Cited by 1,924Retinal Development and DisordersVirus-based gene therapy researchRetinal Diseases and Treatments

Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber’s congenital amaurosis

Open access
Bainbridge, James W.B., Smith, Alexander J., Barker, Susie S., Robbie, Scott, Henderson, Robert, Balaggan, Kamaljit, Viswanathan, Ananth, Holder, Graham E. +10 more·2008·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Early-onset, severe retinal dystrophy caused by mutations in the gene encoding retinal pigment epithelium-specific 65-kD protein (RPE65) is associated with poor vision at birth and complete loss of vision in early adulthood. We administered to three young adult patients subretinal injections of recombinant adeno-associated virus vector 2/2 expressing RPE65 complementary DNA (cDNA) under the control of a human RPE65 promoter. There were no serious adverse events. There was no clinically significant change in visual acuity or in peripheral visual fields on Goldmann perimetry in any of the three patients. We detected no change in retinal responses on electroretinography. One patient had significant improvement in visual function on microperimetry and on dark-adapted perimetry. This patient also showed improvement in a subjective test of visual mobility. These findings provide support for further clinical studies of this experimental approach in other patients with mutant RPE65. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00643747 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa0802268

Cites

24 of 24 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?

  • Subretinal AAV2 RPE65 trials in LCA showed sustained improvement in subjective and objective vision in over 30 patients.

    “during Phase I/II clinical trials for Leber's congenital amaurosis (LCA), over 30 patients who received a subretinal injection of AAV2 encoding RPE65, an enzyme responsible for the isomerohydrolase activity of retinal pigment epithelium, showed sustained improvement in both subjective and objective measurements of vision.8–14”

    From Antibody neutralization poses a barrier to intravitreal adeno-associated viral vector gene delivery to non-human primates (2015) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Summary (p. 1) describes subretinal AAV2/2-RPE65 treatment in three patients, with objective and subjective visual improvement in only one. The Patients and Study Design section (p. 2) reports follow-up of up to 12 months for one patient, so this paper does not establish sustained improvement in over 30 patients. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AAV has been successful in clinical gene therapy trials for LCA, hemophilia, familial lipoprotein lipase deficiency, and choroideremia.

    “Adeno-associated virus has been successful in clinical gene therapy trials for Leber's congenital amaurosis, hemophilia, familial lipoprotein lipase deficiency, and choroideremia.8–15,26,27,60,61”

    From Antibody neutralization poses a barrier to intravitreal adeno-associated viral vector gene delivery to non-human primates (2015) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Summary (p. 1) describes an AAV gene-therapy trial in three young adults with RPE65-related Leber’s congenital amaurosis; one patient improved on measures of visual function, while none had a clinically significant change in visual acuity. The cited paper does not address clinical trials for hemophilia, familial lipoprotein lipase deficiency, or choroideremia, so it supports only the LCA part of the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Despite a 28-day oral corticosteroid therapy started 2 days before the first IVT, 70.7% of lenadogene nolparvovec-treated eyes developed some degree of intraocular inflammation versus 10.2% of placebo-treated eyes.

    “Despite a 28-day oral corticosteroid therapy started 2 days before the first IVT, a regimen similar to that provided in several other clinical studies using IVT or sub-retinal AAV-based gene therapies,41–45 70.7% of lenadogene nolparvovec-treated eyes developed some degree of intraocular inflammation versus 10.2% of placebo-treated eyes.”

    From Randomized trial of bilateral gene therapy injection for m.11778G&amp;gt;A <i>MT-ND4</i> Leber optic neuropathy (2023) · cites this paper as [41]

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AAV clinical successes to date have involved delivery either to immune privileged regions or to subjects lacking apparent AAV immunological memory.

    “As a result, AAV clinical successes to date have involved delivery either to immune privileged regions or to subjects lacking apparent AAV immunological memory.8–14,30,42”
  • The techniques underpinning AAV-mediated retinal gene therapy have undergone iterative improvement since the first-in-human studies in RPE65-associated IRDs.

    “The techniques underpinning AAV-mediated retinal gene therapy have undergone iterative improvement since the first-in-human studies in RPE65 -associated IRDs (Bainbridge et al., 2008; Hauswirth et al., 2008; Maguire et al., 2008).”

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

1 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bainbridge, J. W. B., Smith, A. J., Barker, S. S., Robbie, S., Henderson, R., Balaggan, K., Viswanathan, A., Holder, G. E., Stockman, A., Tyler, N., Petersen-Jones, S., Bhattacharya, S. S., Thrasher, A. J., Fitzke, F. W., Carter, B. J., Rubin, G. S., Moore, A. T., & Ali, R. R.
Affiliations
  • Moorfields Eye Hospital (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2008-05-22
Volume
358
Issue
21
Pages
2231-2239
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2151809142
Cited by
1,924
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 94 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 83 · 2018: 101 · 2017: 115 · 2016: 98 · 2015: 155 · 2014: 142 · 2013: 149 · 2012: 151
FWCI
69.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Virus-based gene therapy research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
Leber congenital amaurosis, RPE65, gene therapy, subretinal injection, retinal dystrophy, visual function, microperimetry, visual acuity, electroretinogram
MeSH terms
Retinoid Isomerohydrolase, Dependovirus, Adolescent, Adult, Blindness, Carrier Proteins, Eye Proteins, Genetic Vectors, Humans, Injections, Mutation, Retina, Retinal Degeneration, Visual Acuity, Genetic Therapy, Gene Transfer Techniques, DNA, Complementary, cis-trans-Isomerases

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