4.5 Review

How the discovery of ISS-N1 led to the first medical therapy for spinal muscular atrophy

期刊

GENE THERAPY
卷 24, 期 9, 页码 520-526

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/gt.2017.34

关键词

-

资金

  1. US National Institutes of Health NIH [R01 NS055925]
  2. Iowa Center of Advanced Neurotoxicology (ICAN)
  3. Salsbury Endowment at Iowa State University
  4. NIH [R01 NS040275, R01 NS0682284]
  5. Cure SMA
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS040275, R01NS055925] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), a prominent genetic disease of infant mortality, is caused by low levels of survival motor neuron (SMN) protein owing to deletions or mutations of the SMN1 gene. SMN2, a nearly identical copy of SMN1 present in humans, cannot compensate for the loss of SMN1 because of predominant skipping of exon 7 during pre-mRNA splicing. With the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of nusinersen (Spinraza), the potential for correction of SMN2 exon 7 splicing as an SMA therapy has been affirmed. Nusinersen is an antisense oligonucleotide that targets intronic splicing silencer N1 (ISS-N1) discovered in 2004 at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. ISS-N1 has emerged as the model target for testing the therapeutic efficacy of antisense oligonucleotides using different chemistries as well as different mouse models of SMA. Here, we provide a historical account of events that led to the discovery of ISS-N1 and describe the impact of independent validations that raised the profile of ISS-N1 as one of the most potent antisense targets for the treatment of a genetic disease. Recent approval of nusinersen provides a much-needed boost for antisense technology that is just beginning to realize its potential. Beyond treating SMA, the ISS-N1 target offers myriad potentials for perfecting various aspects of the nucleic-acid-based technology for the amelioration of the countless number of pathological conditions.

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

4.5
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