Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Gene transfer by biolistic process

P A Furth1

  • 1Department of Medicine, University of Maryland Medical School, Baltimore, USA. furth@nih.gov

Molecular Biotechnology
|April 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Depletion of the Transcriptional Coactivator Amplified in Breast Cancer 1 (AIB1) Uncovers Functionally Distinct Subpopulations in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.)·2019
Same author

Validation of transgenic models of breast cancer: ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and Brca1-mutation-related breast cancer.

Breast cancer online : BCO·2013
Same author

The nuclear coactivator amplified in breast cancer 1 maintains tumor-initiating cells during development of ductal carcinoma in situ.

Oncogene·2013
Same author

Loss of cyclin D1 in concert with deregulated estrogen receptor alpha expression induces DNA damage response activation and interrupts mammary gland morphogenesis.

Oncogene·2007
Same author

Activation of estrogen signaling pathways collaborates with loss of Brca1 to promote development of ERalpha-negative and ERalpha-positive mammary preneoplasia and cancer.

Oncogene·2007
Same author

Bax regulates c-Myc-induced mammary tumour apoptosis but not proliferation in MMTV-c-myc transgenic mice.

British journal of cancer·2004

Biolistic gene transfer methods, including jet injection, microparticle bombardment, and needle injection, offer versatile tools for somatic cell gene delivery in research and clinical applications. The optimal method depends on the specific gene therapy or genetic immunization strategy.

Area of Science:

  • Biotechnology
  • Molecular Biology
  • Gene Therapy

Background:

  • Gene transfer into somatic tissues is crucial for understanding gene function and developing clinical applications like gene therapy and genetic immunization.
  • Biolistic processes provide effective methods for delivering genetic material into somatic cells, utilizing both viral and nonviral vectors.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review and compare the advantages and disadvantages of three primary biolistic gene transfer methods: jet injection, microparticle bombardment, and needle and syringe injection.
  • To guide the selection of appropriate biolistic techniques based on specific research or clinical objectives.

Main Methods:

  • Discussion of jet injection for gene delivery, noting its capacity for both viral and nonviral vectors and broad tissue targeting.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of microparticle bombardment as a biolistic method, highlighting its suitability for diverse tissues.
  • Evaluation of needle and syringe injection, emphasizing its common use in muscle tissue for delivering various vector types.

    • Main Results:

    • Jet injection and needle and syringe injection are effective for delivering both viral and nonviral vectors.
    • Jet injection and microparticle bombardment demonstrate broad tissue targeting capabilities.
    • Needle and syringe injection is predominantly utilized for gene transfer into muscle tissue.

    Conclusions:

    • The selection of a biolistic gene transfer method should be tailored to the specific requirements of the application, whether for basic research or clinical gene therapy.
    • Each method (jet injection, microparticle bombardment, needle and syringe injection) presents unique advantages and limitations influencing its suitability for different gene delivery scenarios.