ReviewArtificial DNA, PNA & XNA2014
Chemical modifications of artificial restriction DNA cutter (ARCUT) to promote its in vivo and in vitro applications.
Review in Artificial DNA, PNA & XNA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging tools in plant genome editing.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Advancement in CRISPR/Cas9 Technology to Better Understand and Treat Neurological Disorders.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2023Review
- Current technological interventions and applications of CRISPR/Cas for crop improvement.Molecular biology reports · 2022Review
- Genome editing technologies: CRISPR, LEAPER, RESTORE, ARCUT, SATI, and RESCUE.EXCLI journal · 2021Review
- Genome-Editing Technologies: Concept, Pros, and Cons of Various Genome-Editing Techniques and Bioethical Concerns for Clinical Application.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, completely chemistry-based tools for site-selective scission of DNA (ARCUT) have been prepared by combining 2 strands of pseudo-complementary PNA (pcPNA: site-selective activator) and a Ce(IV)-EDTA complex (molecular scissors). Its site-specificity is sufficient to cut the whole human genome at one predetermined site. In this first-generation ARCUT, however, there still remain several problems to be solved for wider applications. This review presents recent approaches to solve these problems. They are divided into (i) covalent modification of pcPNA with other functional groups and (ii) new strategies using conventional PNA, in place of pcPNA, as site-selective activator. Among various chemical modifications, conjugation with positively-charged nuclear localization signal peptide is especially effective. Furthermore, unimolecular activators, a single strand of which successfully activates the target site in DNA for site-selective scission, have been also developed. As the result of these modifications, the site-selective scission by Ce(IV)-EDTA was achieved promptly even under high salt conditions which are otherwise unfavourable for double-duplex invasion. Furthermore, it has been shown that "molecular crowding effect," which characterizes the inside of living cells, enormously promotes the invasion, and thus the invasion seems to proceed effectively and spontaneously in the cells. Strong potential of pcPNA for further applications in vivo and in vitro has been confirmed.
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.