ライフサイエンスコーパス: gene transfer efficiency

1 e peptide dramatically influence the in vivo gene transfer efficiency.

2 h safer than viral vectors, suffers from low gene transfer efficiency.

3 transcription, cation channel activity, and gene transfer efficiency.

4 al of immunoglobulins in non-CF BAL restored gene transfer efficiency.

5 on the apical surface significantly increase gene transfer efficiency.

6 d via a non-CAR pathway, with enhancement of gene transfer efficiency.

7 e where fiber receptors are located increase gene transfer efficiency.

8 rowth factor combinations to further improve gene transfer efficiency.

9 hieved limited success partly because of low gene transfer efficiency.

10 denoviral vectors because of their excellent gene-transfer efficiency.

11 For beta-thalassemic CD34(+) cells, similar gene transfer efficiencies achieved HbF production rangi

12 High-level gene transfer efficiency allowed insertion site analysis

13 The relevant contributions of Ad gene transfer efficiency and inherent 5-FU sensitivity i

14 chment characteristics significantly improve gene transfer efficiency and may expand the tissues amen

15 ation showed gene transfer but with distinct gene transfer efficiency and patterns when different del

16 mitations to gene therapy using HSCs are low gene transfer efficiency and the inability of most thera

17 We examined the in vivo gene transfer efficiency and tissue or cell tropism of a

18 g reduced-intensity conditioning and varying gene transfer efficiency and vector copy number, we asse

19 This report compares gene transfer efficiencies as well as durations and leve

20 conditions have resulted in stable long-term gene transfer efficiency as high as 15-20% to primitive

21 al surface did not significantly improve AdV gene transfer efficiency because the lumenal surface gly

22 n, our data show considerable differences in gene transfer efficiency between individual baboons, sug

23 Attempts to increase gene transfer efficiency by increasing nonspecific attac

24 w PEG length, linkage and location influence gene transfer efficiency, detailed PK, biodistribution a

25 However, the inability to achieve a high gene transfer efficiency, even in mice with a deletion o

26 High gene transfer efficiencies have been difficult to achiev

27 ven in GPI-hCAR transgenic mice but that the gene transfer efficiency improved in the absence of Muc1

28 with the filovirus pseudotypes, we compared gene transfer efficiency in immortalized airway epitheli

29 ntibodies directed to human AAVs and because gene transfer efficiency in muscle was similar to that o

30 Gene transfer efficiency in primary T lymphocytes of up

31 understanding of what limits nonviral vector gene transfer efficiency in vivo has resulted in more so

32 However, currently attainable gene transfer efficiencies into human HSCs are unlikely

33 Gene transfer efficiency into hematopoietic repopulating

34 In an attempt to improve our gene transfer efficiency into hematopoietic stem cells a

35 d in a Rev-independent packaging system, had gene transfer efficiencies nearly equivalent to those pr

36 Gene transfer efficiencies of >50% into primary lymphocy

37 Nevertheless, gene transfer efficiencies of longer-shafted Ad vectors

38 Finally, the gene transfer efficiencies of RRV/FIV after direct appli

39 hern blot analysis in one animal confirmed a gene transfer efficiency of between 1% and 5%.

40 ral gene delivery methods are limited by low gene transfer efficiency, they benefit from relative saf

41 number and 3.5-fold and 3-fold increases in gene transfer efficiency to HeLa cells and J774 cells, r

42 ll gene therapy has long been limited by low gene transfer efficiency to hematopoietic stem cells.

43 MGMTP140K) has been proposed to overcome low gene transfer efficiency to HSCs.

44 study, we demonstrate that low AdV-mediated gene transfer efficiency to well-differentiated (WD) cul

45 tomatitis virus-G envelope produced the best gene transfer efficiency, transducing greater than 90% o

46 s infection and a dose-dependent decrease in gene transfer efficiency upon JNK inhibition.

47 High-level gene transfer efficiency was achieved in murine models i

48 Gene transfer efficiency was determined by flow cytometr

49 Overall gene transfer efficiency was higher with the GALVpseudot

50 Gene transfer efficiency was several log orders greater

51 infected epithelial cell cultures with high gene transfer efficiency when applied to the apical surf

52 n preclinical models, significantly enhances gene transfer efficiency while retaining the safety adva

53 The higher gene transfer efficiency with the GALV-pseudotyped vecto

54 tment for cystic fibrosis is limited by poor gene transfer efficiency with vectors applied to the api