4.7 Review

Gene Therapy Intervention in Neovascular Eye Disease: A Recent Update

期刊

MOLECULAR THERAPY
卷 28, 期 10, 页码 2120-2138

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.06.029

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [GNT1185600]
  2. Ophthalmic Research Institute of Australia
  3. Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Biomimetic Materials and Cellular Immunomodulation [ZDSYS20190902093409851]
  4. Victorian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aberrant growth of blood vessels (neovascularization) is a key feature of severe eye diseases that can cause legal blindness, including neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic retinopathy (DR). The development of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents has revolutionized the treatment of ocular neovascularization. Novel proangiogenic targets, such as angiopoietin and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), are under development for patients who respond poorly to anti-VEGF therapy and to reduce adverse effects from long-term VEGF inhibition. A rapidly advancing area is gene therapy, which may provide significant therapeutic benefits. Viral vector-mediated transgene delivery provides the potential for continuous production of antiangiogenic proteins, which would avoid the need for repeated anti-VEGF injections. Gene silencing with RNA interference to target ocular angiogenesis has been investigated in clinical trials. Proof-of-concept gene therapy studies using gene-editing tools such as CRISPR-Cas have already been shown to be effective in suppressing neovascularization in animal models, highlighting the therapeutic potential of the system for treatment of aberrant ocular angiogenesis. This review provides updates on the development of anti-VEGF agents and novel antiangiogenic targets. We also summarize current gene therapy strategies already in clinical trials and those with the latest approaches utilizing CRISPR-Cas gene editing against aberrant ocular neovascularization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据