Electrotransfection and Lipofection Show Comparable Efficiency for In Vitro Gene Delivery of Primary Human Myoblasts
- 527 Downloads
Transfection of primary human myoblasts offers the possibility to study mechanisms that are important for muscle regeneration and gene therapy of muscle disease. Cultured human myoblasts were selected here because muscle cells still proliferate at this developmental stage, which might have several advantages in gene therapy. Gene therapy is one of the most sought-after tools in modern medicine. Its progress is, however, limited due to the lack of suitable gene transfer techniques. To obtain better insight into the transfection potential of the presently used techniques, two non-viral transfection methods—lipofection and electroporation—were compared. The parameters that can influence transfection efficiency and cell viability were systematically approached and compared. Cultured myoblasts were transfected with the pEGFP-N1 plasmid either using Lipofectamine 2000 or with electroporation. Various combinations for the preparation of the lipoplexes and the electroporation media, and for the pulsing protocols, were tested and compared. Transfection efficiency and cell viability were inversely proportional for both approaches. The appropriate ratio of Lipofectamine and plasmid DNA provides optimal conditions for lipofection, while for electroporation, RPMI medium and a pulsing protocol using eight pulses of 2 ms at E = 0.8 kV/cm proved to be the optimal combination. The transfection efficiencies for the optimal lipofection and optimal electrotransfection protocols were similar (32 vs. 32.5 %, respectively). Both of these methods are effective for transfection of primary human myoblasts; however, electroporation might be advantageous for in vivo application to skeletal muscle.
KeywordsMyoblasts Lipofection Electroporation Gene electrotransfer Gene therapy
This study was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (Grant No. J4-4324, research programme P3-0043). We gratefully acknowledge help from Zvonka Frelih, Marko Narobe and Romain Teruel.
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
- André FM, Gehl J, Sersa G, Préat V, Hojman P, Eriksen J, Golzio M, Cemazar M, Pavselj N, Rols MP, Miklavcic D, Neumann E, Teissié J, Mir LM (2008) Efficiency of high- and low-voltage pulse combinations for gene electrotransfer in muscle, liver, tumor, and skin. Hum Gene Ther 19:1261–1272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bregar VB, Lojk J, Suštar V, Veranič P, Pavlin M (2013) Visualization of internalization of functionalized cobalt ferrite nanoparticles and their intracellular fate. Int J Nanomed 8:919–931Google Scholar
- Haberl S, Kandušer M, Flisar K, Hodžić D, Bregar VB, Miklavčič D, Escoffre JM, Rols MP, Pavlin M (2013) Effect of different parameters used for in vitro gene electrotransfer on gene expression efficiency, cell viability and visualization of plasmid DNA at the membrane level. J Gene Med 15:169–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kotnik N, Haberl S, Pegan K, Marš T, Grubič Z, Pavlin M (2010) Comparison of electroporation and lipofection for in vitro transfer of plasmid PEGFP-N1 into human myoblasts. Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Electrotechnical and Computer Science Conference ERK 2009, pp 287–290Google Scholar
- Modlich U, Kustikova OS, Schmidt M, Rudolph C, Meyer J, Li Z, Kamino K, von Neuhoff N, Schlegelberger B, Kuehlcke K, Bunting KD, Schmidt S, Deichmann A, von Kalle C, Fehse B, Baum C (2005) Leukemias following retroviral transfer of multidrug resistance 1 (MDR1) are driven by combinatorial insertional mutagenesis. Blood 105:4235–4246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar