ReviewBritish journal of haematology2021
CRISPR/Cas9 for the treatment of haematological diseases: a journey from bacteria to the bedside.
Review in British journal of haematology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical translation of CRISPR-Cas9 therapeutics in cancer and inherited genetic disorders.Frontiers in genome editing · 2026Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 Technology for Modifying Immune Checkpoint in CAR-T Cell Therapy for Hematopoietic Malignancies.Current gene therapy · 2026Review
- Advances in Cell and Gene Therapy for Rare Disease Treatment.International journal of stem cells · 2025Review
- CRISPR Genome Editing in Personalized Therapy for Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases: A Scoping Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Engineering Useful Microbial Species for Pharmaceutical Applications.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Therapeutic precision, potency and promise.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Expanding Horizons of CRISPR/Cas Technology: Clinical Advancements, Therapeutic Applications, and Challenges in Gene Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Exosomes for CRISPR-Cas9 Delivery: The Cutting Edge in Genome Editing.Molecular biotechnology · 2024Review
- CRISPR technology in human diseases.MedComm · 2024Review
- Multiplex CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in hematopoietic stem cells for fetal hemoglobin reinduction generates chromosomal translocations.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing therapies represent a significant advancement in next-generation, precision medicine for the management of haematological diseases, and CRISPR/Cas9 has to date been the most successful implementation platform. From discovery in bacteria and archaea over three decades ago, through intensive basic research and pre-clinical development phases involving the modification of therapeutically relevant cell types, CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing is now being investigated in ongoing clinic trials. Despite the widespread enthusiasm brought by this new technology, significant challenges remain before genome editing can be routinely recommended and implemented in the clinic. These include risks of genotoxicity resulting from off-target DNA cleavage or chromosomal rearrangement, and suboptimal efficacy of homology-directed repair editing strategies, which thus limit therapeutic options. Practical hurdles such as high costs and inaccessibility to patients outside specialised centres must also be addressed. Future improvements in this rapidly developing field should circumvent current limitations with novel editing platforms and with the simplification of clinical protocols using in vivo delivery of editing reagents.
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.