| Title |
Efficient gene delivery to human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells by cationized Porphyra yezoensis polysaccharide nanoparticles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s93122 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qingtong Yu, Jin Cao, Baoding Chen, Wenwen Deng, Xia Cao, Jingjing Chen, Yan Wang, Shicheng Wang, Jiangnan Yu, Ximing Xu, Xiangdong Gao |
| Abstract |
This study centered on an innovative application of Porphyra yezoensis polysaccharide (PPS) with cationic modification as a safe and efficient nonviral gene vector to deliver a plasmid encoding human Wnt3a (pWnt3a) into human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (HUMSCs). After modification with branched low-molecular-weight (1,200 Da) polyethylenimine, the cationized PPS (CPPS) was combined with pWnt3a to form spherical nanoscale particles (CPPS-pWnt3a nanoparticles). Particle size and distribution indicated that the CPPS-pWnt3a nanoparticles at a CPPS:pWnt3a weight ratio of 40:1 might be a potential candidate for DNA plasmid transfection. A cytotoxicity assay demonstrated that the nanoparticles prepared at a CPPS:pWnt3a weight ratio of 40:1 were nontoxic to HUMSCs compared to those of Lipofectamine 2000 and polyethylenimine (25 kDa). These nanoparticles were further transfected to HUMSCs. Western blotting demonstrated that the nanoparticles (CPPS:pWnt3a weight ratio 40:1) had the greatest transfection efficiency in HUMSCs, which was significantly higher than that of Lipofectamine 2000; however, when the CPPS:pWnt3a weight ratio was increased to 80:1, the nanoparticle-treated group showed no obvious improvement in translation efficiency over Lipofectamine 2000. Therefore, CPPS, a novel cationic polysaccharide derived from P. yezoensis, could be developed into a safe, efficient, nonviral gene vector in a gene-delivery system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 33% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 November 2015.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,077
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,320
of 294,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#26
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.