NEPA21_comparison_with_Lipofectamine,_FuGENE_HD_and_NEON

Re ES/iPS Results

Please note the following links to our website:

–          www.sonidel.com/NEPA21/NEPA21_Results/NEPA21_vs_nucleofector_etc.pdf

(This link demonstrates results from client labs. and compares the best NEPA21 result with the best the client was able to achieve with competing devices)

Please note the table in the above link that compares the four different transfection methods (Lipofectamine 2000, FuGENE HD, Neon and the NEPA21)  for human iPS cells and comes from the following original article: Genome Editing In Human iPS Cells by TALENS:

–        Japanese Original Article: Genome Editing in Human iPS Cells by TALENS

Hongmei Li, Knut Woltjen, Kazutoshi Takahashi, Shinya Yamanaka, Akitsu Hotta Center for iPS Cell Research and Application (CiRA), Kyoto University

“Genome Editing in Human iPS Cells by TALENs”

Saiboh-Kohgaku Vol.32 No.5 2013

–        Japanese Article with English translation: Genome Editing in Human iPS Cells by TALENS

The English translation is of the table comparing the four methods and appears immediately under the comparison table.  The following link is a summary of the English translation

–   Summary of the English translation of the comparison table

 The above referenced Japanese article was authored by researchers in CiRA.

CiRA (http://www.cira.kyoto-u.ac.jp/e/index.html) is a part of Kyoto University in Japan.

The Director of CiRA is Dr. Shinya Yamanaka a Nobel winner.

In this article about TALEN (similar to Zinc Finger Nuclease), the authors say that the NEPA21 is better than the Neon device.  The authors now use the NEPA21 for their transfection experiments.

The article compares four different transfection methods for human iPS cells:

–          Lipofectamine 2000

–          FuGENE HD

–          Neon Electroporation

–          NEPA21 Electroporation

Methods	Applications	DNA Transfection Efficiency	Cell Toxicity	Running Costs
Lipofectamine 2000	Transfection into adherent cells	+		$
FuGENE HD	Transfection into adherent cellsReverse transfection	+		$
Neon	Electroporation	++		$$$$
NEPA21	Electroporation	++		$$

 “We are mainly using the NEPA21 for transfection of TALEN expression vectors, because the cell recovery with the NEPA21 is faster than Neon.”

NOTE:

– Pre-comparison CiRA already had the Nucleofector (Lonza) and Neon (Invitrogen) devices

– Post-comparison, Yamanaka’s CiRA institute purchased 7 NEPA21 units

Another Japanese Publication citing the NEPA21:

–          Gene Targeting with TALENS,

(From the publication Stanndard Protocols on ES/iPS Cells)

(The relevant section of Japanese text is displayed with a superimposed English Translation)

NEPA21 Es/iPs Results from Client Labs

–          ES_iPSCells – Transfection Data from client labs

Latest Publications

–       Delivery of Full-Length Factor VIII Using a piggyback Transposon Vector to Correct a Mouse Model of Hemophilia A  Matsu, 2014.

–       Precise Correction of the Dystrophin Gene in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Patient Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells by TALEN and CRISPR-Cas9  Hongmei, Hotta and Yamanaka, 2015