MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140137267 · doi:10.2174/156652306775515510

Synthetic and Natural Polycations for Gene Therapy: State of the Art and New Perspectives

2006· review· en· W2140137267 on OpenAlexafffund
Márcio José Tiera, Françoise M. Winnik, Julio Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Gene Therapy · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorArthritis Society
KeywordsGenetic enhancementNatural (archaeology)Computational biologyMedicineGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, the major drawback of gene therapy is the gene transfection rate. The two main types of vectors that are used in gene therapy are based on viral or non-viral gene delivery systems. There are several non-viral systems that can be used to transfer foreign genetic material into the human body. In order to do so, the DNA to be transferred must escape the processes that affect the disposition of macromolecules. These processes include the interaction with blood components, vascular endothelial cells and uptake by the reticuloendothelial system. Furthermore, the degradation of therapeutic DNA by serum nucleases is also a potential obstacle for functional delivery to the target cell. Cationic polymers have a great potential for DNA complexation and may be useful as non-viral vectors for gene therapy applications. The objective of this review was to address the state of the art in gene therapy using synthetic and natural polycations and the latest strategies to improve the efficiency of gene transfer into the cell.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Gene TherapySame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207