Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12621449›Full record

ReviewGene therapy2003

Progress and prospects: naked DNA gene transfer and therapy.

H Herweijer, J A Wolff

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gene therapy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

112 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. DNA Materials Assembled from One DNA Strand.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Therapeutic promise of engineered nonsense suppressor tRNAs.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. RNA · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. The "Perfect Cytokine Storm" of COVID-19.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2020
    Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

H HerweijerMirus Corporation and University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53705, USA.
J A Wolff

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increases in efficiency have made naked DNA gene transfer a viable method for gene therapy. Intravascular delivery results in effective gene delivery to liver and muscle, and provides in vivo transfection methods for basic and applied gene therapy and antisense strategies with oligonucleotides and small interfering RNA (siRNA). Delivery via the tail vein in rodents provides an especially simple and effective means for in vivo gene transfer. Electroporation methods significantly enhance direct injection of naked DNA for genetic immunization. The availability of plasmid DNA expression vectors that enable sustained high level expression, allows for the development of gene therapies based on the delivery of naked plasmid DNA.

Indexed as

AnimalsDNADogsElectroporationGenetic TherapyHaplorhiniHepatocytesHumansInjections, IntramuscularInjections, IntravenousMiceModels, AnimalPeripheral Vascular DiseasesPlasmidsRatsRNA, Small InterferingDNARNA, Small Interfering

Identifiers

PMID12621449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.