Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Thorax. 2021 Oct 25;77(8):812–820. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-215185

Figure 1.

Figure 1

In vitro characterisation of DNA-loaded nanoparticles. Electrophoretic analysis of (A) complexation and (B) protection (against enzymatic degradation by DNase) of plasmid payloads. For the protection assay, plasmids were de-compacted from DNA-MPP via heparin prior to gel electrophoresis. Lane 1: GFP-encoding plasmid. Lane 2: luciferase-encoding plasmid. Lane 3: shENaC-encoding plasmid. Lane 4: MPP carrying GFP-encoding plasmid. Lane 5: MPP carrying luciferase-expressing plasmid. Lane 6: MPP carrying shENaC-encoding plasmid. (C) Colloidal stability of DNA-CP and DNA-MPP in BAL fluid (ie, change in hydrodynamic diameter) over time at 37°C (n=3, mean±SD). ***p<0.001 (Student’s t-test). (D) Binding of DNA-CP and DNA-MPP to porcine gastric mucus assessed by surface plasmon resonance (n=3, mean±SD). The arrow indicates the timing of nanoparticle injection. ***p<0.001 (Student’s t-test). DNA-CP, DNA-loaded conventional particles; DNA-MPP, DNA-loaded mucus-penetrating particles; GFP, green fluorescent protein; shENaC, short hairpin RNA against ENaC.