ReviewHuman gene therapy2011
Contributions of gene marking to cell and gene therapies.
Review in Human gene therapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic engineering of human and mouse CD4Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2021Article
- Protein-Polyelectrolyte Complexes and Micellar Assemblies.Polymers · 2019Review
- Multiplexing clonality: combining RGB marking and genetic barcoding.Nucleic acids research · 2014Article
- Evaluating a ligation-mediated PCR and pyrosequencing method for the detection of clonal contribution in polyclonal retrovirally transduced samples.Human gene therapy methods · 2013Article
- Article
- Optimized processing of growth factor mobilized peripheral blood CD34+ products by counterflow centrifugal elutriation.Stem cells translational medicine · 2012Article
- RGB marking with lentiviral vectors for multicolor clonal cell tracking.Nature protocols · 2012Article
- Review
- Tracking single hematopoietic stem cells in vivo using high-throughput sequencing in conjunction with viral genetic barcoding.Nature biotechnology · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The first human genetic modification studies used replication-incompetent integrating vector vectors to introduce marker genes into T lymphocytes and subsequently into hematopoietic stem cells. Such studies have provided numerous insights into the biology of hematopoiesis and immune reconstitution and contributed to clinical development of gene and cell therapies. Tracking of hematopoietic reconstitution and analysis of the origin of residual malignant disease after hematopoietic transplantation has been possible via gene marking. Introduction of selectable marker genes has enabled preselection of specific T-cell populations for tumor and viral immunotherapy and reduced the threat of graft-versus-host disease, improving the survival of patients after allogeneic marrow transplantation. Marking studies in humans, murine xenografts, and large animals have helped optimize conditions for gene transfer into CD34(+) hematopoietic progenitors, contributing to the achievement of gene transfer efficiencies sufficient for clinical benefit in several serious genetic diseases such as X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency and adrenoleukodystrophy. When adverse events linked to insertional mutagenesis arose in clinical gene therapy trials for inherited immunodeficiencies, additional animal studies using gene-marking vectors have greatly increased our understanding of genotoxicity. The knowledge gained from these studies is being translated into new vector designs and clinical protocols, which we hope will continue to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and safety of these promising therapeutic approaches.
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.