ReviewCancer letters2016
Development and potential applications of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology in sarcoma.
Review in Cancer letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Effect of Gene Editing by CRISPR-Cas9 of miR-21 and the Indirect Target MMP9 in Metastatic Prostate Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Application of CRISPR/Cas9 Technology in Cancer Treatment: A Future Direction.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Current Applications and Future Perspectives of CRISPR-Cas9 for the Treatment of Lung Cancer.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2021Review
- CRISPR-Cas: Converting A Bacterial Defence Mechanism into A State-of-the-Art Genetic Manipulation Tool.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- CRISPR Technology for Breast Cancer: Diagnostics, Modeling, and Therapy.Advanced biosystems · 2018Article
- Sarcoma Spheroids and Organoids-Promising Tools in the Era of Personalized Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Gene Delivery Approaches for Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy: Strategies to Increase Efficiency and Specificity.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2017Review
- Selective disruption of an oncogenic mutant allele by CRISPR/Cas9 induces efficient tumor regression.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- p53 signaling modulation of cell cycle arrest and viral replication in porcine circovirus type 2 infection cells.Veterinary research · 2016Article
- Technological advances in precision medicine and drug development.Expert review of precision medicine and drug developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Sarcomas include some of the most aggressive tumors and typically respond poorly to chemotherapy. In recent years, specific gene fusion/mutations and gene over-expression/activation have been shown to drive sarcoma pathogenesis and development. These emerging genomic alterations may provide targets for novel therapeutic strategies and have the potential to transform sarcoma patient care. The RNA-guided nuclease CRISPR-Cas9 (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)-associated protein-9 nuclease) is a convenient and versatile platform for site-specific genome editing and epigenome targeted modulation. Given that sarcoma is believed to develop as a result of genetic alterations in mesenchymal progenitor/stem cells, CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technologies hold extensive application potentials in sarcoma models and therapies. We review the development and mechanisms of the CRISPR-Cas9 system in genome editing and introduce its application in sarcoma research and potential therapy in clinic. Additionally, we propose future directions and discuss the challenges faced with these applications, providing concise and enlightening information for readers interested in this area.
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.