Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28160121›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuroimmune pharmacology : the official journal of the Society on NeuroImmune Pharmacology2017

Destination Brain: the Past, Present, and Future of Therapeutic Gene Delivery.

Chaitanya R Joshi, Vinod Labhasetwar, Anuja Ghorpade

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuroimmune pharmacology : the official journal of the Society on NeuroImmune Pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Nanoparticle-based Gene Therapy for Neurodegenerative Disorders.Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Non-viral Gene Delivery Methods for Bone and Joints.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Genome engineering for CNS injury and disease.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2018
    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

3 authors.

Chaitanya R JoshiInstitute for Molecular Medicine, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Boulevard, Fort Worth, TX, 76107, USA.
Vinod LabhasetwarDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
Anuja GhorpadeInstitute for Molecular Medicine, University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Boulevard, Fort Worth, TX, 76107, USA. Anuja.Ghorpade@unthsc.edu.

Funding

Neuronal Survival, HIV-1 and Astrocyte-TIMP-1R01NS048837 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR · PI BORGMANN, KATHLEEN · 2005 to 2018
$5.2M
Stroke TherapyR01NS070896 · NINDS · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI LABHASETWAR, VINOD D · 2010 to 2014
$2.3M
Neuronal Protective Nanoparticles for Treating Acute SCIR01NS092033 · NINDS · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI LABHASETWAR, VINOD D · 2015 to 2019
$2.2M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS048837NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS070896NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS092033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurological diseases and disorders (NDDs) present a significant societal burden and currently available drug- and biological-based therapeutic strategies have proven inadequate to alleviate it. Gene therapy is a suitable alternative to treat NDDs compared to conventional systems since it can be tailored to specifically alter select gene expression, reverse disease phenotype and restore normal function. The scope of gene therapy has broadened over the years with the advent of RNA interference and genome editing technologies. Consequently, encouraging results from central nervous system (CNS)-targeted gene delivery studies have led to their transition from preclinical to clinical trials. As we shift to an exciting gene therapy era, a retrospective of available literature on CNS-associated gene delivery is in order. This review is timely in this regard, since it analyzes key challenges and major findings from the last two decades and evaluates future prospects of brain gene delivery. We emphasize major areas consisting of physiological and pharmacological challenges in gene therapy, function-based selection of a ideal cellular target(s), available therapy modalities, and diversity of viral vectors and nanoparticles as vehicle systems. Further, we present plausible answers to key questions such as strategies to circumvent low blood-brain barrier permeability and most suitable CNS cell types for targeting. We compare and contrast pros and cons of the tested viral vectors in the context of delivery systems used in past and current clinical trials. Gene vector design challenges are also evaluated in the context of cell-specific promoters. Key challenges and findings reported for recent gene therapy clinical trials, assessing viral vectors and nanoparticles are discussed from the perspective of bench to bedside gene therapy translation. We conclude this review by tying together gene delivery challenges, available vehicle systems and comprehensive analyses of neuropathogenesis to outline future prospects of CNS-targeted gene therapies.

Indexed as

BrainGene Transfer TechniquesAnimalsBlood-Brain BarrierForecastingGenetic TherapyHumansNeurodegenerative DiseasesAdeno-associated viral vectorsAdenoviral vectorsCNS-gene deliveryCNS-specific promotersLentiviral vectorsPolymeric nanoparticles

Identifiers

PMID28160121
PMCPMC5393046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.