ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluation of rat pancreatic islets damage after siRNA microporation.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Small interfering RNA (siRNA) can be used for the temporary inhibition of gene expression, and one possible delivery method is microporation. In this study, we evaluated whether microporation is a suitable technique for the transfection of pancreatic islets and whether the selected siRNA is recognized by islet cells as foreign, potentially triggering an inflammatory or cytotoxic response. Rat islets were transfected with siRNA by microporation 24 hours after isolation. Another 24 hours post-transfection, the islets were assessed for viability, function, and the expression of inflammatory markers. Microporation induced mild but, in some assays, statistically significant stress. Flow cytometry revealed 9.94% dead cells in the negative control, 16.33% in islets microporated without siRNA, and 14.50% in islets microporated with siRNA. These results were confirmed by live/dead staining using Propidium iodide and Acridine orange. In contrast, caspase 3/7 staining, insulin secretion assays, and qRT-PCR analysis of inflammatory markers showed no statistically significant differences between the negative control and microporated groups. In addition, there were no significant differences in any of the assays between islets microporated with or without siRNA, or between the siRNA-only group and the negative control. These findings indicate that the selected siRNA is non-toxic to pancreatic islets and does not elicit an inflammatory response. Although microporation induces mild cellular stress and increased cell death, it may still be considered as a possible method for the transfection of pancreatic islets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.