was assessed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). HEK293 cells were transfected with CsNPs, and expression of H2B-CMV-mScarlet plasmid was assessed by flow cytometry. Confocal microscopy was used to visualize post-transfection gene expression. Time, volume, and effect of sonication were tested to optimize the lyophilization process. Results: DLS and TEM analysis indicated amine groups on chitosan to phosphate groups on DNA (N:P) ratios yielded smaller CsNPs sizes. Transfection efficiency, measured by FACS and confocal microscopy, peaked at N:P ratios of 2:1 and 3:1 for both fresh and lyophilized CsNPs. Chitosan/DNA complexes remained stable in solution for at least 72 h at a ratio ≥2:1 as assessed by agarose gel electrophoresis. A lower surface charge with lower N:P ratios was indicated by zeta potential measurements. Lyophilized CsNPs lost 50% transfection efficiency compared to those freshly made. In contrast, sonication of lyophilized CsNPs restored their transfection efficiency to the level of fresh CsNPs. Sonicated CsNPs maintained spherical morphology, while unsonicated CsNPs showed aggregates. Cytotoxicity assays revealed high cell viability (>90%) after CsNPs transfection for a ratio of 2:1 or 3:1. Conclusion: This optimized CsNPs synthesis protocol opens the possibility of long-term storage for CsNPs, which would provide broader applications of this technology.
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.