ArticleGenes2022
Potential CRISPR Base Editing Therapeutic Options in a Sorsby Fundus Dystrophy Patient.
Article in Genes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Advancements in pre-clinical development of gene editing-based therapies to treat inherited retinal diseases.Vision research · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
TIMP3 mutations are associated with early-onset macular choroidal neovascularisation for which no treatment currently exists. CRISPR base editing, with its ability to irreversibly correct point mutations by chemical modification of nucleobases at DNA level, may be a therapeutic option. We report a bioinformatic analysis of potential therapeutic options in a patient presenting with Sorsby fundus dystrophy. Genetic testing in a 35-year-old gentleman with bilateral macular choroidal neovascularisation revealed the patient to be heterozygous for a TIMP3 variant c.610A>T, p.(Ser204Cys). Using a glycosylase base editor (GBE), another DNA-edit could be introduced that would revert the variant back to wild-type on amino acid level. Alternatively, the mutated residue could be changed to another amino acid that would be better tolerated, and for that, an available 'NG'-PAM site was found to be available for the SpCas9-based adenine base editor (ABE) that would introduce p.(Ser204Arg). In silico analyses predicted this variant to be non-pathogenic; however, a bystander edit, p.Ile205Thr, would be introduced. This case report highlights the importance of considering genetic testing in young patients with choroidal neovascularisation, particularly within the context of a strong family history of presumed wet age-related macular degeneration, and describes potential therapeutic options.
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.