CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 176

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A largely random AAV integration profile after LPLD gene therapy

Kaeppel, Christine, Beattie, Stuart G, Fronza, Raffaele, van Logtenstein, Richard, Salmon, Florence, Schmidt, Sabine, Wolf, Stephan, Nowrouzi, Ali, Glimm, Hanno, von Kalle, Christof, Petry, Harald, Gaudet, Daniel, Schmidt, Manfred·2013·Nature Medicine
DOI 10.1038/nm.3230
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The clinical application of adeno-associated virus vectors (AAVs) is limited because of concerns about AAV integration-mediated tumorigenicity. We performed integration-site analysis after AAV1-LPL(S447X) intramuscular injection in five lipoprotein lipase-deficient subjects, revealing random nuclear integration and hotspots in mitochondria. We conclude that AAV integration is potentially safe and that vector breakage and integration may occur from each position of the vector genome. Future viral integration-site analyses should include the mitochondrial genome.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nm.3230

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Asokan, A., Schaffer, D.V. & Samulski, R.J. Mol. Ther. 20, 699–708 (2012). · DOI
  2. High, K.A. & Aubourg, P. Methods Mol. Biol. 807, 429–457 (2011). · DOI
  3. Rosas, L.E. et al. Mol. Ther. 20, 2098–2110 (2012). · DOI
  4. Paruzynski, A. et al. Nat. Protoc. 5, 1379–1395 (2010). · DOI
  5. Inagaki, K. et al. J. Virol. 81, 11290–11303 (2007). · DOI
  6. Li, H. et al. Blood 117, 3311–3319 (2011). · DOI
  7. Nowrouzi, A. et al. Mol. Ther. 20, 1177–1186 (2012). · DOI
  8. Deyle, D.R. & Russell, D.W. Curr. Opin. Mol. Ther. 11, 442–447 (2009).
  9. Wu, X., Luke, B.T. & Burgess, S.M. Virology 344, 292–295 (2006). · DOI
  10. Abel, U. et al. PLoS ONE 2, e570 (2007). · DOI
  11. Richly, E. et al. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 1081–1084 (2004). · DOI
  12. Hazkani-Covo, E. et al. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000834 (2010). · DOI
  13. Ramos, A. et al. Mitochondrion 11, 946–953 (2011). · DOI
  14. Calabrese, F.M. et al. BMC Bioinformatics 13 (suppl. 4), S15 (2012). · DOI
  15. Yu, H. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, E1238–E1247 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Zhang, Z., Schwartz, S., Wagner, L. & Miller, W. J. Comput. Biol. 7, 203–214 (2000). · DOI
  17. Suzuki, T. et al. Nat. Genet. 32, 166–174 (2002). · DOI
  18. Wu, T.D. et al. Bioinformatics 26, 873–881 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Li, H. et al. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Robinson, J.T. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 24–26 (2011). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kaeppel, C., Beattie, S. G., Fronza, R., van Logtenstein, R., Salmon, F., Schmidt, S., Wolf, S., Nowrouzi, A., Glimm, H., von Kalle, C., Petry, H., Gaudet, D., & Schmidt, M.
Venue
Nature Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-06-16
Volume
19
Issue
7
Pages
889-891
ISSN
  • 1078-8956
  • 1546-170X
DOI
10.1038/nm.3230
Cited by
176
References
5
Language
en
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

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