Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology

High-efficiency gene transfer into skeletal muscle mediated by electric pulses

Lluis M. Mir, Michel F. Bureau, Julie Gehl, Ravi Rangara, Didier Rouy, Jean-Michel Caillaud, Pia Delaere, Didier Branellec, Bertrand Schwartz, and Daniel Scherman
PNAS April 13, 1999 96 (8) 4262-4267; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.8.4262
Lluis M. Mir
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michel F. Bureau
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie Gehl
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ravi Rangara
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Didier Rouy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jean-Michel Caillaud
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pia Delaere
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Didier Branellec
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bertrand Schwartz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Scherman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  1. Communicated by Pierre A. Joliot, Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology, Paris, France (received for review October 15, 1998)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Gene delivery to skeletal muscle is a promising strategy for the treatment of muscle disorders and for the systemic secretion of therapeutic proteins. However, present DNA delivery technologies have to be improved with regard to both the level of expression and interindividual variability. We report very efficient plasmid DNA transfer in muscle fibers by using square-wave electric pulses of low field strength (less than 300 V/cm) and of long duration (more than 1 ms). Contrary to the electropermeabilization-induced uptake of small molecules into muscle fibers, plasmid DNA has to be present in the tissue during the electric pulses, suggesting a direct effect of the electric field on DNA during electrotransfer. This i.m. electrotransfer method increases reporter and therapeutic gene expression by several orders of magnitude in various muscles in mouse, rat, rabbit, and monkey. Moreover, i.m. electrotransfer strongly decreases variability. Stability of expression was observed for at least 9 months. With a pCMV-FGF1 plasmid coding for fibroblast growth factor 1, this protein was immunodetected in the majority of muscle fibers subjected to the electric pulses. DNA electrotransfer in muscle may have broad applications in gene therapy and in physiological, pharmacological, and developmental studies.

Nonviral gene transfer for gene therapy is a rapidly expanding field (1–3). Tissues for which highly efficient gene transfer is sought include tumors, various epithelia or endothelia, and organs such as the liver, heart, or brain. Special interest has been devoted to gene delivery to skeletal muscle fibers, e.g., for the correction of myopathies such as Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy (4), for the local secretion of angiogenic or neurotrophic factors, and also for vaccination (5). Another exciting application is the use of highly vascularized muscle as an endocrine organ for the systemic secretion of therapeutic proteins, such as erythropoietin, α1-antitrypsin, clotting factors, antiinflammatory cytokines, etc. (6–10).

The transfer of a foreign gene into muscle fibers by injection of “naked” plasmid DNA has been demonstrated (11–13), leading to transgene expression and physiological or therapeutic responses, such as vaccinal and antiinflammatory response or hematocrit increase (8, 9, 14–16). However, there are several major limitations to the transfer of naked DNA. First, there is a very high interindividual variability of the level of foreign gene expression. The origin of this lack of reproducibility is not yet understood, and it might strongly impair the clinical development of therapeutic use of i.m. DNA administration. Second, the level of therapeutic protein expression is still too low for efficient treatment of diseases such as hemophilia or muscular dystrophy. Thus, alternative strategies aimed at improving the level and reliability of gene expression after i.m. DNA injection are needed. The use of ballistic technology (a “gene gun”) resulted in a moderate enhancement of gene transfer into skin (17) or into muscle after surgical limb opening (18); the principal limitation was a poor penetration across tissues. Until now, no enhancement of gene transfer in muscle, as compared with naked DNA, has been achieved by using cationic lipids or polymers (19, 20; C. Dubertret, B. Pitard, and D.S., unpublished data). It is surprising that this enhancement has not been observed, considering that cationic lipids lead to efficient transfection in vitro (1, 2, 21–25) and in vivo in tissues such as brain or tumor (26–29). Neutral polymers, such as polyvinyl derivatives, have been reported to enhance plasmid delivery to rat muscle by 2- to 6-fold (30).

Since the 1982 publication by Neumann et al. (31), the use of electric pulses for cell electropermeabilization (also called cell electroporation) has been used to introduce foreign DNA into prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells in vitro (32) and has been used in other applications in cell biology and pharmacology (33). By using optimal electrical parameters, it is possible to achieve excellent levels of cell permeabilization that are compatible with cell survival (34). Cell electropermeabilization also can be achieved locally in vivo by means of simple electrodes (35, 36). A relevant clinical application, electrochemotherapy, is being pursued in oncology, by using cell electropermeabilization to favor the cellular entry of hydrophilic anticancer agents like bleomycin (35, 37–39). This approach results in a drastically increased antitumor effect of bleomycin. The short (100-μs) and intense (800- to 1,500-V/cm) electric pulses used in current electrochemotherapy protocols are safe and well tolerated (35, 37–39).

Electric pulses also have been used to transfer DNA in vivo to skin, liver, and tumor cells (40–44). Initial experiments were performed by using runs of short (100- to 300-μs) and intense (400- to 1,200-V/cm) electric pulses (40, 41). Long electric pulses of lower voltage-to-distance ratios have been reported to increase DNA transfer in vivo to tumor cells (10 pulses; 800 V/cm; 4 ms per pulse; ref. 42), to liver cells (8 pulses; 250 V/cm; 50 ms per pulse; ref. 43), and, in a study published during the completion of the present article, to muscle cells (6 pulses; 200 V/cm; 50 ms per pulse; ref. 44). We report here the characteristics and mechanisms of highly efficient and reproducible plasmid transfer to muscle fibers achieved in vivo by the local application of electric pulses, and we discuss the features of this i.m. DNA electrotransfer method that open possibilities for nonviral gene therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Plasmids and DNA Preparation.

The plasmids pXL2774 (pCMV-Luc), pXL3031 (pCMV-Luc+), pXL3004 (pCMV-βgal), and pXL3096 (pCMV-FGF1) contain the cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter (nucleotides 229–890 of pcDNA3; Invitrogen) inserted upstream of the coding sequence, respectively, of the Photinus pyralis peroxisomal luciferase (pGL2 basic; Promega), of the modified cytosolic luc+ luciferase, of the Escherichia coli LacZ gene coding for the β-galactosidase, and of the gene coding for a fusion peptide between the signal secretion peptide of human fibroblast interferon and fibroblast growth factor 1 (FGF1; ref. 45). Plasmids were prepared by using standard procedures (46). All plasmid preparations contained a high percentage of supercoiled DNA (70–80%), and no RNA was detectable by gel electrophoresis.

DNA Injection and Electric-Pulse Delivery.

Unless otherwise stated, 15 μg of DNA in 30 μl of 0.9% NaCl was injected into the tibial cranial muscle of anesthetized C57Bl/6 mice (Iffa Credo) with a Hamilton syringe. There were 10 tibial cranial muscles included in each experimental group. At defined times after DNA injection (25 s or 1 min, depending on the experiment), transcutaneous electric pulses were applied by two stainless steel plate electrodes placed 4.2–5.3 mm apart, at each side of the leg. The 1-cm plates encompassed the whole leg of each mouse. Electrical contact with the leg skin was ensured by shaving each leg and applying a conductive gel. Square-wave electric pulses were generated by a PS-15 electropulsator (Jouan, St. Herblain, France), except in the analysis of pulse-length influence, for which we used a T820 electroporator (BTX, San Diego), which allowed the delivery of pulses for 1–99 ms. Electric-field strengths (in V/cm) are reported in terms of the ratio of the applied voltage to the distance between the electrodes.

For pulse delivery to rat and rabbit muscles, two implanted stainless steel needles (Terumo, Leuven, Belgium; 0.08 mm in diameter × 50 mm in length) (the depth of insertion was 2 cm; the gap between the two needles was 0.9 cm) were used as electrodes and connected to the generator. The efficiency of needle electrodes for DNA electrotransfer to rat muscle is similar to that of external plate electrodes (data not shown). pXL3031 (150 μg; 0.5 μg/μl) was injected into rat muscle, and pXL2774 (200 μg; 1 μg/μl) was injected into rabbit muscle. The needle electrodes also were used in the monkey trial. All animals were anesthetized during the whole procedure. Experiments were conducted following the recommendations of the National Institutes of Health for animal experimentation and those of the Rhône-Poulenc-Rorer local Ethics Committee on Animal Care and Experimentation.

Measurement of Luciferase Activity.

Unless otherwise stated, mice were killed 7 days after DNA transfer. Muscles were removed and homogenized in 1.5 ml of Cell Culture Lysis reagent (Promega) supplemented with aprotinin (Sigma) at a final concentration of 2 μg/ml. After centrifugation at 5,000 × g for 15 min, luciferase activity was assessed on 10 μl of supernatant with a Berthold Lumat LB 9501 luminometer (EG & G, Evry, France). This assessment was made by measuring the integration of the light produced during 10 s, starting 1 s after the addition of 50 μl of Luciferase Assay Substrate (Promega) to the muscle-fiber lysate. Calibration performed with purified firefly luciferase protein (Sigma and Boehringer Mannheim) established that 106 relative light units was approximately equivalent to 30 pg of luciferase. Results are expressed as picograms of luciferase per muscle ±SEM (see the figures) or nanograms per muscle ±SEM (see Table 1). Because electric fields have been shown to induce production of free radicals, which could interfere with the luciferase detection assay, we verified, by using a plasmid coding for β-galactosidase, that electrotransfer did not result in false-positive detection of luciferase activity (data not shown).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Increase of foreign gene expression after electric-pulse delivery in various mouse, rat, and rabbit muscles

Chromium-51-EDTA (51Cr-EDTA) Uptake.

A small molecule, 51Cr-EDTA (Amersham Pharmacia), was used as a permeabilization indicator. In parallel experiments, either 51Cr-EDTA (0.01 MBq in 30 μl saline) or pXL2774 plasmid (15 μg in 30 μl saline) was injected i.m. into mouse tibial cranial muscle at different times either before or after electric-pulse delivery, by using the same procedure as described above for DNA (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz). For the experiments on the influence of voltage and the number of pulses on 51Cr-EDTA entrapment, 50 μl of 51Cr-EDTA (0.2 MBq) was i.v. injected 2.5 min before pulsation. In all cases, mice were killed 1 h after 51Cr-EDTA injection. The treated muscle was excised and weighed, and radioactivity was measured in a Packard γ counter. Taking into account the specific radioactivity, the decay, and the period from the reference date, calculations were performed to determine the uptake in nanomoles of 51Cr-EDTA per gram of treated muscle.

Immunohistochemical Procedures.

Muscles were removed, fixed, and sliced 7 days after DNA electrotransfer. To show β-galactosidase expression, staining with 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl β-d-galactoside was performed in toto according to described procedures (47). For detection of FGF1 expression, sections were subjected to indirect immunohistochemistry on an automat (Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson, AZ), by first using a polyclonal rabbit anti-human FGF1 antibody dilvent, Ventana Medical Systems; 1/200) and then a biotinylated donkey polyclonal anti-rabbit antibody (The Jackson Laboratory; 1/800) and then an avidin-biotin-alkaline phosphatase revelation kit (Jackson ImmunoResearch).

RESULTS

Influence of the Electric-Pulse Parameters on Reporter-Gene Expression.

A luciferase gene-encoding plasmid was injected i.m. into mouse-leg tibial cranial muscle, and electric pulses were delivered through external plate electrodes placed at each side of the leg. When we applied electric pulses similar to those used for electrochemotherapy and for liver DNA transfer (eight pulses; 100 μs per pulse; 1,200 V/cm; 1 Hz), we observed a 50-fold decrease of muscle luciferase expression, as compared with the values observed in the absence of an electric field. In contrast, we found that eight long (20-ms) and less intense (200-V/cm) electric pulses applied at a 1-Hz frequency resulted in a marked enhancement of luciferase expression and in a drastic reduction in interindividual variability (Fig. 1A). This effect was observed constantly in 149 separate muscles (data not shown). We refer to this procedure as electrotransfer.

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

Characteristics of DNA electrotransfer in muscle fibers. Bars represent the mean ± SEM of individual values (triangles), observed in the absence (white bars) or the presence (gray bars) of electric-pulse delivery. The ordinate scale is logarithmic. (A) Influence of the applied voltage-to-distance ratio (eight pulses; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz). (B) Influence of pulse length (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 1 Hz). (C) Influence of pulse number (200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz). (D) Influence of the frequency of pulse delivery (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse). (E) Dependence of luciferase gene expression on the amount of injected DNA in a constant volume of 30 μl (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz); (F) Kinetics of luciferase gene expression in the absence (open circles) or presence (filled squares) of electrotransfer (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 2 Hz). Abscissa: time after plasmid injection. Mice were killed 7 days (A–E) or at the indicated times (F) after DNA transfer.

Electrotransfer efficiency depended strongly on the characteristics of the electric pulses. Enhancement of expression was detected from a threshold field strength of 100 V/cm and was optimal at 200 V/cm (eight pulses; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz; Fig. 1A). Under these conditions, luciferase expression was enhanced approximately 100-fold. Transgene expression was reduced at 300 V/cm or more (Fig. 1A and data not shown). At 200 V/cm (eight pulses; 1 Hz), the electrotransfer efficiency increased with the duration of each pulse up to 40 ms (Fig. 1B). In other experiments, a plateau value was obtained at 20 ms per pulse, and luciferase expression clearly leveled off for pulses lasting >40 ms per pulse (data not shown). At 200 V/cm and 20 ms per pulse and 1 Hz, 8–16 pulses led to the highest enhancement (Fig. 1C). In other experiments that used similar pulse characteristics, 8 pulses yielded the best results, and a clear decrease of the electrotransfer effect was observed with 32 pulses (data not shown). Subsequent experiments showed that at the optimal conditions of eight pulses, 200 V/cm, and 20 ms per pulse, an additional gain could be obtained by increasing the frequency of pulse administration (Fig. 1D).

Characteristics of the Expression of the Electrotransferred DNA.

i.m. gene electrotransfer increased as a function of the amount of DNA injected, whereas no clear dose–effect relationship was observed in the absence of the electric pulses (Fig. 1E).

Note that, after electrotransfer, a clear reduction in the interindividual variability of gene expression, as indicated by the relative SEM, was observed constantly, in contrast to the classical high variability observed with DNA administered alone (Fig. 1 A–E). For example, in Fig. 1E, the relative SEM (in percentage of the mean value) decreased from 57.2–64.3% for controls without electric pulses to 16.2–16.9% when electric pulses were applied.

The time course of expression of electrotransferred luciferase gene expression was studied (Fig. 1F). Luciferase expression was already detectable 3 h after DNA injection in the absence or presence of electric pulses. It increased progressively and, at day 3, reached a plateau value that persisted for at least 270 days. At all time points of the reported experiment, expression of the electrotransferred DNA was much higher than that of DNA injected without electric pulses (from 25-fold at 3 h to 734-fold at 121 days).

Under optimal conditions (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz), histological analysis with the β-galactosidase reporter gene showed that electrotransfer increased global β-galactosidase expression, the number of muscle fibers positive for β-galactosidase, and the volume of tissue expressing the foreign gene (Fig. 2). i.m. gene electrotransfer was restricted to the muscle volume exposed to the electric pulses (data not shown).

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2

β-Galactosidase expression in mouse tibial cranial muscle after DNA injection with or without the application of electric pulses. (A and B) Legs from mice injected with DNA without (A) or with (B) exposure to the electric pulses (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz). (C and D) Macroscopic photographs of the whole tibial cranial muscle of mice injected with DNA without (C) or with (D) exposure to electric pulses.

The in vivo electropermeabilization of muscle fibers, which results from membrane perturbation caused by the electric field, was determined by assaying the uptake of low molecular mass 51Cr-EDTA, a small complex used as a permeabilization indicator. At eight pulses, 20 ms per pulse, 1 Hz, the same field-threshold value of 100 V/cm was observed for muscle-fiber electropermeabilization as for electrotransfer.

The uptake of 51Cr-EDTA was increased whether its i.m. injection was performed before or after the electric pulses (Fig. 3A). In contrast, DNA had to be present in the tissue at the time of the electric-pulse application to observe electrotransfer. Indeed, when DNA injection was performed 20 s (or later) after the delivery of electric pulses, no increase in foreign gene expression was detected (Fig. 3B). Interestingly, the electrotransfer effect was detected when DNA was injected as long as 30–60 min before the delivery of electric pulses but was lost when DNA was injected 2 h before the delivery (Fig. 3A and data not shown).

Figure 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3

Comparative effect of the time of injection vs. time of electric-pulse delivery on the in vivo 51Cr-EDTA uptake and on luciferase gene expression by muscle fibers. Bars represent the mean of the individuals values; error bars represent SEM. Gray bars represent the uptake of 51Cr-EDTA (A) or the uptake of plasmid DNA (B) as assessed by luciferase gene expression 7 days after the electric pulses (eight pulses; 200 V/cm; 20 ms per pulse; 1 Hz). White bars represent control values observed in the absence of electric pulses.

Finally, for 20-ms electric pulses, in contrast to plasmid electrotransfer, 51Cr-EDTA uptake increased up to a voltage-to-distance ratio of 400 V/cm before leveling off and increased with the number of pulses up to 32 pulses (data not shown). Note that significant 51Cr-EDTA uptake was also observed with eight 100-μs pulses at 1,200 V/cm (data not shown), conditions that led to strong decrease of electrotransferred plasmid expression, as reported above.

Electrotransfer to Rat, Rabbit, and Primate Muscles of Reporter or Therapeutic Genes.

All preceding experiments were performed on mouse tibialis cranialis muscle. A 2- to 4-log enhancement of luciferase gene transfer by electric pulses also was observed in various mouse, rat, and rabbit muscles (Table 1). Either external plate electrodes or needle electrodes directly implanted in the muscle were used. A similar electrotransfer efficacy was found for both types of electrodes in rat muscles.

An electrotransfer-induced increase of gene expression also was obtained with DNA coding for FGF1, which, when secreted locally, is a candidate for therapeutic angiogenesis in peripheral artery disease and in ischemic heart disease (48, 49). After electrotransfer of plasmid pXL3096, immunohistology identified FGF1 expression in the majority of the fibers of the injected mouse leg muscle (Fig. 4). Interestingly, histology shows that injected plasmid DNA diffuses extensively in muscle tissue, because fibers positive for FGF1 were detected in the whole muscle section. In contrast, in the absence of electric pulses, FGF1 immunodetection was restricted to the vicinity of the path of the DNA-injecting needle. At days 3 and 7 after DNA injection, an average of 0 and 4 ± 2 fibers immunopositive for FGF1 per muscle (n = 5) were observed in the absence of electric pulses, and an average of 320 ± 45 and 710 ± 122 fibers immunopositive for FGF1 were observed with electrotransfer, respectively (n = 5; mean ± SEM).

Figure 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4

FGF1 expression in mouse tibial cranial muscle. A run of eight pulses of 200 V/cm and 20 ms per pulse at 2 Hz was used, and muscle was removed 7 days after electrotransfer of the pXL3096 plasmid.

We also tested the injection of 500 μg of plasmid pCMV-FGF1 (pXL3096) in the tibialis cranialis, rectus femoris, triceps, and biceps of a Maccaca fascicularis monkey. One side was injected with plasmid DNA alone, and, for the other side, DNA injection was followed by application of electric pulses through implanted electrodes. Fibers positive for FGF1 were detected in three of the four different muscles treated with the electric field, whereas no fibers positive for FGF1 were immunodetected in the four contralateral muscles.

DISCUSSION

We report here an efficient method for DNA transfer in muscle fibers, which consists of plasmid DNA i.m. injection, followed by the delivery of low-field-strength, long-duration, square-wave electric pulses through external or invasive electrodes. During completion of this paper, two papers were published describing the use of low-field-strength, long-duration electric pulses for gene transfer to muscle (44, 50). Harrison et al. (50) reported ex vivo plasmid electrotransfer into a newborn mouse heart maintained in organotypic culture for several days, conditions quite different from the in vivo gene transfer to skeletal muscle. Aihara and Miyazaki (44) reported an increase in interleukin 5 and β-galactosidase expression in mouse muscle after a similar electrotransfer procedure. The electric-field strength used was similar to the one we used, but the pulse duration was 50 ms, a condition that we found to be suboptimal. This condition and/or the fact that a different promoter was used might explain why these authors observed transgene expression peaking at day 7 and a duration of only 2 weeks. With respect to this concomitant work (44), we have shown the electrotransfer effect for two new genes (luciferase and FGF1), and we have explored the influence of electric-pulse parameters on gene expression thoroughly. In addition, we have illustrated the potentiality of i.m. electrotransfer on four species, including monkey, and shown that the use of external plate electrodes leads to results similar to those obtained with invasive needle electrodes. We also show a significant decrease in interindividual variability by using optimal electrotransfer parameters, as well as very long-term foreign gene expression (at least 9 months); both of these observations are highly relevant for further fundamental or clinical applications. Finally, we also have investigated the mechanisms by which electric pulses increase i.m. plasmid DNA transfer.

The mechanism of DNA electrotransfer was investigated by comparison with the uptake of a radioactive marker, 51Cr-EDTA. The uptake of 51Cr-EDTA can be considered evidence of muscle-fiber permeabilization. The fact that both 51Cr-EDTA uptake and DNA expression started at a threshold of 100 V/cm indicates that electropermeabilization is a prerequisite for DNA electrotransfer. For 20-ms pulses, transfection was optimal at 200 V/cm, whereas 51Cr-EDTA uptake continued to increase up to 400 V/cm, indicating that minimizing damage to electropermeabilized cells is important for transfection efficiency. We also found that adding 51Cr-EDTA shortly after the delivery of electric pulses resulted in uptake, whereas gene transfer did not occur when DNA was added after pulse delivery. This result suggests that the electric pulses increase gene transfer not only by muscle-fiber permeabilization but also by a direct active effect on the DNA molecule, promoting DNA migration and cellular uptake. This hypothesis agrees with in vitro studies (51) and with the beneficial effects of long-duration pulses in vivo into tumor and liver cells (42, 43).

Experiments showing that DNA has to be injected in muscles before the delivery of electric pulses also argue against a direct transcriptional or translational effect of the electric fields in muscle fibers; such an effect would have occurred similarly whether the pulses were applied shortly before or after DNA injection. A hypothetical transcriptional or translational effect also is ruled out by the fact that an identical electric-field-induced enhancement of expression was observed with three different promoters upstream of the luciferase gene (data not shown).

The following conclusions are relevant to the clinical development of i.m. electrotransfer.

(i) Electrotransfer drastically increases the efficiency of i.m. gene transfer, resulting in a 2- to 4-log enhancement of gene expression. Both the number of muscle fibers positive for FGF1 and the volume of transfected tissue were increased significantly. Therefore, i.m. electrotransfer may be crucial in obtaining a therapeutic response.

(ii) Electrotransfer strongly decreases interindividual variability, which is one of the largest restrictions to the use of i.m. naked DNA.

(iii) Electrotransfer efficacy does not depend on the period between DNA preinjection and electric-pulse delivery (up to 1 h). This result, which indicates that no fast extracellular degradation of plasmid DNA occurs in muscle tissue (at least for the electrotransferred DNA fraction), contributes to the homogenization and predictability of foreign gene expression, and it makes the overall procedure easier to perform.

(iv) Electrotransfer gives long-lasting expression, which is important for long-term clinical applications.

(v) Electrotransfer is achievable in different muscles of various species, including primates, indicating wide applicability.

(vi) Electrotransfer allows modulation of foreign gene expression by varying either the amount of DNA injected, electric-pulse parameters, and/or the volume of tissue exposed to the electric pulses. Only local effects were obtained, in agreement with the known local permeabilizing effects of appropriate electric pulses (35, 37–39). These various control levels permit adjustment of foreign gene expression to achieve the desired investigative or therapeutic goal.

DNA electrotransfer in muscle may have broad applications in the therapeutic field and in physiological, pharmacological, and developmental studies.

Acknowledgments

We thank J. Crouzet and J. F. Mayaux for discussion and support and F. Soubrier, B. Cameron, and M. Ollivier for plasmid construction and production. We acknowledge the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut Gustave Roussy, Rhône-Poulenc-Rorer, the Rhône-Poulenc Group Scientific Direction, Det Medicinske Selskab i København (Tode-legatet), and the SAS Institute (Denmark) for support.

Footnotes

    • ↵† To whom reprint requests should be addressed. e-mail: luismir{at}igr.fr or daniel.scherman{at}rp-rorer.fr.

    • ↵¶ Present address: Cardiovascular Department, Rhône-Poulenc-Rorer, CRVA, 13, Quai Jules Guesde, B.P. 14, 94403 Vitry-sur-Seine Cedex, France.

    ABBREVIATIONS

    CMV,
    cytomegalovirus;
    FGF,
    fibroblast growth factor
    • Received October 15, 1998.
    • Accepted January 19, 1999.
    • Copyright © 1999, The National Academy of Sciences

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Ledley F D
      (1995) Hum Gene Ther 6:1129–1144, pmid:8527471.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    2. ↵
      1. Lee R J,
      2. Huang L
      (1997) Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst 14:173–206, pmid:9107521.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    3. ↵
      1. Smith J,
      2. Zhang Y,
      3. Niven R
      (1997) Adv Drug Delivery Rev 26:135–150.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Ragot T,
      2. Vincent N,
      3. Chafey P,
      4. Vigne E,
      5. Gilgenkrantz H,
      6. Couton D,
      7. Cartaud J,
      8. Briand P,
      9. Kaplan J C,
      10. Perricaudet M
      (1993) Nature (London) 361:647–650, pmid:8437625.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    5. ↵
      1. Montgomery D L,
      2. Ulmer J B,
      3. Donnelly J J,
      4. Liu M A
      (1997) Pharmacol Ther 74:195–205, pmid:9336022.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    6. ↵
      1. Tripathy S K,
      2. Goldwasser E,
      3. Min-Min L,
      4. Barr E,
      5. Leiden J F
      (1994) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:11557–11561, pmid:7972101.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Naffakh N,
      2. Pinset C,
      3. Montarras D,
      4. Li Z,
      5. Paulin D,
      6. Danos O,
      7. Heard J M
      (1996) Hum Gene Ther 7:11–21, pmid:8825864.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Miller G,
      2. Steinbrecher R A,
      3. Murdock P J,
      4. Tuddenham E G D,
      5. Lee C A,
      6. Pasi K J,
      7. Goldspink G
      (1995) Gene Ther 2:736–742, pmid:8750013.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Levy M Y,
      2. Barron L G,
      3. Meyer K B,
      4. Szocka F
      (1996) Gene Ther 3:201–211, pmid:8646550.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    9. ↵
      1. Kessler P D,
      2. Podsakoff G M,
      3. Chen X,
      4. McQuiston S,
      5. Colosi P C,
      6. Matelis L A,
      7. Kurtzman G J,
      8. Byrne B J
      (1996) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:14082–14087, pmid:8943064.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    10. ↵
      1. Wolff J A,
      2. Malone R W,
      3. Williams P,
      4. Chong W,
      5. Acsadi G,
      6. Jani A,
      7. Felgner P L
      (1990) Science 247:1465–1468, pmid:1690918.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Davis H L,
      2. Demeneix B A,
      3. Quantin B,
      4. Coulombe J,
      5. Whalen R
      (1993) Hum Gene Ther 4:733–740, pmid:8186288.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      1. Manthorpe M,
      2. Cornefert-Jensen F,
      3. Hartikka J,
      4. Felgner J,
      5. Rundell A,
      6. Margalith M,
      7. Dwarki V
      (1993) Hum Gene Ther 4:419–431, pmid:8399489.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. Davis H L,
      2. McCluskie M J,
      3. Gerin J L,
      4. Purcell R H
      (1996) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:7213–7218, pmid:8692971.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Tripathy S K,
      2. Svensson E C,
      3. Black H B,
      4. Goldwasser E,
      5. Margalith M,
      6. Hobart P M,
      7. Leiden J M
      (1996) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:10876–10880, pmid:8855275.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    13. ↵
      1. Song X Y,
      2. Gu M L,
      3. Klinman D M,
      4. Wahl S M
      (1998) J Clin Invest 101:2615–2621, pmid:9637694.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Fynan E F,
      2. Webster R G,
      3. Fuller D H,
      4. Haynes J R,
      5. Santoro J C,
      6. Robinson H L
      (1993) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:11478–11482, pmid:8265577.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. ↵
      1. Xanthopoulos K G
      1. Baranov V,
      2. Zelenin A,
      3. Tarasenko O,
      4. Kolesnikov V,
      5. Mikhailov V,
      6. Ivaschenko T,
      7. Kiselev A,
      8. Artemyeva O,
      9. Evgrafov O,
      10. Zelina I,
      11. et al.
      (1998) in Gene Therapy, North Atlantic Treaty Organization Advanced Science Institute series, ed Xanthopoulos K G(Springer, Berlin), H105, pp 219–223.
      OpenUrl
      1. Wolff J A,
      2. Dowty M E,
      3. Jiao S,
      4. Repetto G,
      5. Berg R K,
      6. Ludtke J J,
      7. Williams P,
      8. Slautterback D B
      (1992) J Cell Sci 103:1249–1259, pmid:1487500.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Schwartz B,
      2. Benoist C,
      3. Abdallah B,
      4. Rangara R,
      5. Hassan A,
      6. Scherman D,
      7. Demeinex B
      (1996) Gene Ther 3:405–411, pmid:9156801.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    16. ↵
      1. Felgner P L,
      2. Gadek T R,
      3. Holm M,
      4. Roman R,
      5. Chan H W,
      6. Wenz M,
      7. Northrop J P,
      8. Ringold G M,
      9. Danielsen M
      (1987) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84:7413–7417, pmid:2823261.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Boussif O,
      2. Lezoualc’h F,
      3. Zanta M A,
      4. Mergny M,
      5. Scherman D,
      6. Demeinex B,
      7. Behr J P
      (1995) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:7297–7301, pmid:7638184.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Pitard B,
      2. Aguerre O,
      3. Airiau M,
      4. Lachages A-M,
      5. Bouknikachvilli T,
      6. Byk G,
      7. Dubertret C,
      8. Daniel J-C,
      9. Herviou C,
      10. Scherman D,
      11. et al.
      (1997) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:14412–14417, pmid:9405626.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Escriou V,
      2. Ciolina C,
      3. Lacroix F,
      4. Byk G,
      5. Scherman D,
      6. Wils P
      (1998) Biochim Biophys Acta 1368:276–288, pmid:9459605.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    17. ↵
      1. Byk G,
      2. Dubertret C,
      3. Escriou V,
      4. Frederic M,
      5. Jaslin G,
      6. Rangara R,
      7. Pitard B,
      8. Crouzet J,
      9. Wils P,
      10. Schwartz B,
      11. et al.
      (1998) J Med Chem 41:224–225.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    18. ↵
      1. Nabel E G,
      2. Plautz G,
      3. Nabel G J
      (1990) Science 249:1285–1288, pmid:2119055.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Plautz G E,
      2. Yang Z Y,
      3. Wu B W,
      4. Gao G,
      5. Huang L,
      6. Nabel G
      (1993) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:4645–4649, pmid:8506311.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Logan J J,
      2. Bebok Z,
      3. Walker L C,
      4. Peng S,
      5. Felgner P L,
      6. Siegal G P,
      7. Frizzell R A,
      8. Dong J,
      9. Howard M,
      10. Matalon S,
      11. et al.
      (1995) Gene Ther 2:38–49, pmid:7536114.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    19. ↵
      1. Schwartz B,
      2. Benoist C,
      3. Abdallah B,
      4. Scherman D,
      5. Behr J P,
      6. Demeinex B A
      (1995) Hum Gene Ther 6:1515–1524, pmid:8664376.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Mumper R J,
      2. Duguid J G,
      3. Anwer K,
      4. Barron M K,
      5. Nitta H,
      6. Rolland A P
      (1996) Pharm Res 13:701–709, pmid:8860424.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    21. ↵
      1. Neumann E,
      2. Schaefer-Ridder M,
      3. Wang Y,
      4. Hofschneider P H
      (1982) EMBO J 1:841–845, pmid:6329708.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    22. ↵
      1. Potter H
      (1988) Anal Biochem 174:361–373, pmid:3071177.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    23. ↵
      1. Orlowski S,
      2. Mir L M
      (1993) Biochim Biophys Acta 1154:51–63, pmid:8507646.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    24. ↵
      1. Gehl J,
      2. Skovsgaard T,
      3. Mir L M
      (1998) Anticancer Drugs 9:319–325, pmid:9635922.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    25. ↵
      1. Mir L M,
      2. Belehradek M,
      3. Domenge C,
      4. Orlowski S,
      5. Poddevin B,
      6. Belehradek J Jr,
      7. Schwaab G,
      8. Luboinski B,
      9. Paoletti C
      (1991) C R Acad Sci Ser III 313:613–618, pmid:1723647.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    26. ↵
      1. Gilbert R,
      2. Jaroszeski M J,
      3. Heller R
      (1997) Biochim Biophys Acta 1334:9–14, pmid:9042358.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    27. ↵
      1. Mir L M,
      2. Glass F L,
      3. Seröa G,
      4. Teissié J,
      5. Domenge C,
      6. Miklavcic D,
      7. Jaroszeski M J,
      8. Orlowski S,
      9. Reintgen D S,
      10. Rudolf Z R,
      11. et al.
      (1998) Br J Cancer 77:2336–2342, pmid:9649155.
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Heller R,
      2. Jaroszeski M J,
      3. Reintgen D S,
      4. Puleo C A,
      5. DeConti R C,
      6. Gilbert R A,
      7. Glass L F
      (1998) Cancer 83:148–157, pmid:9655305.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Seröa G,
      2. Stabuc B,
      3. Cemazar M,
      4. Jancar B,
      5. Miklavcic D,
      6. Rudolf Z
      (1998) Eur J Cancer 34:1213–1218, pmid:9849482.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    29. ↵
      1. Titomirov A V,
      2. Sukharev S,
      3. Kristanova E
      (1991) Biochim Biophys Acta 1088:131–134, pmid:1703441.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    30. ↵
      1. Heller R,
      2. Jaroszeski M,
      3. Atkin A,
      4. Moradpour D,
      5. Gilbert R,
      6. Wands J,
      7. Nicolau C
      (1996) FEBS Lett 389:225–228, pmid:8766704.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    31. ↵
      1. Rols M-P,
      2. Delteil C,
      3. Golzio M,
      4. Dumond P,
      5. Cros S,
      6. Teissié J
      (1998) Nat Biotechnol 16:168–171, pmid:9487524.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    32. ↵
      1. Suzuki T,
      2. Shin B C,
      3. Fujikura K,
      4. Matsuzaki T,
      5. Takata K
      (1998) FEBS Lett 425:436–440, pmid:9563509.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    33. ↵
      1. Aihara H,
      2. Miyazaki J I
      (1998) Nat Biotechnol 16:867–870, pmid:9743122.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    34. ↵
      1. Jouanneau J,
      2. Gavrilovic J,
      3. Caruelle D,
      4. Jaye M,
      5. Moens G,
      6. Caruelle J P,
      7. Thiery J P
      (1991) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88:2893–2897, pmid:1707175.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    35. ↵
      1. Ausubel F M,
      2. Brent R,
      3. Kingston R E,
      4. Moore D D,
      5. Seidman J G,
      6. Smith J A,
      7. Struhl K
      , eds(1994) Current Protocols in Molecular Biology (Wiley, New York), pp 1.7.9–1.7.10.
    36. ↵
      1. Demeneix B A,
      2. Abdel-Taweb H,
      3. Benoist C,
      4. Seugnet I,
      5. Behr J P
      (1994) BioTechniques 16:496–501, pmid:8185924.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    37. ↵
      1. Tabata H,
      2. Silver M,
      3. Isner J M
      (1997) Cardiovasc Res 35:470–479, pmid:9415291.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    38. ↵
      1. Schumacher B,
      2. Pecher P,
      3. von Spech B U,
      4. Stegman T
      (1998) Circulation 97:645–650, pmid:9495299.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    39. ↵
      1. Harrison R L,
      2. Byrne B J,
      3. Tung L
      (1998) FEBS Lett 435:1–5, pmid:9755847.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    40. ↵
      1. Sukharev S I,
      2. Klenchin V A,
      3. Serov S M,
      4. Chernomordik L V,
      5. Chizmadzhev Y A
      (1992) Biophys J 63:1320–1327, pmid:1282374.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    View Abstract
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    Article Alerts
    Email Article

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    High-efficiency gene transfer into skeletal muscle mediated by electric pulses
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
    Citation Tools
    High-efficiency gene transfer into skeletal muscle mediated by electric pulses
    Lluis M. Mir, Michel F. Bureau, Julie Gehl, Ravi Rangara, Didier Rouy, Jean-Michel Caillaud, Pia Delaere, Didier Branellec, Bertrand Schwartz, Daniel Scherman
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 1999, 96 (8) 4262-4267; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.8.4262

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Request Permissions
    Share
    High-efficiency gene transfer into skeletal muscle mediated by electric pulses
    Lluis M. Mir, Michel F. Bureau, Julie Gehl, Ravi Rangara, Didier Rouy, Jean-Michel Caillaud, Pia Delaere, Didier Branellec, Bertrand Schwartz, Daniel Scherman
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Apr 1999, 96 (8) 4262-4267; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.8.4262
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Mendeley logo Mendeley

    More Articles of This Classification

    Biological Sciences

    • Movement kinematics drive chain selection toward intention detection
    • Phosphoethanolamine cellulose enhances curli-mediated adhesion of uropathogenic Escherichia coli to bladder epithelial cells
    • Repurposing type III polyketide synthase as a malonyl-CoA biosensor for metabolic engineering in bacteria
    Show more

    Applied Biological Sciences

    • Repurposing type III polyketide synthase as a malonyl-CoA biosensor for metabolic engineering in bacteria
    • Functional profiling of circulating tumor cells with an integrated vortex capture and single-cell protease activity assay
    • Simultaneous improvements of strength and toughness in topologically interlocked ceramics
    Show more

    Related Content

    • No related articles found.
    • Scopus
    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

    Cited by...

    • A microdevice to locally electroporate embryos with high efficiency and reduced cell damage
    • Electrotransfer of RNAi-based Oligonucleotides for Oncology
    • Preclinical Validation of Electrochemotherapy as an Effective Treatment for Brain Tumors
    • Compensatory Increases in Nuclear PGC1{alpha} Protein Are Primarily Associated With Subsarcolemmal Mitochondrial Adaptations in ZDF Rats
    • DNA Vaccination by Electroporation and Boosting with Recombinant Proteins Enhances the Efficacy of DNA Vaccines for Schistosomiasis Japonica
    • The Rho-Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor Domain of Obscurin Activates RhoA Signaling in Skeletal Muscle
    • Generation of High-Titer Neutralizing Antibodies against Botulinum Toxins A, B, and E by DNA Electrotransfer
    • Relaxin treatment of solid tumors: effects on electric field-mediated gene delivery
    • Modest PGC-1{alpha} Overexpression in Muscle in Vivo Is Sufficient to Increase Insulin Sensitivity and Palmitate Oxidation in Subsarcolemmal, Not Intermyofibrillar, Mitochondria
    • Effects of Plasmid-Based Stat3-Specific Short Hairpin RNA and GRIM-19 on PC-3M Tumor Cell Growth
    • Chemokine-idiotype fusion DNA vaccines are potentiated by bivalency and xenogeneic sequences
    • Nucleocytoplasmic transport of DNA: enhancing non-viral gene transfer
    • Atheroprotective Effect of CD31 Receptor Globulin Through Enrichment of Circulating Regulatory T-Cells
    • Potential of Transfected Muscle Cells to Contribute to DNA Vaccine Immunogenicity
    • Effect of Plasmid DNA Vaccine Design and In Vivo Electroporation on the Resulting Vaccine-Specific Immune Responses in Rhesus Macaques
    • Modulation of the Immune Response Induced by Gene Electrotransfer of a Hepatitis C Virus DNA Vaccine in Nonhuman Primates
    • Enhancement of plasmid-mediated gene therapy for muscular dystrophy by directed plasmid integration
    • IGF-I increases bone marrow contribution to adult skeletal muscle and enhances the fusion of myelomonocytic precursors
    • Acute Bidirectional Manipulation of Muscle Glucose Uptake by In Vivo Electrotransfer of Constructs Targeting Glucose Transporter Genes
    • Electroporation as a "Prime/Boost" Strategy for Naked DNA Vaccination against a Tumor Antigen
    • Myocyte Enhancer Factor 2 Activates Promoter Sequences of the Human A{beta}H-J-J Locus, Encoding Aspartyl-{beta}-Hydroxylase, Junctin, and Junctate
    • Nur77 Regulates Lipolysis in Skeletal Muscle Cells: EVIDENCE FOR CROSS-TALK BETWEEN THE {beta}-ADRENERGIC AND AN ORPHAN NUCLEAR HORMONE RECEPTOR PATHWAY
    • DGAT1 overexpression in muscle by in vivo DNA electroporation increases intramyocellular lipid content
    • Electroporated DNA Vaccine Clears Away Multifocal Mammary Carcinomas in Her-2/neu Transgenic Mice
    • Evidence of Antiangiogenic and Antimetastatic Activities of the Recombinant Disintegrin Domain of Metargidin
    • Differential Regulation of the Muscle-specific GLUT4 Enhancer in Regenerating and Adult Skeletal Muscle
    • Electroporation Enables Plasmid Vaccines to Elicit CD8+ T Cell Responses in the Absence of CD4+ T Cells
    • A novel pathway for MuSK to induce key genes in neuromuscular synapse formation
    • An approach to electrical modeling of single and multiple cells
    • Marked Enhancement of the Antigen-Specific Immune Response by Combining Plasmid DNA-Based Immunization with a Schiff Base-Forming Drug
    • Sarcolipin Overexpression in Rat Slow Twitch Muscle Inhibits Sarcoplasmic Reticulum Ca2+ Uptake and Impairs Contractile Function
    • Electroporated Transgene-Rescued Spermatogenesis in Infertile Mutant Mice with a Sertoli Cell Defect
    • Gene Therapy of Erectile Dysfunction in the Rat with Penile Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase
    • Inhibition of Growth of Human Prostate Cancer Xenograft by Transfection of p53 Gene: Gene Transfer by Electroporation
    • Calcineurin controls nerve activity-dependent specification of slow skeletal muscle fibers but not muscle growth
    • West Nile Virus Recombinant DNA Vaccine Protects Mouse and Horse from Virus Challenge and Expresses In Vitro a Noninfectious Recombinant Antigen That Can Be Used in Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays
    • Therapeutic Tumor Immunity Induced by Polyimmunization with Melanoma Antigens gp100 and TRP-2
    • Posttranslational modifications of recombinant myotube-synthesized human factor IX
    • Enhancing B- and T-Cell Immune Response to a Hepatitis C Virus E2 DNA Vaccine by Intramuscular Electrical Gene Transfer
    • Increased DNA Vaccine Delivery and Immunogenicity by Electroporation In Vivo
    • Highly efficient electro-gene therapy of solid tumor by using an expression plasmid for the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene
    • Protective Role of Interleukin-10 in Atherosclerosis
    • Calcineurin controls nerve activity-dependent specification of slow skeletal muscle fibers but not muscle growth
    • Scopus (720)
    • Google Scholar

    Similar Articles

    You May Also be Interested in

    The videos, shown with minimal information and often without sound or music, are meant to provide a sort of scientific cinéma vérité. Image courtesy of Nipam Patel (University of California, Berkeley, CA).
    Science and Culture: Raw data videos offer a glimpse into laboratory research
    The videos, shown with minimal information and often without sound or music, are meant to provide a sort of scientific cinéma vérité.
    Image courtesy of Nipam Patel (University of California, Berkeley, CA).
    Victoria Orphan and Elizabeth Trembath-Reichert discuss microbial life in the deep subseafloor.
    Deep subseafloor microbial life
    Victoria Orphan and Elizabeth Trembath-Reichert discuss microbial life in the deep subseafloor.
    Listen
    Past PodcastsSubscribe
    PNAS Profile with NAS member and anthropologist Michael Tomasello
    PNAS Profile
    PNAS Profile with NAS member and anthropologist Michael Tomasello
    Early monumental burial sites
    Researchers report an early monumental burial site near Lake Turkana in Kenya that may have served as a stable landmark for mobile herders in a changing physical environment and as a social anchor point to foster communal identity and interaction among mobile herders.
    Moon. Image courtesy of Pixabay/Ponciano.
    Evidence of surface water ice on the moon
    A study reports evidence of water ice on the moon’s surface, discerned via a signature in the near-infrared reflectance spectra that suggests the ice was formed by slow condensation due to impact or water migration through the lunar exosphere.
    Image courtesy of Pixabay/Ponciano.
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 115 (38)
    Current Issue

    Submit

    Sign up for Article Alerts

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Abstract
      • MATERIALS AND METHODS
      • RESULTS
      • DISCUSSION
      • Acknowledgments
      • Footnotes
      • ABBREVIATIONS
      • References
    • Figures & SI
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    Site Logo
    Powered by HighWire
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feeds
    • Email Alerts

    Articles

    • Current Issue
    • Latest Articles
    • Archive

    PNAS Portals

    • Classics
    • Front Matter
    • Teaching Resources
    • Anthropology
    • Chemistry
    • Physics
    • Sustainability Science

    Information

    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Press
    • Site Map

    Feedback    Privacy/Legal

    Copyright © 2018 National Academy of Sciences.