ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026
Gene therapy in patients with choroideremia: a meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo systematically review the published literature on clinical trials of gene therapy in patients with choroideremia (CHM gene mutation).
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov up to April 2026, and was limited to studies published in English or Spanish. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of gene therapy in patients with a confirmed molecular diagnosis were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomised Trials and ROBINS-I. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to compare best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in treated versus untreated eyes by standardised mean differences (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and the Q test.
resultsEight intervention arms from seven clinical trials (377 eyes) assessed the effects of gene therapy on BCVA, showing a small, non-significant improvement (SMD 0.34; 95% CI: -0.52 to 1.19; p = 0.38) with high heterogeneity (I²=89.6%, p < 0.01). Exploratory subgroup analyses by dose suggested differences across dose groups, but these findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the limited number of studies and high heterogeneity. Seven clinical trials (351 eyes) found no significant effect on retinal sensitivity, though lower doses showed more consistent positive trends. Three trials (276 eyes) reported no significant change in foveal thickness overall, with high variability and dose-related differences. No publication bias was detected (Egger's test: p = 0.54).
conclusionSome individual studies showed significant visual improvements with gene therapy in choroideremia, but the overall pooled effect was modest and not conclusive. High heterogeneity reflects varied study designs and criteria. More rigorous, standardized trials are needed to confirm gene therapy's efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42307761What 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.