4.5 Article

Efficient Therapeutic Protein Expression Using Retroviral Replicating Vector with 2A Peptide in Cancer Models

期刊

HUMAN GENE THERAPY
卷 29, 期 4, 页码 437-451

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/hum.2017.205

关键词

retroviral replicating vector; cancer gene therapy; 2A peptide

资金

  1. NIH grants [U01-NS59821, R01-CA105171]
  2. Accelerate Brain Cancer Cure, American Brain Tumor Association (Washington, DC)
  3. Musella Foundation (Hewlett, NY)
  4. National Brain Tumor Society (Watertown, MA)
  5. Voices Against Brain Cancer (New York, NY)
  6. Department of Health and Human Services US (Washington, DC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Toca 511, a retroviral replicating vector (RRV), uses an internal ribosomal entry site (IRES) to express an optimized yeast cytosine deaminase (yCD2), which converts 5-fluorocytosine to 5-fluorouracil. This configuration is genetically stable in both preclinical mouse models and human clinical trials. However, the use of IRES (approximate to 600bp) restricts choices of therapeutic transgenes due to limits in RRV genome size. This study replaced IRES with 2A peptides derived from picornaviruses with or without a GSG linker. The data show that GSG-linked 2A (g2A) peptide resulted in higher polyprotein separation efficiency than non-GSG linked 2A peptide. The study also shows that RRV can tolerate insertion of two separate 2A peptides to allow expression of two transgenes without compromising the assembly and function of the virus in addition to insertion of a single 2A peptide to confirm genetic stability with yCD2, green fluorescent protein, and HSV-1 thymidine kinase. In a parallel comparison of the RRV-IRES-yCD2 and RRV-g2A-yCD2 configurations, the study shows the yCD2 protein expressed from RRV-g2A-yCD2 has higher activity, resulting in a higher survival benefit in an intracranial tumor mouse model. These data enable a wider range of potential product candidates that could be developed using the RRV platform.

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