Cited by 141Virus-based gene therapy researchRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryBarrier Structure and Function Studies

Evaluation of Intrathecal Routes of Administration for Adeno-Associated Viral Vectors in Large Animals

Open access
Hinderer, Christian, Bell, Peter, Katz, Nathan, Vite, Charles H., Louboutin, Jean-Pierre, Bote, Erin, Yu, Hongwei, Zhu, Yanqing +7 more·2018·Human Gene Therapy

Abstract

Delivery of adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) can achieve gene transfer to cells throughout the brain and spinal cord, potentially making many neurological diseases tractable gene therapy targets. Identifying the optimal route of CSF access for intrathecal AAV delivery will be a critical step in translating this approach to clinical practice. We previously demonstrated that vector injection into the cisterna magna is a safe and effective method for intrathecal AAV delivery in nonhuman primates; however, this procedure is not commonly used in clinical practice. More routine methods of administration into the CSF are now being explored, including intracerebroventricular (ICV) injection and injection through a lumbar puncture. In this study, we compared ICV and intracisternal (IC) AAV administration in dogs. We also evaluated vector administration via lumbar puncture in nonhuman primates, with some animals placed in the Trendelenburg position after injection, a maneuver that has been suggested to improve cranial distribution of vector. In the dog study, ICV and IC vector administration resulted in similarly efficient transduction throughout the brain and spinal cord. However, animals in the ICV cohort developed encephalitis associated with a T-cell response to the transgene product, a phenomenon that was not observed in the IC cohort. In the nonhuman primate study, transduction efficiency was not improved by placing animals in the Trendelenburg position after injection. These findings illustrate important limitations of commonly used methods for CSF access in the context of AAV delivery, and will be important for informing the selection of a route of administration for first-in-human studies.

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 · 10.1089/hum.2017.026

Cites

18 of 18 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?

  • In the study by Hinderer et al., comparison of intracisternal and intraventricular delivery of AAV9-GUSB to mucopolysaccharidosis-afflicted canines found that the intraventricular route led to inflammation and development of encephalitis.

    “comparison of intracisternal and intraventricular delivery of AAV9-GUSB (1.8 × 1013 gc, 1 mL) to mucopolysaccharidosis-afflicted canines found that the intraventricular route lead to inflammation and development of encephalitis”

    From AAVrh.10-Mediated APOE2 Central Nervous System Gene Therapy for APOE4-Associated Alzheimer's Disease (2018) · cites this paper as [95]

    The Results report encephalitis in dogs given intraventricular AAV9-GFP, not AAV9-GUSB. The dog given intraventricular AAV9-GUSB had no clinical abnormalities or generalized encephalitis, although histology found a localized lesion with lymphocytic infiltration beside the needle track. The claim conflates the two experiments. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    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
Hinderer, C., Bell, P., Katz, N., Vite, C. H., Louboutin, J.-P., Bote, E., Yu, H., Zhu, Y., Casal, M. L., Bagel, J., O'Donnell, P., Wang, P., Haskins, M. E., Goode, T., & Wilson, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of the West Indies (TT)
  • Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Venue
Human Gene Therapy
Published
2018-01
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
15-24
ISSN
  • 1043-0342 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7422
OpenAlex
W2746920043
Cited by
141
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Gene Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • REGENXBIO
  • National Institutes of Health (P40OD010939)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK054481)
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
adeno-associated virus vectors, intrathecal gene delivery, cerebrospinal fluid, intracerebroventricular administration, intracisternal injection, lumbar puncture, Trendelenburg position, encephalitis, T cell response, transduction efficiency, dogs, non-human primates
MeSH terms
Dependovirus, Animals, Haplorhini, Central Nervous System Diseases, Dogs, Genetic Vectors, Injections, Spinal, Spinal Puncture, Genetic Therapy, Gene Transfer Techniques, Head-Down Tilt, Models, Animal, Infusions, Intraventricular

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