Direct Comparison of Administration Routes for AAV8-mediated Ocular Gene Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We recently demonstrated that direct subretinal (SR) injection of adeno-associated virus (AAV) type 8 (AAV8) into photoreceptor cells and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) is a highly efficient model of gene delivery. The current study compared transduction efficiency and expression patterns associated with various routes of vector administration. METHOD: The efficacy of intravitreal (VT), SR and subconjunctival (SC) injections for delivery of AAV8-derived vectors, i.e. those expressing luciferase (Luc) and enhanced green fluorescent protein (GFP) - AAV8/Luc and AAV8/GFP, respectively - were compared in an animal (mouse) model (n = 8 mice/group). Transduction efficiency and expression patterns were examined at post-injection weeks 1 and 2, and months 1, 3, 6 and 12 via in vivo imaging. RESULTS: One year after AAV injection, AAV8/Luc-treated mice exhibited stable and sustained high expression of vector in the VT and SR groups, but not in the SC group (VT:SR:SC = 3,218:2,923:115; 1 × 10(5 )photons/s). Histological analysis showed that GFP expression was observed in the inner retina of VT group mice, and in photoreceptor cells and RPE of SR group mice, whereas no GFP expression was noted in the SC group. Electroretinography (ERG) revealed adverse effects following SR delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that both SR and VT injections of AAV8 vectors are useful routes for administering ocular gene therapy, and stress the importance of selecting an appropriate administration route, i.e. one that targets specific cells, for treating ocular disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".