Cited by 55Virus-based gene therapy researchRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryBarrier Structure and Function Studies

Destination Brain: the Past, Present, and Future of Therapeutic Gene Delivery

Open access
Joshi, Chaitanya R., Labhasetwar, Vinod, Ghorpade, Anuja·2017·Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology

Abstract

Neurological diseases and disorders (NDDs) present a significant societal burden and currently available drug- and biological-based therapeutic strategies have proven inadequate to alleviate it. Gene therapy is a suitable alternative to treat NDDs compared to conventional systems since it can be tailored to specifically alter select gene expression, reverse disease phenotype and restore normal function. The scope of gene therapy has broadened over the years with the advent of RNA interference and genome editing technologies. Consequently, encouraging results from central nervous system (CNS)-targeted gene delivery studies have led to their transition from preclinical to clinical trials. As we shift to an exciting gene therapy era, a retrospective of available literature on CNS-associated gene delivery is in order. This review is timely in this regard, since it analyzes key challenges and major findings from the last two decades and evaluates future prospects of brain gene delivery. We emphasize major areas consisting of physiological and pharmacological challenges in gene therapy, function-based selection of a ideal cellular target(s), available therapy modalities, and diversity of viral vectors and nanoparticles as vehicle systems. Further, we present plausible answers to key questions such as strategies to circumvent low blood-brain barrier permeability and most suitable CNS cell types for targeting. We compare and contrast pros and cons of the tested viral vectors in the context of delivery systems used in past and current clinical trials. Gene vector design challenges are also evaluated in the context of cell-specific promoters. Key challenges and findings reported for recent gene therapy clinical trials, assessing viral vectors and nanoparticles are discussed from the perspective of bench to bedside gene therapy translation. We conclude this review by tying together gene delivery challenges, available vehicle systems and comprehensive analyses of neuropathogenesis to outline future prospects of CNS-targeted gene therapies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11481-016-9724-3

Cites

259 of 259 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AAV vector administration to the CNS has an excellent safety and efficacy profile.

    “AAV vector administration to the CNS has an excellent safety and efficacy profile.”

    From AAVrh.10-Mediated APOE2 Central Nervous System Gene Therapy for APOE4-Associated Alzheimer's Disease (2018) · cites this paper as [53]

    Section 5.1 describes AAV vectors as suitable for brain gene delivery because of their low immunogenicity and reports effective transduction. Section 7 reports that an AAV2 trial was safe and well tolerated, but says its efficacy was still being evaluated; the paper also reports AAV9 immune activation and possible neurotoxicity in Section 5.1. These qualifications do not support an unqualified claim of an excellent safety and efficacy profile for CNS AAV administration. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Joshi, C. R., Labhasetwar, V., & Ghorpade, A.
Affiliations
  • University of North Texas Health Science Center (US)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Ghorpade, Anuja
Venue
Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology
Published
2017-02-03
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
51-83
ISSN
  • 1557-1890 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1904
OpenAlex
W2585557706
Cited by
55
References
259
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS048837, NS070896)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Virus-based gene therapy research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Interference and Gene Delivery
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
Keywords
gene therapy, gene delivery to the brain, central nervous system, neurological disorders, blood-brain barrier, viral vectors, nanoparticles, RNA interference, genome editing, cell-specific promoters, clinical trials, translational medicine, neuropathogenesis
MeSH terms
Animals, Blood-Brain Barrier, Brain, Forecasting, Humans, Genetic Therapy, Gene Transfer Techniques, Neurodegenerative Diseases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review