Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33003635›Full record

ReviewViruses2020

Gene Therapy Applications of Non-Human Lentiviral Vectors.

Altar M Munis

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Viruses, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Viral Vector-Based Gene Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Therapeutic potentials of CRISPR-Cas genome editing technology in human viral infections.Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie · 2022
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Altar M MunisNuffield Division of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent commercialization of lentiviral vector (LV)-based cell therapies and successful reports of clinical studies have demonstrated the untapped potential of LVs to treat diseases and benefit patients. LVs hold notable and inherent advantages over other gene transfer agents based on their ability to transduce non-dividing cells, permanently transform target cell genome, and allow stable, long-term transgene expression. LV systems based on non-human lentiviruses are attractive alternatives to conventional HIV-1-based LVs due to their lack of pathogenicity in humans. This article reviews non-human lentiviruses and highlights their unique characteristics regarding virology and molecular biology. The LV systems developed based on these lentiviruses, as well as their successes and shortcomings, are also discussed. As the field of gene therapy is advancing rapidly, the use of LVs uncovers further challenges and possibilities. Advances in virology and an improved understanding of lentiviral biology will aid in the creation of recombinant viral vector variants suitable for translational applications from a variety of lentiviruses.

Indexed as

Genetic VectorsLentivirusAnimalsGenetic TherapyGene Transfer TechniquesHIV-1HumansLentiviruses, FelineRetroviridaeTransgenesEIAVFIVgene therapyHIV-1lentiviral vectorlentivirusnon-primate lentivirusSIV

Identifiers

PMID33003635
PMCPMC7599719
OpenAlexW3090195579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.