Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21914224›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011

Methodology and software to detect viral integration site hot-spots.

Angela P Presson, Namshin Kim, Yan Xiaofei, Irvin Sy Chen, Sanggu Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Recombinant AAV Integration Is Not Associated With Hepatic Genotoxicity in Nonhuman Primates and Patients.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2016
    Article
  3. A Graph Based Framework to Model Virus Integration Sites.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2016
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Retroviral integrations in gene therapy trials.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2012
    Review
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

5 authors.

Angela P PressonDepartment of Biostatistics, University of California Los Angeles, School of Public Health, USA. apresson@ucla.edu
Namshin Kim
Yan Xiaofei
Irvin Sy Chen
Sanggu Kim

Funding

MOLECULAR MECHANISMS OF HIV1 DNA INTEGRATIONR01CA068859 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI CHOW, SAMSON A · 1995 to 2008
$2.5M
Intramural NIH HHSNCI NIH HHS CA68859NIAID NIH HHS AI055281-06A2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundModern gene therapy methods have limited control over where a therapeutic viral vector inserts into the host genome. Vector integration can activate local gene expression, which can cause cancer if the vector inserts near an oncogene. Viral integration hot-spots or 'common insertion sites' (CIS) are scrutinized to evaluate and predict patient safety. CIS are typically defined by a minimum density of insertions (such as 2-4 within a 30-100 kb region), which unfortunately depends on the total number of observed VIS. This is problematic for comparing hot-spot distributions across data sets and patients, where the VIS numbers may vary.

resultsWe develop two new methods for defining hot-spots that are relatively independent of data set size. Both methods operate on distributions of VIS across consecutive 1 Mb 'bins' of the genome. The first method 'z-threshold' tallies the number of VIS per bin, converts these counts to z-scores, and applies a threshold to define high density bins. The second method 'BCP' applies a Bayesian change-point model to the z-scores to define hot-spots. The novel hot-spot methods are compared with a conventional CIS method using simulated data sets and data sets from five published human studies, including the X-linked ALD (adrenoleukodystrophy), CGD (chronic granulomatous disease) and SCID-X1 (X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency) trials. The BCP analysis of the human X-linked ALD data for two patients separately (774 and 1627 VIS) and combined (2401 VIS) resulted in 5-6 hot-spots covering 0.17-0.251% of the genome and containing 5.56-7.74% of the total VIS. In comparison, the CIS analysis resulted in 12-110 hot-spots covering 0.018-0.246% of the genome and containing 5.81-22.7% of the VIS, corresponding to a greater number of hot-spots as the data set size increased. Our hot-spot methods enable one to evaluate the extent of VIS clustering, and formally compare data sets in terms of hot-spot overlap. Finally, we show that the BCP hot-spots from the repopulating samples coincide with greater gene and CpG island density than the median genome density.

conclusionsThe z-threshold and BCP methods are useful for comparing hot-spot patterns across data sets of disparate sizes. The methodology and software provided here should enable one to study hot-spot conservation across a variety of VIS data sets and evaluate vector safety for gene therapy trials.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremGenetic VectorsGenome, HumanPatient SafetySoftwareAdrenoleukodystrophyAgedClinical Trials as TopicCluster AnalysisFemaleGenetic TherapyGranulomatous Disease, ChronicHumansLentivirusMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID21914224
PMCPMC3203353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.