ReviewMolecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy2016
Salient Features of Endonuclease Platforms for Therapeutic Genome Editing.
Review in Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to eliminate native T cell receptors for adoptive T cell therapies.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2026Review
- AsCas12a ultra nuclease facilitates the rapid generation of therapeutic cell medicines.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Review
- Advances in genome editing for improved animal breeding: A review.Veterinary world · 2017Review
- Translational Advances in the Field of Pulmonary Hypertension Molecular Medicine of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. From Population Genetics to Precision Medicine and Gene Editing.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2017Article
- Genome Editing in Large Animals.Journal of equine veterinary science · 2016Article
- Sendai virus, an RNA virus with no risk of genomic integration, delivers CRISPR/Cas9 for efficient gene editing.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2016Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging gene-editing technologies are nearing a revolutionary phase in genetic medicine: precisely modifying or repairing causal genetic defects. This may include any number of DNA sequence manipulations, such as knocking out a deleterious gene, introducing a particular mutation, or directly repairing a defective sequence by site-specific recombination. All of these edits can currently be achieved via programmable rare-cutting endonucleases to create targeted DNA breaks that can engage and exploit endogenous DNA repair pathways to impart site-specific genetic changes. Over the past decade, several distinct technologies for introducing site-specific DNA breaks have been developed, yet the different biological origins of these gene-editing technologies bring along inherent differences in parameters that impact clinical implementation. This review aims to provide an accessible overview of the various endonuclease-based gene-editing platforms, highlighting the strengths and weakness of each with respect to therapeutic applications.
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.