Type I interferon response against viral and non-viral gene transfer in human tumor and primary cell lines.

BACKGROUND: Type I interferon (IFN-alpha/beta) response is one of the major host defence mechanisms against viruses. Some recent reports suggest that IFNs may interfere with the efficacy of both non-viral and virus-vector-mediated therapeutic gene transfer. METHODS: The type I IFN response upon different gene transfer methods in human tumor and primary cell lines was studied by analysing IFN-beta mRNA expression, secretion of type I IFNs and accumulation of IFN-alpha/beta-induced MxA protein (myxovirus resistance protein A). RESULTS: Infection with avirulent Semliki Forest virus A7[74] induced MxA protein accumulation and increased the IFN-beta mRNA level, whereas none of the studied virus vectors (adenovirus, CRAd, lentivirus or AAV) induced IFN response. However, plasmid DNA induced the accumulation of MxA protein when transfected with several commercial transfection reagents. RNA transfection appeared to be an efficient inducer of type I IFN response: replicating alphaviral RNA, eukaryotic total RNA, or mRNA all induced both MxA protein accumulation and IFN-beta expression. siRNA transfection failed to induce MxA response. CONCLUSIONS: The non-viral gene transfer methods have gained more interest in recent years due to their better safety profiles when compared to their viral counterparts. However, the efficiency of non-viral gene transfer is well below those reached by viral vector systems. The type I interferon response induced by non-viral methods may in part contribute to this inefficiency, while most currently used viral gene transfer vectors fail to induce or are able to suppress type I IFN response.

Cancer cells as targets for lentivirus-mediated gene transfer and gene therapy.

Lentiviruses have been used as gene transfer vectors for almost 10 years and their utility has been demonstrated in a variety of different applications. However, their value in cancer gene therapy has not been studied thoroughly. Here we show that VSV-G pseudotyped HIV-1-based lentiviruses are efficient vectors for human tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. Lentiviral gene transfer efficiency was demonstrated by transducing 42 different cell lines, representing 10 different human tumor types. It was shown that most of the cell lines were good or excellent targets for lentiviral transduction, allowing 50-95% gene transfer efficiency. These results were comparable to those obtained with an E1/E3 deleted, serotype 5 adenovirus vector. Analysis of lentivirus vector structure revealed that virus particles devoid of HIV-1 accessory proteins appeared to be more efficient, but the presence of enhancing elements cPPT and WPRE did not play a major role in transduction efficiency to four different human tumor cell lines. However, their effect on the gene expression level in these cells was apparent. To examine the impact of lentiviral gene expression level on suicide gene therapy approach, human osteosarcoma cells were transduced with lentivirus- or adenovirus vectors carrying the fusion gene HSV-TK-GFP and exposed to ganciclovir. Cell viability analysis after the treatment revealed that both vector types induced similar level of cytotoxicity, suggesting that lentiviral expression of a suicide gene is adequate for tumor cell destruction. Finally, in vivo transduction studies with subcutaneous tumors showed that lentivirus vectors can yield similar gene transfer efficiency than adenovirus vector, despite three orders of magnitude lower titer of the lentiviral preparation. In conclusion, these data show that lentiviruses are efficient gene transfer vehicles for human tumor cells and justify their use in further preclinical cancer gene therapy studies.

Report of a questionnaire survey of poststroke patients with aphasia and their families.

In a study made by The Stroke and Aphasia Federation Finland, a little less than a quarter of the aphasic patients and their families could not cope with the change in their life caused by stroke. Patients' and families' functionality decreased, and their social contacts either decreased or ended. These were the factors that prevented families from adapting to new situations. Patients and famiIies felt that they had received too little information about the illness and various benefits available. Families also needed more mental support. Those who lived in big cities or in the scattered areas felt that the rehabilitation was also insufficient.