↓ Skip to main content

Genetic medicines for CF: Hype versus reality

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Pulmonology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genetic medicines for CF: Hype versus reality
Published in
Pediatric Pulmonology, September 2016
DOI 10.1002/ppul.23543
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric W.F.W. Alton, A. Christopher Boyd, Jane C. Davies, Deborah R. Gill, Uta Griesenbach, Patrick T. Harrison, Noreen Henig, Tracy Higgins, Stephen C. Hyde, J. Alastair Innes, Michael S.D. Korman

Abstract

Since identification of the CFTR gene over 25 years ago, gene therapy for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been actively developed. More recently gene therapy has been joined by other forms of "genetic medicines" including mRNA delivery, as well as genome editing and mRNA repair-based strategies. Proof-of-concept that gene therapy can stabilize the progression of CF lung disease has recently been established in a Phase IIb trial. An early phase study to assess the safety and explore efficacy of CFTR mRNA repair is ongoing, while mRNA delivery and genome editing-based strategies are currently at the pre-clinical phase of development. This review has been written jointly by some of those involved in the various CF "genetic medicine" fields and will summarize the current state-of-the-art, as well as discuss future developments. Where applicable, it highlights common problems faced by each of the strategies, and also tries to highlight where a specific strategy may have an advantage on the pathway to clinical translation. We hope that this review will contribute to the ongoing discussion about the hype versus reality of genetic medicine-based treatment approaches in CF. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2016;51:S5-S17. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 20%
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 24 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 27 29%