The Impact of Non-electrical Factors on Electrical Gene Transfer

  • Jiemiao Hu
  • Jeffry Cutrera
  • Shulin Li
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1121)


Electrical pulses directly and effectively boost both in vitro and in vivo gene transfer, but this process is greatly affected by non-electrical factors that exist during electroporation. These factors include, but are not limited to, the types of cells or tissues used, property of DNA, DNA formulation, and expressed protein. In this mini-review, we only describe and discuss a summary of DNA properties and selected DNA formulations on gene transfer via electroporation. The properties of DNA were selected for review because a substantial amount of remarkable work has been performed during the past few years but has received less notice than other works, although DNA properties appear to be critical for boosting electroporation delivery. The selected formulations will be covered in this mini-review because we are only interested in the simple formulations that could be used for cell or gene therapy via electroporation. Plus, there was an extensive review of DNA formulations in the first edition of this book. The formulations discussed in this mini-review represent novel developments in recent years and may impact electroporation significantly. These advancements in DNA formulations could prove to be important for gene delivery and disease treatment.

Key words

Non-electrical factors DNA properties DNA formulation Electrical gene transfer 


  1. 1.
    Li S (2004) Electroporation gene therapy: new developments in vivo and in vitro. Curr Gene Ther 4:309–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mir LM, Bureau MF, Gehl J et al (1999) High-efficiency gene transfer into skeletal muscle mediated by electric pulses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:4262–4267PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li S, Zhang X, Xia X et al (2001) Intramuscular electroporation delivery of ifn-alpha gene therapy for inhibition of tumor growth located at a distant site. Gene Ther 8:400–407PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aihara H, Miyazaki J (1998) Gene transfer into muscle by electroporation in vivo. Nat Biotechnol 16:867–870PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heller LC, Coppola D (2002) Electrically mediated delivery of vector plasmid DNA elicits an antitumor effect. Gene Ther 9:1321–1325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maruyama H, Ataka K, Higuchi N, Sakamoto F, Gejyo F, Miyazaki J (2001) Skin-targeted gene transfer using in vivo electroporation. Gene Ther 8:1808–1812PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nishi T, Yoshizato K, Yamashiro S et al (1996) High-efficiency in vivo gene transfer using intraarterial plasmid DNA injection following in vivo electroporation. Cancer Res 56:1050–1055PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Draghia-Akli R, Khan AS, Cummings KK, Parghi D, Carpenter RH, Brown PA (2002) Electrical enhancement of formulated plasmid delivery in animals. Technol Cancer Res Treat 1:365–372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vierra DA, Irvine SQ (2012) Optimized conditions for transgenesis of the ascidian ciona using square wave electroporation. Dev Genes Evol 222:55–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vry JD, Martinez-Martinez P, Losen M et al (2010) Low current-driven micro-electroporation allows efficient in vivo delivery of nonviral DNA into the adult mouse brain. Mol Ther 18:1182–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pavlin M, Flisar K, Kanduser M (2010) The role of electrophoresis in gene electrotransfer. J Membr Biol 236:75–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bureau MF, Gehl J, Deleuze V, Mir LM, Scherman D (2000) Importance of association between permeabilization and electrophoretic forces for intramuscular DNA electrotransfer. Biochim Biophys Acta 1474:353–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Andre FM, Gehl J, Sersa G et al (2008) Efficiency of high- and low-voltage pulse combinations for gene electrotransfer in muscle, liver, tumor, and skin. Hum Gene Ther 19:1261–1271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nicol F, Wong M, MacLaughlin FC et al (2002) Poly-l-glutamate, an anionic polymer, enhances transgene expression for plasmids delivered by intramuscular injection with in vivo electroporation. Gene Ther 9:1351–1358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fewell JG, MacLaughlin F, Mehta V et al (2001) Gene therapy for the treatment of hemophilia b using pinc-formulated plasmid delivered to muscle with electroporation. Mol Ther 3:574–583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Flanagan M, Gimble JM, Yu G et al (2011) Competitive electroporation formulation for cell therapy. Cancer Gene Ther 18:579–586PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barbon CM, Baker L, Lajoie C, Ramstedt U, Hedley ML, Luby TM (2010) In vivo electroporation enhances the potency of poly-lactide co-glycolide (plg) plasmid DNA immunization. Vaccine 28:7852–7864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gopalakrishnan AM, Kundu AK, Mandal TK, Kumar N (2013) Novel nanosomes for gene delivery to plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells. Sci Rep 3:1534PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mignet N, Vandermeulen G, Pembouong G et al (2010) Cationic and anionic lipoplexes inhibit gene transfection by electroporation in vivo. J Gene Med 12:491–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Flanagan M, Gimble JM, Yu G, Xia X, Bunnell BA, Li S (2012) Competitive DNA transfection formulation via electroporation for human adipose stem cells and mesenchymal stem cells. Biol Proced Online 14:7PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee MJ, Cho SS, Jang HS et al (2002) Optimal salt concentration of vehicle for plasmid DNA enhances gene transfer mediated by electroporation. Exp Mol Med 34:265–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ribeiro S, Mairhofer J, Madeira C et al (2012) Plasmid DNA size does affect nonviral gene delivery efficiency in stem cells. Cell Reprogram 14:130–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spath K, Heinl S, Grabherr R (2012) Direct cloning in lactobacillus plantarum: electroporation with non-methylated plasmid DNA enhances transformation efficiency and makes shuttle vectors obsolete. Microb Cell Fact 11:141PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin SY, Yeh KT, Chen WT et al (2004) Promoter cpg methylation of tumor suppressor genes in colorectal cancer and its relationship to clinical features. Oncol Rep 11:341–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen Y, Dhupelia A, Schoenherr CJ (2009) The igf2/h19 imprinting control region exhibits sequence-specific and cell-type-dependent DNA methylation-mediated repression. Nucleic Acids Res 37:793–803PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Arakawa T, Ohta T, Abiko Y, Okayama M, Mizoguchi I, Takuma T (2011) A polymerase chain reaction-based method for constructing a linear vector with site-specific DNA methylation. Anal Biochem 416:211–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lu J, Zhang F, Kay MA (2013) A mini-intronic plasmid (mip): a novel robust transgene expression vector in vivo and in vitro. Mol Ther 21:954–963PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gao L, Xie L, Long X et al (2013) Efficacy of mri visible iron oxide nanoparticles in delivering minicircle DNA into liver via intrabiliary infusion. Biomaterials 34:3688–3696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kobelt D, Schleef M, Schmeer M, Aumann J, Schlag PM, Walther W (2013) Performance of high quality minicircle DNA for in vitro and in vivo gene transfer. Mol Biotechnol 53:80–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peng J, Zhao Y, Mai J, Guo W, Xu Y (2012) Short noncoding DNA fragment improve efficiencies of in vivo electroporation-mediated gene transfer. J Gene Med 14:563–569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cutrera J, Dibra D, Xia X, Li S (2010) Enhancement of reporter gene detection sensitivity by insertion of specific mini-peptide-coding sequences. Cancer Gene Ther 17:131–140PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Miller AM, Dean DA (2009) Tissue-specific and transcription factor-mediated nuclear entry of DNA. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 61:603–613PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lee ST, Jang JH, Cheong JW et al (2002) Treatment of high-risk acute myelogenous leukaemia by myeloablative chemoradiotherapy followed by co-infusion of t cell-depleted haematopoietic stem cells and culture-expanded marrow mesenchymal stem cells from a related donor with one fully mismatched human leucocyte antigen haplotype. Br J Haematol 118:1128–1131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prata Kde L, Orellana MD, De Santis GC et al (2010) Effects of high-dose chemotherapy on bone marrow multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells isolated from lymphoma patients. Exp Hematol 38(292–300):e294Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wild JM, Krutzfeldt NO (2010) Neocortical-like organization of avian auditory ‘cortex’. Commentary on Wang Y, Brzozowska-Prechtl A, Karten HJ (2010): Laminar and columnar auditory cortex in avian brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:12676–12681. Brain Behav Evol 76:89–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Katz AJ, Llull R, Hedrick MH, Futrell JW (1999) Emerging approaches to the tissue engineering of fat. Clin Plast Surg 26:587–603, viiiPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gimble J, Guilak F (2003) Adipose-derived adult stem cells: isolation, characterization, and differentiation potential. Cytotherapy 5:362–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Morizono K, De Ugarte DA, Zhu M et al (2003) Multilineage cells from adipose tissue as gene delivery vehicles. Hum Gene Ther 14:59–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Josiah DT, Zhu D, Dreher F, Olson J, McFadden G, Caldas H (2010) Adipose-derived stem cells as therapeutic delivery vehicles of an oncolytic virus for glioblastoma. Mol Ther 18:377–385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Li S (2008) Electroporation gene therapy. Preface. Meth Mol Biol 423:v–viiGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiemiao Hu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jeffry Cutrera
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shulin Li
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PediatricsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Shanghai Tenth People’s HospitalTongji University School of MedicineShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations