In iGEM, safety is not just a requirement but a responsibility [1]. As synthetic biologists, we are creating tools that have the potential to improve human health and society - but if handled carelessly, they could also pose risks. For this reason, our team approaches every stage of our project with careful attention to biosafety (protecting people and the environment from accidental harm), biosecurity (preventing the intentional misuse of biological knowledge or materials), and bioethics (ensuring our work respects human dignity, values, and responsibility toward future generations). We believe that developing new therapies should always go hand in hand with preventing risks, building public trust, and ensuring that our innovations truly serve to make the world a better and safer place. In the following sections, we therefore present a detailed overview of how we applied these principles to each biological system and material we worked with.
Working with human-derived cell lines is central to our project. These models are valuable tools for testing the uptake and efficacy of antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) in a controlled and reproducible environment. At the same time, they come with important responsibilities: safeguarding researchers from exposure, preventing contamination or release, ensuring materials are used responsibly, and reflecting on the ethical implications of using human biological resources.
All work with human cell lines was carried out under Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) conditions, in compliance with institutional and international guidelines [2].
This included:
HEK293 (Human Embryonic Kidney 293) cells are a widely used immortalized human cell line that provides a reliable mammalian model system for molecular biology and gene expression studies [3]. In our project, HEK293 cells are transduced with a lentiviral vector carrying a GFP reporter gene, enabling fluorescent readouts of antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) activity [4], [5]. This makes them an ideal platform for proof-of-concept experiments in RNA-targeted gene regulation.
We used A549 (human lung adenocarcinoma, epithelial, ATCC CCL-185)[6] as an in-vitro model of NSCLC to quantify the activity of our antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs). Their origin from human lung cancer tissue makes them directly relevant to our therapeutic strategy.
For fluorescence-based assays, we also used A549 cells engineered to express green fluorescent protein (GFP). The GFP transgene was introduced using a replication-incompetent lentiviral vector (Addgene #185473) [7]. These cells enable quantitative and visual readouts of ASO-mediated knockdown in a cancer-relevant model.
We use the A375 human epithelial melanoma cell line [8] to evaluate our antibody-epitope conjugate. A375 cells are EGFR-positive and HLA-A2 positive, making them suitable for evaluating our antibody-epitope conjugate. They are used to assess whether the conjugate is internalized, processed, and presented on MHC-I molecules, enabling activation of MART-1–specific T cells.
We use engineered primary human T cells expressing a MART-1–specific TCR, provided by our collaborators [9] at Bar-Ilan university and described in [10]. These cells allow us to evaluate whether our antibody–epitope conjugate can be internalized by A375 epithelial cancer cells, processed, and presented on MHC-I molecules to activate MART-1–specific T cells. Because no immortalized or commercially available cell line carries this specific TCR, the use of engineered primary T cells is essential for testing whether our conjugate enables antigen presentation and immune recognition in vitro.
While human cell lines themselves are not typically associated with dual-use concerns, biosecurity measures ensured that materials could not be misused:
Our use of human cell lines was guided by ethical considerations:
Antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) are short, synthetic single-stranded DNA molecules designed to bind complementary RNA sequences and promote their degradation or block their function [11]. In our project, ASOs serve as molecular tools to evaluate knockdown efficiency, specificity, and cell viability in human cell lines. We use:
Our ASO experiments are conceptually related to Registry parts BBa_K5401005 and BBa_K2429068, which also employ antisense strategies to modulate gene expression, although the target genes and cellular systems differ [14].
All ASOs are handled under Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) conditions in compliance with institutional and iGEM safety policies [2]. Specific measures include:
Because ASOs are non-replicating, non-infectious molecules, they pose no hazard of propagation or transmission. The main potential risk is off-target modulation of unintended genes, but this risk is confined to in vitro cell culture experiments and mitigated by using ASOs only in controlled, small-scale laboratory settings.
ASOs do not encode proteins or toxins and cannot be weaponized in their current form. They are synthesized at research-grade purity and used exclusively for laboratory testing of knockdown efficacy. There is no foreseeable dual-use risk or potential for misuse.
The use of antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) targeting human transcripts requires ethical consideration due to their potential biological effects. In our project, all ASOs are strictly employed as in vitro research tools, never in living organisms or clinical settings. Their purpose is to validate our system and assess knockdown efficiency while minimizing unnecessary risks. We also align with iGEM’s policy that nucleic acid parts outside the White List, including non-coding RNA targets, require a Check-In, which we have acknowledged and completed.
We use a replication-deficient, VSV-G–pseudotyped lentiviral vector to deliver a GFP-expressing construct (VectorBuilder VB900088-2243bzq) into HEK293 cells [15]. This system allows stable genomic integration of the GFP transgene, enabling long-term expression for proof-of-concept experiments testing the effectiveness and specificity of our antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) [4] [16]. The lentiviral system is engineered to be replication-incompetent and lacks all packaging genes, meaning no additional viral particles are produced after transduction [17]. Using this approach provides consistent GFP expression, which is critical for reproducible assessment of ASO-mediated knockdown over time.
Although the lentivirus is replication-deficient, it carries potential risks standard for integrating viral vectors, including:
To mitigate these risks, all procedures are conducted under Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) conditions with strict adherence to institutional protocols [2]:
The lentiviral vector is replication-deficient, non-pathogenic, and restricted to in vitro use. It cannot be used to generate infectious viruses in the laboratory context, and all materials are secured and handled only by trained personnel. There is no foreseeable dual-use risk in the context of our experiments.
The lentiviral system is used solely to create a stable GFP-expressing HEK293 and A549 cell lines for in vitro proof-of-concept testing of ASO therapeutics. No human or animal subjects are directly exposed, and the system is applied only in contained BSL-2 laboratories. This approach maximizes scientific benefit while minimizing ethical and biosafety concerns.
We incorporate a short peptide epitope derived from MART‑1 (Melan‑A, amino acids 26–35, ELAGIGILTV) into our engineered antibody chain (discussed below). MART‑1 is a melanocyte differentiation protein expressed in normal melanocytes and melanoma cells. Its peptide epitopes can be presented on MHC-I and recognized by T cells. In our experiments, the MART‑1 epitope is delivered to A375 human melanoma cells (ATCC CRL-1619) [8], which are then co-cultured with human T cells engineered to express a MART‑1-specific TCR [10]. T cell proliferation and activation serve as readouts for successful epitope presentation, providing a controlled system to study antigen delivery and immune response.
The MART-1 sequence is a short, non-infectious peptide motif embedded in a recombinant antibody. It cannot replicate, encode functional proteins beyond its antigenic role, or cause disease. All experiments are performed under Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) conditions using standard cell culture practices [2]:
The MART-1 epitope is a non-replicating, non-pathogenic antigen fragment used solely as part of an engineered antibody in vitro. There are no dual-use concerns.
The MART‑1 epitope allows the use of immortalized human cell lines (A375 and engineered T cells) [8], [10] rather than pathogenic organisms or primary patient samples, minimizing ethical concerns. It is widely used in immunology research and represents a minimal-risk model system to test antigen delivery and T cell activation, fully consistent with iGEM safety guidelines [1]. Alternative epitopes would not further reduce risk, as MART‑1 already provides a standardized, safe, and well-characterized option.
We express Cetuximab (anti-EGFR) [19] in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells [20] to explore antibody-based delivery strategies for our ASO therapeutic platform. The antibody sequence is codon-optimized for CHO cells to improve expression efficiency, and we evaluate expression levels experimentally. This setup allows us to study ASO conjugation strategies, demonstrate effects of codon optimization, and establish a modular in vitro platform for targeted antisense delivery. Computational tools such as ESO [21] and MNDL Bio [22] are used to predict and optimize antibody expression in CHO cells.
To enable targeted delivery of antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs), we plan to conjugate the expressed antibody to ASOs using an N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS) ester coupling strategy [23], which covalently links the ASO to lysine residues on the antibody. This approach provides a stable, reproducible means of generating antibody–ASO conjugates, allowing us to test targeted knockdown efficiency and delivery in vitro.
Cetuximab is a well-characterized, clinically approved therapeutic antibody [24]. It is not derived from a pathogen or toxin and has no natural function in the host organism beyond its designed anti-EGFR activity. Expression in CHO cells is performed solely for research purposes, including expression testing, codon optimization, and ASO conjugation studies.
Cetuximab expression in CHO cells poses no known biosafety hazards beyond standard mammalian cell culture procedures [2]. CHO cells are non-pathogenic and commonly used in research and biomanufacturing. Safety measures include:
No part of the antibody sequence encodes toxins, virulence factors, or other hazardous elements.
The antibody sequence is synthetic and non-replicating, and CHO cells are non-pathogenic. Materials are restricted to trained personnel in a controlled laboratory environment. There are no dual-use concerns associated with this work.
This work uses immortalized CHO cells and synthetic antibody sequences, avoiding any pathogenic organisms or patient-derived materials. Expression of Cetuximab and its conjugation to ASOs provides a safe, reproducible platform to test targeted antisense delivery, fully consistent with iGEM safety and ethical guidelines.
We engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae W303 to express GFP as a model organism to test the effectiveness and specificity of our antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs). This serves as a proof-of-concept system for RNA-targeted gene regulation, providing a simple, controllable eukaryotic context before moving to mammalian cell lines.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae is classified as SBiosafety Level 1 (BSL-1)S and is generally regarded as safe. The main risks involve accidental exposure to laboratory personnel or unintended environmental release. These risks are minimal because S. cerevisiae is non-pathogenic and poses negligible threat to healthy individuals and the environment [2], [26].
All work is conducted under BSL-1 conditions, including:
The GFP-expressing yeast strain is non-pathogenic, non-replicating outside the lab environment, and poses no dual-use concerns [26]. All materials are stored securely and used only by trained personnel.
Using S. cerevisiae allows safe in vitro experimentation without involving human or animal subjects. This choice balances low-risk handling with sufficient biological complexity to test antisense oligonucleotide activity, consistent with iGEM safety and ethical guidelines.
Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells [20] are widely used mammalian cell lines in biotechnology, particularly for recombinant protein and antibody production. In our project, CHO cells are employed as a safe and reliable expression system to produce cetuximab antibodies from plasmid DNA.
CHO cells are non-human, non-pathogenic, and considered low-risk (White List, BSL-1/2 practices) [2]. All work is conducted following standard laboratory safety protocols, including use of personal protective equipment (PPE), sterile techniques in Class II biosafety cabinets, and proper decontamination of waste and surfaces. Their well-characterized nature and long history of safe use make them ideal for controlled antibody expression experiments.
We use Escherichia coli primarily as a cloning and plasmid amplification host in our project, performing standard molecular biology procedures such as plasmid preparation and vector construction [27]. Only well-characterized laboratory strains (e.g., DH5α) are used, which are non-pathogenic, incapable of surviving outside controlled laboratory conditions, and considered low-risk (White List, BSL-1 practices) [2]. All work is carried out using standard microbiological safety measures, including sterile techniques, appropriate personal protective equipment (lab coats, gloves, eye protection), and proper decontamination of liquid and solid waste by autoclaving. No pathogenic or clinical strains are employed, and the procedures are consistent with routine laboratory handling of E. coli, ensuring safe and responsible use.
In this laboratory, we perform experiments with Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast) and Escherichia coli. These organisms are used for cloning, plasmid preparation, and other molecular biology processes that support our main project. The workspace is organized into specific areas (e.g., PCR station, gel electrophoresis station, transformation area, and measurement bench), which ensures that all steps are carried out under reproducible and reliable conditions.
Biosafety note: Although both E. coli and S. cerevisiae are classified as BSL-1 organisms and are safe to handle, they are considered contaminants in mammalian cell culture. For this reason, all experiments with yeast and E. coli are strictly confined to this lab, with designated equipment and waste streams.
Our tissue culture laboratory is exclusively dedicated to mammalian cell work under sterile conditions. Here we maintain human cell lines, perform transfections, and assess gene regulation using our antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs). This environment requires strict aseptic protocols to ensure the reproducibility of experiments and the safety of both personnel and cell cultures.
Separation principle: To prevent cross-contamination, we never bring materials, organisms, or consumables from the yeast/E. coli lab into the tissue culture space. Even small traces of “outsider” microorganisms would pose a major risk to mammalian cultures, which are highly sensitive to contamination. Therefore, each lab is used only for its intended purpose, and all equipment, reagents, and waste handling procedures remain completely separate.
[1] “Safety Policies | iGEM Responsibility.” Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://responsibility.igem.org/safety-policies
[2] CDC, “Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL) 6th Edition,” CDC Laboratories. Accessed: Sept. 13, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.cdc.gov/labs/bmbl/index.html
[3] “293 [HEK-293] - CRL-1573 | ATCC,” https://www.atcc.org. Accessed: Sept. 13, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.atcc.org/products/crl-1573
[4] L. Naldini et al., “In Vivo Gene Delivery and Stable Transduction of Nondividing Cells by a Lentiviral Vector,” Science, vol. 272, no. 5259, pp. 263–267, 1996.
[5] M. Chalfie, Y. Tu, G. Euskirchen, W. W. Ward, and D. C. Prasher, “Green fluorescent protein as a marker for gene expression,” Science, vol. 263, no. 5148, pp. 802–805, Feb. 1994, doi: 10.1126/science.8303295.
[6] “A549 - CCL-185 | ATCC,” https://www.atcc.org. Accessed: Sept. 13, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.atcc.org/products/ccl-185
[7] S. M. Noordermeer et al., “The shieldin complex mediates 53BP1-dependent DNA repair,” Nature, vol. 560, no. 7716, pp. 117–121, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0340-7.
[8] “A-375 [A375] - CRL-1619 | ATCC,” https://www.atcc.org. Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.atcc.org/products/crl-1619
[9] “Cohen Cyrille | The Mina and Everard Goodman Faculty of Life Sciences.” Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://life-sciences.biu.ac.il/en/node/639
[10] T. Matikhina and C. J. Cohen, “Targeting TGFβ with chimeric switch receptor and secreted trap to improve T cells anti-tumor activity,” Front. Immunol., vol. 15, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1460266.
[11] S. T. Crooke, “Molecular Mechanisms of Antisense Oligonucleotides,” Nucleic Acid Ther., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 70–77, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.1089/nat.2016.0656.
[12] R. Maruyama and T. Yokota, “Knocking Down Long Noncoding RNAs Using Antisense Oligonucleotide Gapmers,” in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), vol. 2176, 2020, pp. 49–56. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-0771-8_3.
[13] K. A. Lennox and M. A. Behlke, “Cellular localization of long non-coding RNAs affects silencing by RNAi more than by antisense oligonucleotides,” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 863–877, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv1206.
[14] K. Nejati, M. Alivand, and A. Arabzadeh, “MicroRNA-22 in female malignancies: Focusing on breast, cervical, and ovarian cancers,” Pathol. - Res. Pract., vol. 223, p. 153452, July 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.prp.2021.153452.
[15] “Lentivirus vector for EGFP Expression| VectorBuilder (VB900088-2243bzq).” Accessed: Sept. 13, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://en.vectorbuilder.com/vector/VB900088-2243bzq.html
[16] M. Chalfie, Y. Tu, G. Euskirchen, W. W. Ward, and D. C. Prasher, “Green fluorescent protein as a marker for gene expression,” Science, vol. 263, no. 5148, pp. 802–805, Feb. 1994, doi: 10.1126/science.8303295.
[17] T. Dull et al., “A third-generation lentivirus vector with a conditional packaging system,” J. Virol., vol. 72, no. 11, pp. 8463–8471, Nov. 1998, doi: 10.1128/JVI.72.11.8463-8471.1998.
[18] S. Hacein-Bey-Abina et al., “A serious adverse event after successful gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency,” N. Engl. J. Med., vol. 348, no. 3, pp. 255–256, Jan. 2003, doi: 10.1056/NEJM200301163480314.
[19] “Part:BBa K1694004 - parts.igem.org.” Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://parts.igem.org/Part:BBa_K1694004
[20] “CHO-K1 - CCL-61 | ATCC,” https://www.atcc.org. Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.atcc.org/products/ccl-61
[21] I. Menuhin-Gruman et al., “Evolutionary Stability Optimizer (ESO): A Novel Approach to Identify and Avoid Mutational Hotspots in DNA Sequences While Maintaining High Expression Levels,” ACS Synth. Biol., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1142–1151, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00426.
[22] “MNDL Bio | Optimization of Gene Expression,” MNDL Bio. Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.mndl.bio
[23] “Bioconjugation and crosslinking technical handbook”.
[24] A. Torres-García et al., “Comprehensive Analysis of Cetuximab Critical Quality Attributes: Impact of Handling on Antigen-Antibody Binding,” Pharmaceutics, vol. 16, no. 9, p. 1222, Sept. 2024, doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16091222.
[25] “EG-SDB.” Accessed: Sept. 20, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.dynamic-biosensors.com/wpcms/wp-content/products/material-safety-data-sheets/Crosslinker%20%28Sulfo-NHS%20Ester%29_USA-en_2%2C1.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
[26] “Saccharomyces cerevisiae Meyen ex E.C. Hansen - 201388 | ATCC,” https://www.atcc.org. Accessed: Sept. 13, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.atcc.org/products/201388
[27] M. Kostylev, A. E. Otwell, R. E. Richardson, and Y. Suzuki, “Cloning Should Be Simple: Escherichia coli DH5α-Mediated Assembly of Multiple DNA Fragments with Short End Homologies,” PLOS ONE, vol. 10, no. 9, p. e0137466, Sept. 2015, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137466.
[28] G. Selvaggi et al., “Epidermal growth factor receptor overexpression correlates with a poor prognosis in completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer,” Ann. Oncol., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 28–32, Jan. 2004, doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdh011.
[29] N. Normanno et al., “Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling in cancer,” Gene, vol. 366, no. 1, pp. 2–16, Jan. 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2005.10.018.
[30] Q. Meng et al., “Antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates in cancer therapy: Potential and Promise,” Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol., vol. 215, p. 104858, July 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2025.104858.
[31] “delivery of therapeutic oligonucleotides | Nucleic Acids Research | Oxford Academic.” Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/44/14/6518/2468139
[32] J. Scharner et al., “Hybridization-mediated off-target effects of splice-switching antisense oligonucleotides,” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 802–816, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz1132.
[33] C. Terada et al., “Dynamic and static control of the off-target interactions of antisense oligonucleotides using toehold chemistry,” Nat. Commun., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 7972, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-43714-0.
[34] R. Chauhan, R. R. Damerla, and V. S. Dhyani, “Synthetic lethality in cancer: a protocol for scoping review of gene interactions from synthetic lethal screens and functional studies,” Syst. Rev., vol. 14, p. 81, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1186/s13643-025-02814-2.
[35] C. J. Lord and A. Ashworth, “PARP inhibitors: Synthetic lethality in the clinic,” Science, vol. 355, no. 6330, pp. 1152–1158, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1126/science.aam7344.
[36] C. S. Russell, S. Ben-Yehuda, I. Dix, M. Kupiec, and J. D. Beggs, “Functional analyses of interacting factors involved in both pre-mRNA splicing and cell cycle progression in Saccharomyces cerevisiae,” RNA N. Y. N, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 1565–1572, Nov. 2000, doi: 10.1017/s1355838200000984.
[37] P. A. Roche and P. Cresswell, “Antigen Processing and Presentation Mechanisms in Myeloid Cells,” Microbiol. Spectr., vol. 4, no. 3, June 2016, doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.MCHD-0008-2015.
[38] C. Kurts, B. W. S. Robinson, and P. A. Knolle, “Cross-priming in health and disease,” Nat. Rev. Immunol., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 403–414, June 2010, doi: 10.1038/nri2780.
[39] C. F. Bennett, “Therapeutic Antisense Oligonucleotides Are Coming of Age,” Annu. Rev. Med., vol. 70, pp. 307–321, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-041217-010829.
[40] E. E. Neil and E. K. Bisaccia, “Nusinersen: A Novel Antisense Oligonucleotide for the Treatment of Spinal Muscular Atrophy,” J. Pediatr. Pharmacol. Ther. JPPT Off. J. PPAG, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 194–203, 2019, doi: 10.5863/1551-6776-24.3.194.
[41] “Results,” in Clinical Review Report: Inotersen (Tegsedi): (Akcea Therapeutics, Inc.): Indication: Stage I or II polyneuropathy in adults with hereditary transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis (hATTR) [Internet], Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2020. Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK558490/
[42] “Homepage | Avidity Biosciences.” Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.aviditybiosciences.com/
[43] “Dyne Therapeutics - A biotechnology company developing nucleic acid therapies for rare diseases.,” Dyne Therapeutics. Accessed: Sept. 14, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.dyne-tx.com/