| Title |
Novel hyperbranched polyamidoamine nanoparticles for transfecting skeletal myoblasts with vascular endothelial growth factor gene for cardiac repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10856-011-4424-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kai Zhu, Changfa Guo, Hao Lai, Wuli Yang, Yu Xia, Dong Zhao, Chunsheng Wang |
| Abstract |
We investigated the feasibility and efficacy of hyperbranched polyamidoamine (hPAMAM) mediated human vascular endothelial growth factor-165 (hVEGF(165)) gene transfer into skeletal myoblasts for cardiac repair. The hPAMAM was synthesized using a modified one-pot method. Encapsulated DNA was protected by hPAMAM from degradation for over 120 min. The transfection efficiency of hPAMAM in myoblasts was 82.6 ± 7.0% with cell viability of 94.6 ± 1.4% under optimal conditions. The hPAMAM showed much higher transfection efficiency (P < 0.05) than polyetherimide and Lipofectamine 2000 with low cytotoxicity. The transfected skeletal myoblasts gave stable hVEGF(165) expression for 18 days. After transplantation of hPAMAM-hVEGF(165) transfected cells, apoptotic myocardial cells decreased at day 1 and heart function improved at day 28, with increased neovascularization (P < 0.05). These results indicate that hPAMAM-based gene delivery into myoblasts is feasible and effective and may serve as a novel and promising non-viral DNA vehicle for gene therapy in myocardial infarction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 44% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 6% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 August 2011.
All research outputs
#20,145,561
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
#1,288
of 1,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,898
of 124,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,400 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 124,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.