Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33510064›Full record

ReviewNeural regeneration research2021

The future of retinal gene therapy: evolving from subretinal to intravitreal vector delivery.

Maya Ross, Ron Ofri

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neural regeneration research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Surgical Approaches to Retinal Gene Therapy: 2025 Update.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Gene therapy in neovascular age related macular degeneration: an update.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Intravitreal therapy-success stories and challenges.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maya RossKoret School of Veterinary Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel.
Ron OfriKoret School of Veterinary Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel.
Hebrew University of Jerusalem · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inherited retinal degenerations are a leading and untreatbale cause of blindness, and as such they are targets for gene therapy. Numerous gene therapy treatments have progressed from laboratory research to clinical trails, and a pioneering gene therapy received the first ever FDA approval for treating patients. However, currently retinal gene therapy mostly involves subretinal injection of the therapeutic agent, which treats a limited area, entails retinal detachment and other potential complications, and requires general anesthesia with consequent risks, costs and prolonged recovery. Therefore there is great impetus to develop safer, less invasive and cheapter methods of gene delivery. A promising method is intravitreal injection, that does not cause retinal detachment, can lead to pan-retinal transduction and can be performed under local anesthesia in out-patient clinics. Intravitreally-injected vectors face several obstacles. First, the vector is diluted by the vitreous and has to overcome a long diffusion distance to the target cells. Second, the vector is exposed to the host's immune response, risking neutralization by pre-existing antibodies and triggering a stronger immune response to the injection. Third, the vector has to cross the inner limiting membrane which is both a physical and a biological barrier as it contains binding sites that could cause the vector's sequestration. Finally, in the target cell the vector is prone to proteasome degradation before delivering the transgene to the nucleus. Strategies to overcome these obstacles include modifications of the viral capsid, through rational design or directed evolution, which allow resistance to the immune system, enhancement of penetration through the inner limiting membrane or reduced degradation by intracellular proteasomes. Furthermore, physical and chemical manipulations of the inner limiting membrane and vitreous aim to improve vector penetration. Finally, compact non-viral vectors that can overcome the immunological, physical and anatomical and barriers have been developed. This paper reviews ongoing efforts to develop novel, safe and efficacious methods for intravitreal delivery of therapeutic genes for inherited retinal degenerations. To date, the most promising results are achieved in rodents with robust, pan-retinal transduction following intravitreal delivery. Trials in larger animal models demonstrate transduction mostly of inner retinal layers. Despite ongoing efforts, currently no intravitreally-injected vector has demonstrated outer retinal transduction efficacy comparable to that of subretinal delivery. Further work is warranted to test promising new viral and non-viral vectors on large animal models of inherited retinal degenerations. Positive results will pave the way to development of the next generation of treatments for inherited retinal degeneration.

Indexed as

adeno-associated virusanimal modelblindnessgene therapyinner limiting membranephotoreceptorsretinaretinitis pigmentosavitreous

Identifiers

PMID33510064
PMCPMC8328774
OpenAlexW3123922205

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.