ReviewThe AAPS journal2021
Therapeutic Genome Editing and In Vivo Delivery.
Review in The AAPS journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanomedicine beyond carriers - devices, cells & living therapeutics.Biomedical microdevices · 2026Review
- Insights into next-generation immunotherapy designs and tools: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic prospects.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2025Review
- An Update on the Application of CRISPR Technology in Clinical Practice.Molecular biotechnology · 2024Review
- Liver lobe-specific hydrodynamic gene delivery to baboons: A preclinical trial for hemophilia gene therapy.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2023Article
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
Improvements in the understanding of human genetics and its roles in disease development and prevention have led to an increased interest in therapeutic genome editing via the use of engineered nucleases. Various approaches have been explored in the past focusing on the development of an effective and safe system for sequence-specific editing. Compared to earlier nucleases such as zinc finger nuclease and transcription activator-like effector nuclease, the relatively low cost and ease of producing clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) systems have made therapeutic genome editing significantly more feasible. CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing has shown great potential to correct genetic mutations implicated in monogenic diseases and to eradicate latent or chronic viral infections in preclinical studies. Several CRISPR/Cas9-based therapeutics have reached the clinical stage, including treatments for inherited red blood cell disorders and Leber Congenital Amaurosis 10, as well as CRISPR/Cas9-edited T cells designed to target and destroy cancer cells. Further advances in therapeutic genome editing will rely on a safe and more efficient method of in vivo CRISPR/Cas9 delivery and improved efficiency of homology-directed repair for site-specific gene insertion or replacement. While other reviews have focused on one or two aspects of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing, this review aims to provide a summary of the mechanisms of genome editing, the reasons for the emerging interest in CRISPR/Cas9 compared to other engineered nucleases, the current progress in developing CRISPR/Cas9 delivery systems, and the current preclinical and clinical applications of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.
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.