ReviewMolecular therapy. Methods & clinical development2022
GENE TARGET: A framework for evaluating Mendelian neurodevelopmental disorders for gene therapy.
Review in Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Involvement of patient organisations in research activities: actions taken and lessons learned in a clinical research study for osteogenesis imperfecta.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Schinzel-Giedion syndrome: communication, feeding and motor skills in 16 individuals.Neurogenetics · 2025Article
- A research roadmap for SCN8A-related disorders: addressing knowledge gaps and aligning research priorities across stakeholders.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Prenatal gene editing for neurodevelopmental diseases: Ethical considerations.American journal of human genetics · 2025Review
- Gene replacement therapies for inherited disorders of neurotransmission: Current progress in succinic semialdehyde dehydrogenase deficiency.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 2024Review
- Review
- Emerging roles and opportunities for rare disease patient advocacy groups.Therapeutic advances in rare diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interest in gene-based therapies for neurodevelopmental disorders is increasing exponentially, driven by the rise in recognition of underlying genetic etiology, progress in genomic technology, and recent proof of concept in several disorders. The current prioritization of one genetic disorder over another for development of therapies is driven by competing interests of pharmaceutical companies, advocacy groups, and academic scientists. Although these are all valid perspectives, a consolidated framework will facilitate more efficient and rational gene therapy development. Here we outline features of Mendelian neurodevelopmental disorders that warrant consideration when determining suitability for gene therapy. These features fit into four broad domains: genetics, preclinical validation, clinical considerations, and ethics. We propose a simple mnemonic, GENE TARGET, to remember these features and illustrate how they could be scored using a preliminary scoring rubric. In this suggested rubric, for a given disorder, scores for each feature may be added up to a composite GENE TARGET suitability (GTS) score. In addition to proposing a systematic method to evaluate and compare disorders, our framework helps identify gaps in the translational pipeline for a given disorder, which can inform prioritization of future research efforts.
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.