ReviewTherapeutic advances in hematology2025
CRISPR and gene editing technologies for bleeding disorders.
Review in Therapeutic advances in hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The first gene therapy products for hemophilia A and B have recently been approved by the regulatory authorities. Although this is an important milestone for people with hemophilia, there is still a need to further improve on the efficacy, safety, and stability of expression and to ultimately include pediatric patients before the onset of arthropathy and other complications caused by uncontrolled bleeding. To overcome some of the limitations of conventional gene therapy strategies, gene editing is currently being explored in preclinical studies. Gene editing allows for targeted modifications of the human genome with unprecedented specificity based on zinc finger nuclease, meganuclease, transcription activator-like endonuclease, or clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) technologies that induce double-strand DNA breaks (DSB). Next-generation gene editing strategies, such as those dependent on CRISPR-derived base or prime editors, allow targeted genetic modification independent of the induction of DSBs, offering a potential safer alternative. Sustained efficacy and production of factor VIII or factor IX can be achieved after gene editing in patient-derived cells or in adult or newborn hemophilia A or B mouse models. These preclinical studies pave the way toward phase I/II clinical trials in patients with severe hemophilia. The potential risk of undesired off-target modifications of the human genome and adverse immune reactions, and the need for efficient delivery of the gene editing components, need to be rigorously addressed before the promise of gene editing for hemophilia can ultimately be fulfilled.
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.