Central and peripheral delivery of AAV9-SMN target different pathomechanisms in a mouse model of spinal muscular atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a neuromuscular disease caused by loss of the SMN1 gene. Although lower motor neurons are a primary target, there is evidence that peripheral organ defects contribute to SMA. Current SMA gene therapy uses a single, high titre intravenous bolus of AAV9-SMN resulting in impressive, yet limited amelioration of the clinical phenotype. However, risks of this treatment include liver toxicity. Intrathecal administration is under clinical trial but was interrupted due to safety concerns in a concomitant animal study. As there is no direct comparison between the different delivery strategies while avoiding high dose toxicity, we injected SMA mice with low dose scAAV9-cba-SMN either intravenously (IV) for peripheral SMN restoration or intracerebroventricularly (ICV) for CNS-focused SMN restoration. Here, IV injections restored SMN in peripheral tissues but not CNS, while ICV injections mildly increased SMN in the periphery and the CNS. Consequently, only ICV treatment rescued motor neuron degeneration. Surprisingly, both treatments resulted in an impressive rescue of survival, weight, motor function, and peripheral phenotypes including liver and pancreas pathology. Our work highlights independent contributions of peripheral organs to SMA pathology and suggests that treatments should not be restricted to the motor neuron. Graphical Abstract
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".