MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210696891 · doi:10.3390/ijms23031832

CRISPR Therapeutics for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

2022· review· en· W4210696891 on OpenAlexafffund
Esra Erkut, Toshifumi Yokota

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsCRISPRDuchenne muscular dystrophyDystrophinGenome editingBiologyGeneticsMuscular dystrophyGeneGuide RNAmdx mouseCas9Computational biologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is an X-linked recessive neuromuscular disorder with a prevalence of approximately 1 in 3500-5000 males. DMD manifests as childhood-onset muscle degeneration, followed by loss of ambulation, cardiomyopathy, and death in early adulthood due to a lack of functional dystrophin protein. Out-of-frame mutations in the dystrophin gene are the most common underlying cause of DMD. Gene editing via the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) system is a promising therapeutic for DMD, as it can permanently correct DMD mutations and thus restore the reading frame, allowing for the production of functional dystrophin. The specific mechanism of gene editing can vary based on a variety of factors such as the number of cuts generated by CRISPR, the presence of an exogenous DNA template, or the current cell cycle stage. CRISPR-mediated gene editing for DMD has been tested both in vitro and in vivo, with many of these studies discussed herein. Additionally, novel modifications to the CRISPR system such as base or prime editors allow for more precise gene editing. Despite recent advances, limitations remain including delivery efficiency, off-target mutagenesis, and long-term maintenance of dystrophin. Further studies focusing on safety and accuracy of the CRISPR system are necessary prior to clinical translation.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations66
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207