4.8 Article

Mini-dCas13X-mediated RNA editing restores dystrophin expression in a humanized mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 133, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI162809

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a gene editing technique was used to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) in a mouse model. The results showed that the technique effectively repaired the mutation in the DMD gene, restored expression of the dystrophin protein to normal levels, and improved muscle function. This study provides a new approach for the treatment of DMD and other monogenic diseases.
Approximately 10% of monogenic diseases are caused by nonsense point mutations that generate premature termination codons (PTCs), resulting in a truncated protein and nonsense-mediated decay of the mutant mRNAs. Here, we demonstrate a mini-dCas13X-mediated RNA adenine base editing (mxABE) strategy to treat nonsense mutation-related monogenic diseases via A-to-G editing in a genetically humanized mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Initially, we identified a nonsense point mutation (c.4174C>T, p.Gln1392*) in the DMD gene of a patient and validated its pathogenicity in humanized mice. In this model, mxABE packaged in a single adeno-associated virus (AAV) reached A-to-G editing rates up to 84% in vivo, at least 20-fold greater than rates reported in previous studies using other RNA editing modalities. Furthermore, mxABE restored robust expression of dystrophin protein to over 50% of WT levels by enabling PTC read-through in multiple muscle tissues. Importantly, systemic delivery of mxABE by AAV also rescued dystrophin expression to averages of 37%, 6%, and 54% of WT levels in the diaphragm, tibialis anterior, and heart muscle, respectively, as well as rescued muscle function. Our data strongly suggest that mxABE-based strategies may be a viable new treatment modality for DMD and other monogenic diseases.

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

4.8
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