4.5 Article

Repair of CFTR mRNA by spliceosome-mediated RNA trans-splicing

期刊

GENE THERAPY
卷 7, 期 22, 页码 1885-1895

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.gt.3301307

关键词

therapeutics; sequence deletion; CFTR protein; trans-splicing; gene therapy; gene repair

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [1R01-DK54023, 1 R43 DK56526-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most messenger RNA precursors (pre-mRNA) undergo cis-splicing in which introns are excised and the adjoining exons from a single pre-mRNA are ligated together to form mature messenger RNA. This reaction is driven by a complex known as the spliceosome. Spliceosomes can also combine sequences from two independently transcribed pre-mRNAs in a process known as trans-splicing. Spliceosome-mediated RNA trans-splicing (SMaRT) is an emerging technology in which RNA pre-therapeutic molecules (PTMs) are designed to recode a specific pre-mRNA by suppressing cis-splicing while enhancing trans-splicing between the PTM and its pre-mRNA target. This study examined the feasibility of SMaRT as a potential therapy for genetic diseases to correct mutations using cystic fibrosis (CF) as an example. We used several versions of a cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) mini-gene expressing mutant (Delta F508) pre-mRNA targets and tested this against a number of PTMs capable of binding to the CFTR target intron 9 and trans-splicing in the normal coding sequences for exons 10-24 (containing F508). When 293T cells were cotransfected with both constructs, they produced a trans-spliced mRNA in which normal exon 10-24 replaced mutant exon 10. To test whether SMaRT produced mature CFTR protein, proteins were immunoprecipitated from lysates of cotransfected cells and detected by Western blotting and PKA-phosphorylation. Tryptic phosphopeptide mapping confirmed the identity of CFTR. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that exon replacement by SMaRT can repair an abnormal pre-mRNA associated with a genetic disease.

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