Advertisement

The Journal of Membrane Biology

, Volume 236, Issue 1, pp 97–105 | Cite as

Analysis and Comparison of Electrical Pulse Parameters for Gene Electrotransfer of Two Different Cell Lines

  • Igor Marjanovič
  • Saša Haberl
  • Damijan Miklavčič
  • Maša Kandušer
  • Mojca Pavlin
Article

Abstract

Knowledge of the parameters which influence the efficiency of gene electrotransfer has importance for practical implementation of electrotransfection for gene therapy as well as for better understanding of the underlying mechanism. The focus of this study was to analyze the differences in gene electrotransfer and membrane electropermeabilization between plated cells and cells in a suspension in two different cell lines (CHO and B16F1). Furthermore, we determined the viability and critical induced transmembrane voltage (ITVc) for both cell lines. In plated cells we obtained relatively little difference in electropermeabilization and gene electrotransfection between CHO and B16F1 cells. However, significant differences between the two cell lines were observed in a suspension. CHO cells exhibited a much higher gene electrotransfection rate compared to B16F1 cells, whereas B16F1 cells reached maximum electropermeabilization at lower electric fields than CHO cells. Both in a suspension and on plated cells, CHO cells had a slightly better survival rate at higher electric fields than B16F1 cells. Calculation of ITVc in a suspension showed that, for both electropermeabilization and gene electrotransfection, CHO cells have lower ITVc than B16F1 cells. In all cases, ITVc for electropermeabilization was lower than ITVc for gene electrotransfer, which is in agreement with other studies. Our results show that there is a marked difference in the efficiency of gene electrotransfer between suspended and plated cells.

Keywords

Gene electrotransfer Electropermeabilization Induced transmembrane voltage ITVc CHO B16F1 Suspension Plated cell 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency under grants J2-9770 and P2-0249. We thank also Rosana Hudej (Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Technology, University of Ljubljana) and Marko Ušaj (Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Ljubljana) for help in experimental procedures.

References

  1. Cavazzana-Calvo M, Hacein-Bey S, de Saint Basile G, Gross F, Yvon E, Nusbaum P, Selz F, Hue C, Certain S, Casanova JL, Bousso P, Le Deist F, Fischer A (2000) Gene therapy of human severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)-X1 disease. Science 288:669–672CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Cavazzana-Calvo M, Thrasher A, Mavilio F (2004) The future of gene therapy. Nature 427:779–781CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Cegovnik U, Novakovic S (2004) Setting optimal parameters for in vitro electrotransfection of B16F1, SA1, LPB, SCK, L929 and CHO cells using predefined exponentially decaying electric pulses. Bioelectrochemistry 62:73–82CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cemazar M, Sersa G (2007) Electrotransfer of therapeutic molecules into tissues. Curr Opin Mol Ther 9:554–562PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Corovic S, Zupanic A, Miklavcic D (2008) Numerical modeling and optimization of electric field distribution in subcutaneous tumor treated with electrochemotherapy using needle electrodes., 36:1665–1672Google Scholar
  6. Daud AI, DeConti RC, Andrews S, Urbas P, Riker AI, Sondak VK, Munster PN, Sullivan DM, Ugen KE, Messina JL, Heller R (2008) Phase I trial of interleukin-12 plasmid electroporation in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 26:5896–5903CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Favard C, Dean DS, Rols MP (2007) Electrotransfer as a nonviral method of gene delivery. Curr Gene Ther 7:67–77CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferber D (2001) Gene therapy: safer and virus-free? Science 294:1638–1642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gehl J, Skovsgaard T, Mir LM (1998) Enhancement of cytotoxicity by electropermeabilization: an improved method for screening drugs. Anti Cancer Drugs 9:319–325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Golzio M, Teissié J, Rols MP (2001) Control by membrane order of voltage-induced permeabilization, loading and gene transfer in mammalian cells. Bioelectrochemistry 53:25–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Golzio M, Teissié J, Rols MP (2002) Direct visualization at the single cell level of electrically mediated gene delivery. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:1292–1297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hacein-Bey-Abina S, Von Kalle C, Schmidt M, McCormack MP, Wulffraat N, Leboulch P, Lim A, Osborne CS, Pawliuk R, Morillon E, Sorensen R, Forster A, Fraser P, Cohen JI, de Saint Basile G, Alexander I, Wintergerst U, Frebourg T, Aurias A, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Romana S, Radford-Weiss I, Gross F, Valensi F, Delabesse E, Macintyre E, Sigaux F, Soulier J, Leiva LE, Wissler M, Prinz C, Rabbitts TH, Le Deist F, Fischer A, Cavazzana-Calvo M (2003) LMO2-associated clonal T cell proliferation in two patients after gene therapy for SCID-X1. Science 302:415–419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hojman P, Gissel H, Franck MA, Cournil-Henrionnet C, Eriksen J, Gehl J, Mir ML (2008) Physiological effects of high- and low-voltage pulse combinations for gene electrotransfer in muscle. Hum Gene Ther 19:1249–1260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kanduser M, Miklavcic D, Pavlin M (2009) Mechanisms involved in gene electrotransfer using high- and low-voltage pulses—an in vitro study. Bioelectrochemistry 74:265–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehrman S (1999) Virus treatment questioned after gene therapy death. Nature 401:517–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Li S, Huang L (2000) Nonviral gene therapy: promises and challenges. Gene Ther 7:31–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Mitsuyasu RT, Merigan TC, Carr A, Zack JA, Winters MA, Workman C, Bloch M, Lalezari J, Becker S, Thornton L, Akil B, Khanlou H, Finlayson R, McFarlane R, Smith DE, Garsia R, Ma D, Law M, Murray JM, von Kalle C, Ely JA, Patino SM, Knop AE, Wong P, Todd AV, Haughton M, Fuery C, Macpherson JL, Symonds GP, Evans LA, Pond SM, Cooper DA (2009) Phase 2 gene therapy trial of an anti-HIV ribozyme in autologous CD34+ cells. Nat Med 15:285–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Neumann E, Schaefer-Ridder M, Wang Y, Hofschneider PH (1982) Gene transfer into mouse lymoma cells by electroporation in high electric fields. EMBO J 7:841–845Google Scholar
  19. Neumann E, Sowers AE, Jordan CA (1989) Electroporation and electrofusion in cell biology. Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Parker AL, Newman C, Briggs S, Seymour L, Sheridan PJ (2003) Nonviral gene delivery: techniques and implications for molecular medicine. Expert Rev Mol Med 5(22):1–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pavlin M, Kanduser M, Rebersek M, Pucihar G, Hart FX, Magjarevic R, Miklavcic D (2005) Effect of cell electroporation on the conductivity of a cell suspension. Biophys J 88:4378–4390CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Pavlin M, Flisar K, Kanduser M (2010) The role of electrophoresis in gene electrotransfer. J Memb Biol. doi: 10.1007/s00232-010-9276-z
  23. Pucihar G, Mir LM, Miklavcic D (2002) The effect of pulse repetition frequency on the uptake into electropermeabilized cells in vitro with possible applications in electrochemotherapy. Bioelectrochemistry 57:167–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Pucihar G, Kotnik T, Valic B, Miklavcic D (2006) Numerical determination of transmembrane voltage induced on irregularly shaped cells. Ann Biomed Eng 34:642–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rols MP, Teissié J (1992) Experimental evidence for the involvement of cytoskeleton in mammalian cell electropermeabilization. Biochim Biophys Acta 1111:45–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Rols MP, Teissié J (1998) Electropermeabilization of mammalian cells to macromolecules: control by pulse duration. Biophys J 75:1415–1423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rols MP, Delteil C, Golzio M, Teissié J (1998) Control by ATP and ADP of voltage-induced mammalian-cell-membrane permeabilization, gene transfer and resulting expression. Eur J Biochem 254:382–388CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Schwan HP (1957) Electrical properties of tissue and cell suspensions. Adv Biol Med Phys 5:147–209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Teissié J, Golzio M, Rols MP (2005) Mechanisms of cell membrane electropermeabilization: a minireview of our present (lack of?) knowledge. Biochim Biophys Acta 1724:270–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Teissié J, Escoffre JM, Rols MP, Golzio M (2008) Time dependence of electric field effects on cell membranes. A review for a critical selection of pulse duration for therapeutical applications. Radiol Oncol 42:196–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Towhidi L, Kotnik T, Pucihar G, Firoozabadi SMP, Mozdarani H, Miklavcic D (2008) Variability of the minimal transmembrane voltage resulting in detectable membrane electroporation. Electromagn Biol Med 27:372–385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Valic B, Golzio M, Pavlin M, Schatz A, Faurie C, Gabriel B, Teissié J, Rols MP, Miklavcic D (2003) Effect of electric field induced transmembrane potential on spheroidal cells: theory and experiment. Biophys J 32:519–528Google Scholar
  33. Vaughan EE, Dean DA (2006) Intracellular trafficking of plasmids during transfection is mediated by microtubules. Mol Ther 3:422–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weaver JC, Chizmadzhev YA (1996) Theory of electroporation: a review. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 41:135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wolf H, Rols MP, Boldt E, Neumann E, Teissié J (1994) Control by pulse parameters of electric field-mediated gene transfer in mammalian cells. Biophys J 66:524–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Zaharoff DA, Barr RC, Li CY, Yuan Y (2002) Electromobility of plasmid DNA in tumor tissues during electric field–mediated gene delivery. Gene Ther 9:1286–1290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor Marjanovič
    • 1
  • Saša Haberl
    • 1
  • Damijan Miklavčič
    • 1
  • Maša Kandušer
    • 1
  • Mojca Pavlin
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations