Cited by 35Glaucoma and retinal disordersRetinal Development and DisordersVirus-based gene therapy research

Factors associated with rapid improvement in visual acuity in patients with Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy after gene therapy

Open access
Liu, Hong‐li, Yuan, Jia‐jia, Zhang, Yong, Tian, Zhen, Li, Xin, Wang, Dan, Du, Yang‐yang, Song, Lin +1 more·2020·Acta Ophthalmologica

Abstract

Purpose: To analyse the factors associated with rapid and significant improvement in visual acuity in patients with Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) after gene therapy and explain the theory of this improvement. Methods: We recruited 149 patients with LHON, who underwent gene therapy, and divided them into two groups according to the absence or presence of rapid and significant visual acuity improvements within 3 days of treatment. A bivariate logistic regression model was used to analyse relevant factors including age, the period between onset and treatment, baseline values of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), visual field index (VFI) and pretreatment average retinal nerve fibre‐layer thickness (GRNFL). The corresponding parameters for the injected and non‐injected eyes were analysed separately. Results: The period between onset and treatment, and pretreatment baseline BCVA was significantly associated with rapid and significant improvement in visual acuity for both, the injected and non‐injected eyes. Moreover, pretreatment baseline VFI and GRNFL were not significantly associated with rapid and significant improvement in visual acuity. Age was significantly associated with rapid and significant improvement in visual acuity of the injected eyes. Conclusion: The period between onset and treatment, and pretreatment baseline BCVA may be important predictors of rapid and significant improvement in visual acuity in patients with LHON after gene therapy.

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 · 10.1111/aos.14379

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • Two similar gene therapy programmes led by groups in the USA and China targeted the m.11778G>A mutation in MT-ND4 using a viral vector containing a cDNA coding the human wild-type mitochondrial ND4 protein.

    “Two similar gene therapy programmes led by groups in the USA25,26 and China,27–30 have targeted the m.11778G>A mutation in MT-ND4, also using a viral vector containing a cDNA coding the human wild-type mitochondrial ND4 protein.”

    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 [29]

    The Study participants section (page unavailable) describes a trial in China treating patients with the MT-ND4 m.11778G>A mutation by injecting AAV2-ND4. The Discussion says the introduced ND4 gene produces functional protein that replaces defective ND4, but our copy does not specify that the vector contains a cDNA coding the human wild-type protein. The separate citations attached to the US programmes are outside this source's attribution. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In 149 patients (mean age 19 years) who received unilateral IVT of rAAV2-ND4, 54 (36%) showed early BCVA improvement; it was bilateral in 32% (n=17), treated eye only in 48% (n=26), and contralateral eye only in 20% (n=11).

    “The same group subsequently reported on 149 patients (mean age of 19 years) who received a unilateral IVT of rAAV2-ND4, among whom 54 (36%) showed an early BCVA improvement, which was bilateral for 32% (n ¼ 17), in only the treated eye for 48% (n¼26) and only in the contralateral eye for 20% (n ¼ 11).31”

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
Liu, H., Yuan, J., Zhang, Y., Tian, Z., Li, X., Wang, D., Du, Y., Song, L., & Li, B.
Affiliations
  • Department of Ophthalmology Tongji Hospital Tongji Medical College Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China
  • Hubei University of Medicine (CN)
  • Tongji Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Bin
Venue
Acta Ophthalmologica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-24
Volume
98
Issue
6
Pages
e730-e733
ISSN
  • 0001-639X (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-375X
  • 1755-3768
OpenAlex
W3007696973
Cited by
35
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4
FWCI
4.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Ophthalmologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
the National Natural Science Foundation (81770969)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Glaucoma and retinal disorders
  • 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
Keywords
Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy, gene therapy, visual acuity improvement, predictors of treatment response, time to treatment, best-corrected visual acuity, visual field index, retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, age
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Visual Acuity, Genetic Therapy, Case-Control Studies, Optic Atrophy, Hereditary, Leber

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