ReviewGenome biology2007
Predicting preferential DNA vector insertion sites: implications for functional genomics and gene therapy.
Review in Genome biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene therapy using genome-edited iPS cells for targeting malignant glioma.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Structural insights into the mechanism of double strand break formation by Hermes, a hAT family eukaryotic DNA transposase.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Single Copy Transgene Integration in a Transcriptionally Active Site for Recombinant Protein Synthesis.Biotechnology journal · 2018Article
- Transposons As Tools for Functional Genomics in Vertebrate Models.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2017Review
- CAR-T cell therapy in ovarian cancer: from the bench to the bedside.Oncotarget · 2017Review
- A Novel Ideal Radionuclide Imaging System for Non-invasively Cell Monitoring built on Baculovirus Backbone by Introducing Sleeping Beauty Transposon.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Chromatin states shape insertion profiles of the piggyBac, Tol2 and Sleeping Beauty transposons and murine leukemia virus.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Assessing Tn5 and Sleeping Beauty for transpositional transgenesis by cytoplasmic injection into bovine and ovine zygotes.PloS one · 2017Article
- Hsp90 and Physiological Stress Are Linked to Autonomous Transposon Mobility and Heritable Genetic Change in Nematodes.Genome biology and evolution · 2016Article
- DNA Transposition at Work.Chemical reviews · 2016Review
- Engineering cell-based therapies to interface robustly with host physiology.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2016Review
- miR-625-3p regulates oxaliplatin resistance by targeting MAP2K6-p38 signalling in human colorectal adenocarcinoma cells.Nature communications · 2016Article
- Sleeping Beauty Transposon Vectors in Liver-directed Gene Delivery of LDLR and VLDLR for Gene Therapy of Familial Hypercholesterolemia.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2016Article
- Gene doping in sport - perspectives and risks.Biology of sport · 2014Article
- Genomic landscape of human, bat, and ex vivo DNA transposon integrations.Molecular biology and evolution · 2014Article
- Transpositional transgenesis withMobile genetic elements · 2013Article
- Evaluating risks of insertional mutagenesis by DNA transposons in gene therapy.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2013Review
- The Sleeping Beauty transposon system: a non-viral vector for gene therapy.Human molecular genetics · 2011Review
- Germline transgenic pigs by Sleeping Beauty transposition in porcine zygotes and targeted integration in the pig genome.PloS one · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Viral and transposon vectors have been employed in gene therapy as well as functional genomics studies. However, the goals of gene therapy and functional genomics are entirely different; gene therapists hope to avoid altering endogenous gene expression (especially the activation of oncogenes), whereas geneticists do want to alter expression of chromosomal genes. The odds of either outcome depend on a vector's preference to integrate into genes or control regions, and these preferences vary between vectors. Here we discuss the relative strengths of DNA vectors over viral vectors, and review methods to overcome barriers to delivery inherent to DNA vectors. We also review the tendencies of several classes of retroviral and transposon vectors to target DNA sequences, genes, and genetic elements with respect to the balance between insertion preferences and oncogenic selection. Theoretically, knowing the variables that affect integration for various vectors will allow researchers to choose the vector with the most utility for their specific purposes. The three principle benefits from elucidating factors that affect preferences in integration are as follows: in gene therapy, it allows assessment of the overall risks for activating an oncogene or inactivating a tumor suppressor gene that could lead to severe adverse effects years after treatment; in genomic studies, it allows one to discern random from selected integration events; and in gene therapy as well as functional genomics, it facilitates design of vectors that are better targeted to specific sequences, which would be a significant advance in the art of transgenesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.