Clinical Development of Intramuscular Electroporation: Providing a “Boost” for DNA Vaccines

  • Amir S. Khan
  • Kate E. Broderick
  • Niranjan Y. Sardesai
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1121)


The development of effective vaccines has helped to eradicate or control the spread of numerous infectious diseases. However, there are many more diseases that have proved more difficult to eliminate using conventional vaccines. The recent innovation of DNA vaccines may provide a “boost” to the development efforts. While the early efforts of DNA vaccines in the clinic were disappointing, the use of in vivo electroporation has helped to provide some basis for optimism. Now, there are several ongoing clinical studies of vaccines against such diseases as malaria, HIV, hepatitis C, and even various types of cancer. This review will highlight three recently published clinical studies using intramuscular DNA administration with electroporation.

Key words

DNA vaccines Adjuvants Infectious diseases Oncology Electroporation Intramuscular 


  1. 1.
    Ehreth J (2003) The global value of vaccination. Vaccine 21:596–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zuckerman JN (2000) The importance of injecting vaccines into muscle. Different patients need different needle sizes. BMJ 321: 1237–1238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kutzler MA, Weiner DB (2008) DNA vaccines: ready for prime time? Nat Rev Genet 9:776–788PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morrow MP, Weiner DB (2010) DNA drugs come of age. Sci Am 303:48–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cai Y, Rodriguez S, Hebel H (2009) DNA vaccine manufacture: scale and quality. Expert Rev Vaccines 8:1277–1291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yan J, Corbitt N, Pankhong P et al (2011) Immunogenicity of a novel engineered HIV-1 clade C synthetic consensus-based envelope DNA vaccine. Vaccine 29:7173–7181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bagarazzi ML, Yan J, Morrow MP et al (2012) Immunotherapy against HPV16/18 generates potent TH1 and cytotoxic cellular immune responses. Sci Transl Med 4:138Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sardesai NY, Weiner DB (2011) Electroporation delivery of DNA vaccines: prospects for success. Curr Opin Immunol 23:421–429PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Widera G, Austin M, Rabussay D et al (2000) Increased DNA vaccine delivery and immunogenicity by electroporation in vivo. J Immunol 164:4635–4640PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Draghia-Akli R, Khan AS, Brown PA et al (2008) Parameters for DNA vaccination using adaptive constant-current electroporation in mouse and pig models. Vaccine 19:5230–5237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Daud AI, DeConti RC, Andrews S et al (2008) Phase I trial of interleukin-12 plasmid electroporation in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 26:5896–5903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    El-Kamary SS, Billington M, Deitz S et al (2012) Safety and tolerability of the Easy Vax clinical epidermal electroporation system in healthy adults. Mol Ther 20:214–220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Low L, Mander A, McCann K et al (2009) DNA vaccination with electroporation induces increased antibody responses in patients with prostate cancer. Hum Gene Ther 20: 1269–1278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vasan S, Hurley A, Schlesinger SJ et al (2011) In vivo electroporation enhances the immunogenicity of an HIV-1 DNA vaccine candidate in healthy volunteers. PLoS One 6:e19252PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amir S. Khan
    • 1
  • Kate E. Broderick
    • 1
  • Niranjan Y. Sardesai
    • 1
  1. 1.Inovio PharmaceuticalsBlue BellUSA

Personalised recommendations