**Methods of Transfection with Messenger RNA Gene Vectors**

Oleg E. Tolmachov and Tanya Tolmachova

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/61688

#### **Abstract**

[200] Von Mehren M, Arlen P, Tsang KY, Rogatko A, Meropol N, Cooper HS. Pilot study of a dual gene recombinant avipox vaccine containing both carcinoembryonic anti‐ gen (CEA) and B7.1 transgenes in patients with recurrent CEA-expressing adenocar‐

[201] Nagai E, Ogawa T, Kielian T, Ikubo A, Suzuki T. Irradiated tumor cells adenovirally engineered to secrete granulocyte/macrophage-colony-stimulating factor establish antitumor immunity and eliminate pre-existing tumors in syngeneic mice. Cancer

[202] Ginn SL, Alexander IE, Edelstein ML, Abedi MR, Wixon J. Gene therapy clinical tri‐

[203] Nemunaitis J. Vaccines in cancer: GVAX, a GM-CSF gene vaccine. Expert Rev Vac‐

[204] Nemunaitis J, Jahan T, Ross H, Sterman D, Richards D, Fox B. Phase 1/2 trial of autol‐ ogous tumor mixed with an allogeneic GVAX vaccine in advanced-stage non-small-

[205] Akbulut H, Tang Y, Akbulut KG, Maynard J, Zhang L, Deisseroth A. Antitumor im‐ mune response induced by i.t. injection of vector-activated dendritic cells and che‐ motherapy suppresses metastatic breast cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2006;5:1975–1985.

[206] Breckpot K, Dullaers M, Bonehill A, van Meirvenne S, Heirman C, de Greef C. Lenti‐ virally transduced dendritic cells as a tool for cancer immunotherapy. J Gene Med

[207] Di Lorenzo G, Buonerba C and Kantoff PW. Immunotherapy for the treatment of

[208] Barrett DM, Singh N, David L. Porter DL, Grupp SA, Carl H. Chimeric antigen recep‐

[209] Sun M, Shi H, Liu C, Liu J, LiuX, Sun Y. Construction and evaluation of a novel humanized HER2-specific chimeric receptor. Breast Cancer Res 2014;16:R61.

[210] Jensen MC, Riddel SR. Design and implementation of adoptive therapy with chimer‐ ic antigen receptor-modified T cellsImmunol Rev. Immunol Rev 2014 J;257:127–144.

[211] Shi H, Sun M, Liu L, Wang Z. Chimeric antigen receptor for adoptive immunothera‐ py of cancer: latest research and future prospects. Mol Cancer 2014;13:219.

als worldwide to 2012—an update. J Gene Med 2013;15:65–77.

cell lung cancer. Cancer Gene Ther 2006;13:555–562.

prostate cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011;8: 551–561.

tor therapy for cancer. Annu Rev Med 2014;65: 333–347.

cinomas. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:2219–2228.

Immunol Immunother 1998;47:72–80.

cines 2005;4:259–274.

36 Gene Therapy - Principles and Challenges

2003;5:654–667.

Non-viral gene delivery vectors with messenger RNA (mRNA) as a carrier of genetic information are among the staple gene transfer vectors for research in gene therapy, gene vaccination and cell fate reprogramming. As no passage of genetic cargo in and out of the nucleus is required, mRNA-based vectors typically offer the following five advantages: 1) fast start of transgene expression; 2) ability to express genes in nondividing cells with an intact nuclear envelope; 3) insensitivity to the major gene silencing mechanisms, which operate in the nucleus; 4) absence of potentially mutagenic genomic insertions; 5) high cell survival rate after transfection procedures, which do not need to disturb nuclear envelope. In addition, mRNA-based vectors offer a simple combination of various transgenes through mixing of several mRNAs in a single multi-gene cocktail or expression of a number of proteins from a single mRNA molecule using internal ribosome entry sites (IRESes), ribosome skipping sequences and proteolytic signals. However, on the downside, uncontrolled extrac‐ ellular and intracellular decay of mRNA can be a substantial hurdle for mRNAmediated gene transfer. Procedures for mRNA delivery are analogous to DNA transfer methods, which are well-established. In general, there are three actors in the gene delivery play, namely, the vector, the cell and the transfer environment. The desired outcome, that is, the efficient delivery of a gene to a target cell population, depends on the efficient interaction of all three parties. Thus, the vector should be customised for the target cell population and presented in a form that is resistant to the aggressive factors in the delivery *milieu*. At the same time, the delivery environ‐ ment should be adjusted to be more vector-friendly and more cell-friendly. The recipient cells should be subjected to a specific regimen or artificially modified to become receptive to gene transfer with a particular vector and resistant to the environment. As a rule, barriers outside tissues (e.g. mucus) and an aggressive

© 2015 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

intercellular environment complicate gene delivery *in vivo*, which, therefore, requires more complex gene transfer procedures than transfection of tissue culture cells. This review is focused on transfection methods for mRNA vectors, which rely either on the forceful propulsion of mRNA inside the target cells (e.g. by electroporation or gene gun) or on the complexing of mRNA with other substances (e.g. polycationic transfection reagents) for delivery via endocytic pathways.

**Keywords:** Gene therapy, epigenetic reprogramming, gene vaccination, mRNA gene vec‐ tors, transfection methods, gene transfer
