ライフサイエンスコーパス: Lipofectamine

1 ry efficiency compared to the gold standard, Lipofectamine.

2 ls, an 8-fold increase over that mediated by Lipofectamine.

3 ompared to the commercial transfection agent Lipofectamine.

4 hose transfected with plasmid complexed with Lipofectamine.

5 d in the native form or when formulated with lipofectamine.

6 with the routinely used transfecting agent, lipofectamine.

7 DCs, which were enhanced by the presence of lipofectamine.

8 human fibrosarcoma HT-1080 fibroblasts with lipofectamine.

9 an or comparable to DMRIE-C, Lipofectin, and Lipofectamine.

10 ervals of MAP(280-299)p2p30 in Lipofectin or Lipofectamine.

11 itopes in Montanide's ISA51, Lipofectin, and Lipofectamine.

12 ne or in the presence of pULI100 plasmid and lipofectamine.

13 Compared to Lipofectamine 2000, a commercial transfection agent, LNP

14 ells or cells transfected with VEGF by using Lipofectamine 2000, a leading commercial reagent.

15 m arsenite (NaAsO2), cycloheximide (CHX) and Lipofectamine 2000-mediated transfection of phosphorothi

16 oxicity compared with commercially available lipofectamine 2000.

17 xhibited significant greater efficiency over Lipofectamine 2000.

18 hmark transfection reagents such as bPEI and Lipofectamine 2000.

19 l transfection reagents Polyethylenimine and Lipofectamine 2000.

20 s using transfection with the cationic lipid Lipofectamine 2000.

21 ed with branched polyethylenimine (bPEI) and Lipofectamine-2000.

22 cells using a new DNA transfection reagent, lipofectamine 3000, allowing assessment of their intrace

23 ificantly slower than the cells treated with LipofectAMINE alone or negative control siRNA.

24 ies in soft agar than did cells treated with LipofectAMINE alone or transfected with negative control

25 cted with HDGF-siRNA than cells treated with LipofectAMINE alone were able to invade across a Matrige

26 normal, organ-cultured human scalp HFs with lipofectamine and CDH3-specific or scrambled control siR

27 gth RyR2 was introduced into CHO cells using lipofectAmine and electroporation methods.

28 ransfer than cationic liposomes (lipofectin, lipofectamine, and DOTAP).

29 0 000 cells pretransfected in vitro by using lipofectamine as a positive control.

30 ive to the individual components prepared as lipofectamine complexes indicating the potential utility

31 levels when compared to polyethylenimine or lipofectamine complexes.

32 ult is achieved by random Brownian motion of Lipofectamine-containing vesicles within the cytoplasm.

33 We find that Lipofectamine, contrary to alternative formulations, is

34 Brownian diffusion is an efficient route for Lipofectamine/DNA complexes to avoid metabolic degradati

35 l the intracellular trafficking mechanism of Lipofectamine/DNA complexes.

36 st cancer cells, and addition of a liposome, lipofectamine, further enhanced the transfection efficie

37 cantly improved transfection efficiency over Lipofectamine in serum-containing media.

38 than the common nonviral agents Fugene-6 and Lipofectamine in the presence of serum.

39 poptosis induced by poly(I:C) transfected by Lipofectamine (in-poly(I:C)) compared with the 12-fold h

40 cking of two cationic liposomes, DMRIE-C and Lipofectamine LTX, in CHO cells.

41 ls, similar to that mediated by the standard Lipofectamine method.

42 A lipofectamine preparation of the Zn(2+)-DNA complex disp

43 also showed lower cytotoxicity compared with Lipofectamine(R) 2000 and PEI 25 kDa in various cell typ

44 ytotoxicity compared to branched PEI 25 kDa, Lipofectamine(R) 2000 and, FuGENE(R) 6.

45 kDa in HeLa cells and 7.4 times higher than Lipofectamine(R) 2000 in H9C2 cell.

46 ed low cytotoxicity compared to bPEI 25k and Lipofectamine(R) 2000 in hMSCs.

47 Lipofectamine reagents are widely accepted as "gold-stan

48 s exotoxin gene in the presence of dl312 and lipofectamine resulted in marked breast cancer cell kill

49 eas the maximum gene silencing efficiency of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX was less than 60% and the ED50 was

50 11% after 72h post-transfection, better than Lipofectamine RNAiMax.

51 the absence of human serum, nanocapsules and lipofectamine silenced expression of CCR5-mCherry expres

52 less than 15% while siRNAs delivered through lipofectamine slightly knocked down the expression to 55

53 nzyme knockdown nearly doubled from >30% for Lipofectamine to >60% for our best hit.

54 eduction in message expression compared with lipofectamine-transfected cells.

55 lenced by lentiviral infection and transient Lipofectamine transfection of cultured rat nodose gangli

56 LipofectAMINE transfection of the cDNAs resulted in high

57 Lipofectamine transfection of the conjugate into HSG cel

58 HSG cells treated with conjugate (without Lipofectamine transfection) exhibited a 50% reduction in

59 only after 2 W/cm(2) ultrasound exposure and lipofectamine transfection.