4.7 Article

Dynamics of gene-modified progenitor cells analyzed by tracking retroviral integration sites in a human SCID-X1 gene therapy trial

期刊

BLOOD
卷 115, 期 22, 页码 4356-4366

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-12-257352

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [AI52845, AI66290]
  2. NIH National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [T32 AI07634]
  3. University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine Department of Medicine Measey Basic Science Fellowship Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

X-linked severe-combined immunodeficiency (SCID-X1) has been treated by therapeutic gene transfer using gamma-retroviral vectors, but insertional activation of proto-oncogenes contributed to leukemia in some patients. Here we report a longitudinal study of gene-corrected progenitor cell populations from 8 patients using 454 pyrosequencing to map vector integration sites, and extensive resampling to allow quantification of clonal abundance. The number of transduced cells infused into patients initially predicted the subsequent diversity of circulating cells. A capture-recapture analysis was used to estimate the size of the gene-corrected cell pool, revealing that less than 1/100th of the infused cells had long-term repopulating activity. Integration sites were clustered even at early time points, often near genes involved in growth control, and several patients harbored expanded cell clones with vectors integrated near the cancer-implicated genes CCND2 and HMGA2, but remain healthy. Integration site tracking also documented that chemotherapy for adverse events resulted in successful control. The longitudinal analysis emphasizes that key features of transduced cell populations-including diversity, integration site clustering, and expansion of some clones-were established early after transplantation. The approaches to sequencing and bioinformatics analysis reported here should be widely useful in assessing the outcome of gene therapy trials. (Blood. 2010; 115(22): 4356-4366)

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