Sonoporation efficacy on SiHa cells in vitro at raised bath temperatures—experimental validation of a prototype sonoporation device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A device was devised which aimed to reduce the time and expertise required to perform sonoporation on adherent cell cultures. This prototype device was used to examine the superficial effect of bath temperature on sonoporation efficacy. METHODS: The prototype device consisted of six ultrasound transducers affixed beneath an Opticell stage. Six transducers with nominal diameters of 20 mm were constructed and the acoustic field of each was characterized using hydrophone scanning. A near field treatment plane was chosen for each transducer to minimize field heterogeneity in the near field. Cervical cancer-derived SiHa cells were exposed to nine different treatments in the presence of plasmid DNA-expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP). Ultrasound treatment with Definity ultrasound contrast agent (US+UCA) present, ultrasound treatment without contrast agent present (US), and a sham ultrasound treatment in the presence of ultrasound contrast agent (CA) were each performed at bath temperatures of 37, 39.5, and 42 °C. Each treatment was performed in biological triplicate. GFP expression and PARP expression following treatment were measured using fluorescent microscopy and digital image processing. Cell detachment was measured using phase contrast microscopy before and after treatment. RESULTS: Mean (± s.d.) transfection rates for the US+UCA treatment were 5.4(±0.92), 5.8(±1.3), and 5.3(±1.1) % at 37, 39.5, and 42 °C, respectively. GFP expression and cell detachment were both significantly affected by the presence of ultrasound contrast agent (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Neither GFP expression, PARP expression, or detachment differed significantly between bath temperatures. CONCLUSIONS: Bath temperature did not impact the efficacy of sonoporation treatment on SiHa cells in vitro. The prototype device was found to be suitable for performing sonoporation on adherent cell cultures and will reduce the time and expertise required for conducting sonoporation experiments on adherent cell cultures in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".