Ultrasound-mediated gene transfection in vitro: Effect of ultrasonic parameters on efficiency and cell viability

References

• Friedmann T, Roblin R. Gene therapy for human genetic disease?. Science 1972; 175: 949–955
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann T. Progress toward human gene therapy. Science 1989; 244: 1275–1281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mountain A. Gene therapy: The first decade. Tibtech 2000; 18: 119–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma IM, Weitzman MD. Gene therapy: Twenty-first century medicine. Annu Rev Biochem 2005; 74: 711–738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardlík R, Pálffy R, Hodosy J, Lukács J, Turňa J, Celec P. Vectors and delivery systems in gene therapy. Med Sci Monit 2005; 11: 110–121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins PD, Ghivizzani SC. Viral vector for gene therapy. Pharmacol Ther 1998; 80: 35–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone D, David A, Bolognani F, Lowenstein PR, Castro MG. Viral vectors for gene delivery and gene therapy within the endocrine system. J Endocrinol 2000; 164: 103–118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kootstra NA, Verma IM. Gene therapy with viral vectors. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2003; 43: 413–439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas CE, Ehrhardt A, Kay MA. Progress and problems with the use of viral vectors for gene therapy. Nature Rev Genet 2003; 4: 346–358
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson BL, Breakefield XO. Viral vectors for gene delivery to the nervous system. Nature Rev Neurosci 2003; 4: 353–364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao X, Kim KS, Liu D. Nonviral gene delivery: What we know and what is next. AAPS Journal 2007; 9: E93–E104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis ME. Non-viral gene delivery systems. Curr Opin Biotech 2002; 13: 128–131
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiethoff CM, Middaugh CR. Barriers to nonviral gene delivery. J Pharm Sci 2003; 92: 203–217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells DJ. Gene therapy progress and prospects: Electroporation and other physical methods. Gene Ther 2004; 11: 1363–1369
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintzer MA, Simanek EE. Nonviral vectors for gene delivery. Chem Rev 2009; 109: 259–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seow Y, Wood MJ. Biological gene delivery vehicles: Beyond viral vectors. Mol Ther 2009; 17: 767–777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells DJ. Electroporation and ultrasound enhanced non-viral gene delivery in vitro and in vivo. Cell Biol Toxicol 2010; 26: 21–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman CM, Lawrie A, Brisken AF, Cumberland DC. Ultrasound gene therapy: On the road from concept to reality. Echocardiography 2001; 18: 339–347
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller DL, Pislaru SV, Greenleaf JF. Sonoporation: Mechanical DNA delivery by ultrasonic cavitation. Som Cell and Mol Genet 2002; 27: 115–134
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pitt WG, Husseini GA, Staples BJ. Ultrasonic drug delivery – A general review. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2004; 1: 37–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ter Haar GR, Coussios CC. High intensity focused ultrasound: Past, present and future. Int J Hyperther 2007; 23: 85–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ter Haar GR, Coussios CC. High intensity focused ultrasound: Physical principles and devices. Int J Hyperther 2007; 23: 89–104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coussios CC, Farny CH, ter Haar GR, Roy RA. Role of acoustic cavitation in the delivery and monitoring of cancer treatment by high-intensity focused ultrasound. Int J Hyperther 2007; 23: 105–120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim HJ, Greenleaf JF, Kinnick RR, Bronk JT, Bolander ME. Ultrasound-mediated transfection of mammalian cells. Hum Gene Ther 1996; 7: 1339–1346
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stride E, Saffari N. Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents: A review. Proc Inst Mech Eng H J 2003; 217: 429–447
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrara K, Pollard R, Borden M. Ultrasound microbubble contrast agents: Fundamentals and application to gene and drug delivery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2007; 9: 415–447
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrie A, Brisken AF, Francis SE, Cumberland DC, Crossman DC, Newman CM. Microbubble-enhanced ultrasound for vascular gene delivery. Gene Ther 2000; 7: 2023–2027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toniyama Y, Tachibana K, Hiraoka K, Namba T, Yamasaka K, Hashiya N, et al. Local delivery of plasmid DNA into rat carotid artery using ultrasound. Circulation 2002; 105: 1233–1239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen JP, French BA, Klibanov AL, Kaul S, Lindner JR. Targeted tissue transfection with ultrasound destruction of plasmid-bearing cationic microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003; 29: 1759–1767
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehier-Humbert S, Bettinger T, Yan F, Guy RH. Ultrasound-mediated gene delivery: Kinetics of plasmid internalization and gene expression. J Control Release 2005; 104: 203–211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feril LB, Ogawa R, Tachibana K, Kondo T. Optimized ultrasound-mediated gene transfection in cancer cells. Cancer Sci 2006; 97: 1111–1114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehier-Humbert S, Yan F, Frinking P, Schneider M, Guy RH, Bettinger T. Ultrasound-mediated gene delivery: Influence of contrast agents on transfection. Bioconjugate Chem 2007; 18: 652–662
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill BE, Li KCP. Augmentation of targeted delivery with pulsed high intensity focused ultrasound. Int J Hyperther 2008; 24: 506–520
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobulnik J, Kuliszewski MA, Stewart DJ, Lindner JR, Leong-Poi H. Comparison of gene delivery techniques for therapeutic angiogenesis: Ultrasound-mediated destruction of carrier microbubbles versus direct intramuscular injection. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 1735–1742
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips LC, Klibanov AL, Wamhoff BR, Hossack JA. Targeted gene transfection from microbubbles into vascular smooth muscle cells using focused, ultrasound-mediated delivery. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010; 36: 1470–1480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reslan L, Mestas JL, Herveau S, Béra JC, Dumontet C. Transfection of cells in suspension by ultrasound cavitation. J Control Release 2010; 142: 251–258
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delalande A, Bouakaz A, Renault G, Tabareaue F, Kotopoulis S, Midoux P, et al. Ultrasound and microbubble-assisted gene delivery in Achilles tendons: Long lasting gene expression and restoration of fibromodulin KO phenotype. J Control Release 2011; 156: 223–230
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karshafian R, Bevan PD, Willams R, Samac S, Burns PN. Sonoporation by ultrasound-activated microbubble contrast agents: Effect of acoustic exposure parameters on cell membrane permeability and cell viability. Ultrasound Med Bio 2009; 35: 847–860
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahim A, Taylor SL, Bush NL, ter Haar GR, Bamber JC, Porter CD. Physical parameters affecting ultrasound/microbubble mediated gene delivery efficiency in vitro. Ultrasound Med Biol 2006; 32: 1269–1279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman CM, Bettinger T. Gene therapy progress and prospects: Ultrasound for gene transfer. Gene Ther 2007; 14: 465–475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang HD, Lu QL, Xue SA, Halliwell M, Kodama T, Cosgrove DO, et al. Optimisation of ultrasound-mediated gene transfer (sonoporation) in skeletal muscle cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 2004; 30: 1523–1529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen SY, Shohet RV, Bekeredjian R, Frenkel P, Grayburn PA. Optimization of ultrasound parameters for cardiac gene delivery of adenoviral or plasmid deoxyribonucleic acid by ultrasound-targeted microbubble destruction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 42: 301–308
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarnitsyn VG, Prausnitz MR. Physical parameters influencing optimization of ultrasound-mediated DNA transfection. Ultrasound Med Biol 2004; 30: 527–538
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu JR, Ross JP, Chiu JF. Reparable sonoporation generated by microstreaming. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 111: 1460–1464
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou Y, Cui JM, Deng CX. Dynamics of sonoporation correlated with acoustic cavitation activities. Biophys J 2008; 94: L51–L53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar