ReviewMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids2017
The Therapeutic Potential of CRISPR/Cas9 Systems in Oncogene-Addicted Cancer Types: Virally Driven Cancers as a Model System.
Review in Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Let's make it personal: CRISPR tools in manipulating cell death pathways for cancer treatment.Cell biology and toxicology · 2024Review
- Research Progress on Gene Editing Based on Nano-Drug Delivery Vectors for Tumor Therapy.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- New insights on CRISPR/Cas9-based therapy for breast Cancer.Genes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society · 2021Review
- CRISPR-Cas: a tool for cancer research and therapeutics.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2019Review
- Gene surgery: Potential applications for human diseases.EXCLI journal · 2019Review
- TGFBI Promotes Tumor Growth and is Associated with Poor Prognosis in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Journal of Cancer · 2019Article
- Disruption by SaCas9 Endonuclease of HERV-KViruses · 2018Article
- Review
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
The field of gene editing is undergoing unprecedented growth. The first ex vivo human clinical trial in China started in 2016, more than 1000 US patents have been filed, and there is exponential growth in publications. The ability to edit genes with high fidelity is promising for the development of new treatments for a range of diseases, particularly inherited conditions, infectious diseases, and cancers. For cancer, a major issue is the identification of driver mutations and oncogenes to target for therapeutic effect, and this requires the development of robust models with which to prove their efficacy. The challenge is that there is rarely a single critical gene. However, virally driven cancers, in which cells are addicted to the expression of a single viral oncogene in some cases, may serve as model systems for CRISPR/Cas therapies, as they did for RNAi. These models and systems offer an excellent opportunity to test both preclinical models and clinical conditions to examine the effectiveness of gene editing, and here we review the options and offer a way forward.
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.