Update on Gene Therapy Clinical Trials for Choroideremia and Potential Experimental Therapies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objectives: Choroideremia (CHM) is an X-linked recessive chorioretinal dystrophy caused by mutations involving the CHM gene. Gene therapy has entered late-phase clinical trials, although there have been variable results. This review gives a summary on the outcomes of phase I/II CHM gene therapy trials and describes other potential experimental therapies. Materials and Methods: A Medline (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA) search was performed to identify all articles describing gene therapy treatments available for CHM. Results: Five phase I/II clinical trials that reported subretinal injection of adeno-associated virus Rab escort protein 1 (AAV2.REP1) vector in CHM patients were included. The Oxford study (NCT01461213) included 14 patients; a median gain of 5.5 ± 6.8 SD (−6 min, 18 max) early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) letters was reported. The Tubingen study (NCT02671539) included six patients; only one patient had an improvement of 17 ETDRS letters. The Alberta study (NCT02077361) enrolled six patients, and it reported a minimal vision change, except for one patient who gained 15 ETDRS letters. Six patients were enrolled in the Miami trial (NCT02553135), which reported a median gain of 2 ± 4 SD (−1 min, 10 max) ETDRS letters. The Philadelphia study (NCT02341807) included 10 patients; best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) returned to baseline in all by one-year follow-up, but one patient had −17 ETDRS letters from baseline. Overall, 40 patients were enrolled in trials, and 34 had 2 years of follow-up, with a median gain of 1.5 ± 7.2 SD (−14 min, 18 max) in ETDRS letters. Conclusions: The primary endpoint, BCVA following gene therapy in CHM, showed a marginal improvement with variability between trials. Optimizing surgical technique and pre-, peri-, and post-operative management with immunosuppressants to minimize any adverse ocular inflammatory events could lead to reduced incidence of complications. The ideal therapeutic window needs to be addressed to ensure that the necessary cell types are adequately transduced, minimizing viral toxicity, to prolong long-term transgenic potential. Long-term efficacy will be addressed by ongoing studies.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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".