↓ Skip to main content

Dawn of ocular gene therapy: implications for molecular diagnosis in retinal disease

Overview of attention for article published in Science China Life Sciences, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Dawn of ocular gene therapy: implications for molecular diagnosis in retinal disease
Published in
Science China Life Sciences, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11427-013-4443-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacques Zaneveld, Feng Wang, Xia Wang, Rui Chen

Abstract

Personalized medicine aims to utilize genomic information about patients to tailor treatment. Gene replacement therapy for rare genetic disorders is perhaps the most extreme form of personalized medicine, in that the patients' genome wholly determines their treatment regimen. Gene therapy for retinal disorders is poised to become a clinical reality. The eye is an optimal site for gene therapy due to the relative ease of precise vector delivery, immune system isolation, and availability for monitoring of any potential damage or side effects. Due to these advantages, clinical trials for gene therapy of retinal diseases are currently underway. A necessary precursor to such gene therapies is accurate molecular diagnosis of the mutation(s) underlying disease. In this review, we discuss the application of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) to obtain such a diagnosis and identify disease causing genes, using retinal disorders as a case study. After reviewing ocular gene therapy, we discuss the application of NGS to the identification of novel Mendelian disease genes. We then compare current, array based mutation detection methods against next NGS-based methods in three retinal diseases: Leber's Congenital Amaurosis, Retinitis Pigmentosa, and Stargardt's disease. We conclude that next-generation sequencing based diagnosis offers several advantages over array based methods, including a higher rate of successful diagnosis and the ability to more deeply and efficiently assay a broad spectrum of mutations. However, the relative difficulty of interpreting sequence results and the development of standardized, reliable bioinformatic tools remain outstanding concerns. In this review, recent advances NGS based molecular diagnoses are discussed, as well as their implications for the development of personalized medicine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 45 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 12 25%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Unspecified 6 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 11 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 February 2013.
All research outputs
#18,329,207
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Science China Life Sciences
#614
of 996 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,139
of 284,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science China Life Sciences
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 996 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.