Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28121307›Full record

ReviewGene therapy2017

Genetic pharmacology: progresses in siRNA delivery and therapeutic applications.

D Scherman, A Rousseau, P Bigey, V Escriou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gene therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Innovative approaches for treatment of osteosarcoma.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Cationic Nanostructures for Vaccines Design.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. The valency of fatty acid conjugates impacts siRNA pharmacokinetics, distribution, and efficacy in vivo.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. In vitro and in vivo delivery of siRNA via VIPER polymer system to lung cells.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2018
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
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

4 authors.

D SchermanCNRS, UTCBS UMR 8258, Paris, France.
A RousseauCNRS, UTCBS UMR 8258, Paris, France.
P BigeyCNRS, UTCBS UMR 8258, Paris, France.
V EscriouCNRS, UTCBS UMR 8258, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the RNA interference process, the catalytic degradation of an endogenous mRNA results from the Watson-Crick complementary recognition by either a small silencing synthetic double-stranded ribonucleotide (siRNA) or by a small hairpin RNA (shRNA) produced in the cell by transcription from a DNA template. This interference process ideally results in an exquisitely specific mRNA suppression. The present review is dedicated to siRNAs. It describes the mechanism of RNA silencing and the main siRNA delivery techniques, with a focus on siRNA self-complexing to cationic lipids to form nanoparticles, which are called lipoplexes. The addition to lipoplexes of an anionic polymer leads to the ternary formulation APIRL (Anionic-Polymer-Interfering-RNA-Lipoplexes) with increased in vivo stability and biological efficacy. In terms of clinical development, the review focuses on therapeutic applications by intravenous delivery to the liver and inflammatory joints, and to localized siRNA delivery to the ocular sphere.

Indexed as

AnimalsClinical Trials as TopicHumansNanoparticlesRNAi TherapeuticsRNA, Small InterferingRNA, Small Interfering

Identifiers

PMID28121307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.