Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16467860›Full record

ArticleGene therapy2006

Sustained expression after nonviral ocular gene transfer using mammalian promoters.

S Kachi, N Esumi, D J Zack, P A Campochiaro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gene therapy, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Minicircle Delivery to the Neural Retina as a Gene Therapy Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Gene transfer of interleukin 10 to the murine cornea using electroporation.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2007
    Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S KachiDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
N Esumi
D J Zack
P A Campochiaro
Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

Wilmer Core Grant for Vision ResearchP30EY001765 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Jiang Qian · 1985 to 2026
$22.1M
Targeting survival factors for ocular neovascularizationR01EY012609 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CAMPOCHIARO, PETER A · 1999 to 2015
$5.3M
NEI NIH HHS EY05951NEI NIH HHS EY12609NEI NIH HHS P30EY1765
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The CMV promoter drives high transgene expression and is one of the most commonly used promoters for gene transfer. Tissue-specific mammalian promoters provide an alternative, and it would be useful to have a system to directly compare them to viral promoters free from potential confounding vector-related effects. In this study, we describe how electroporation after subretinal injection of plasmid DNA can be used to perform comparative quantitative analysis of promoter activities. Luciferase assay of eyecup homogenates was carried out after coinjection/electroporation of pGL2, a plasmid containing the promoter fragment of interest coupled to the firefly luciferase gene, and pRL-CMV, a plasmid containing the CMV promoter coupled to the Renilla luciferase gene for normalization. This technique was used to compare activity of different fragments of the 5'-upstream region of the vitelliform macular dystrophy 2 (VMD2) gene, which is selectively expressed in the retinal pigmented epithelial (RPE) cells, and results indicated positive regulatory elements between -104 and -154 bp and between -424 and -585 bp. Addition of a fragment from intron 1 reduced the activity of the -585/+38 bp fragment by 75%. Deletion analysis implicated a 342 bp region near the 5'-end of intron 1 in the repression. Results of transient transfections in two cell lines that constitutively express VMD2 were similar, and results in transgenic mice were consistent, providing validation for promoter analysis by in vivo electroporation. We then explored the time course of expression of the -585/+38 VMD2 promoter fragment and found that compared to cassettes driven by CMV or SV40 promoters, which showed peak luciferase activity on day 2 followed by a rapid decrease in activity, the VMD2 promoter fragment showed lower activity initially, but the activity was sustained for up to 56 days (longest time point measured). A promoter fragment from another RPE-specific gene, Rpe65, showed a similar pattern of sustained expression for at least 112 days. These data indicate that nonviral gene transfer can be used to quantitatively evaluate the activity of promoter fragments independent of influence from viral vectors. A potentially important finding using this new technique is the demonstration that relatively sustained passenger gene expression can be achieved with nonviral gene transfer using mammalian rather than viral promoters.

Indexed as

ElectroporationPromoter Regions, GeneticAnimalsBestrophinsChloride ChannelsCytomegalovirusEye DiseasesEye ProteinsGene ExpressionGenetic EngineeringGenetic TherapyHumansLuciferasesMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMice, TransgenicBEST1 protein, humanBestrophinsChloride ChannelsEye ProteinsLuciferases

Identifiers

PMID16467860
OpenAlexW2031069081

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.