MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119316674 · doi:10.3390/medicina57010064

Update on Gene Therapy Clinical Trials for Choroideremia and Potential Experimental Therapies

2021· review· en· W3119316674 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsChoroideremiaMedicineClinical trialDiabetic retinopathyOphthalmologyVisual acuityInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusPediatricsRetinal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.297 · 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