ReviewNeurogenetics2026
CRISPR-Cas9-based therapies for Huntington's disease and Friedreich's ataxia: mechanisms, advances, and future perspectives.
Review in Neurogenetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Huntington's disease (HD) and Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA) are progressive inherited neurodegenerative disorders caused by trinucleotide repeat expansions but characterized by distinct pathogenic mechanisms. HD arises from a coding-region CAG expansion in the HTT gene that produces toxic gain-of-function effects of mutant huntingtin (mHTT), whereas FRDA results primarily from intronic GAA repeat expansion in FXN, leading to epigenetic repression and frataxin deficiency. The emergence of CRISPR-based genome engineering has created new opportunities to address these diseases at their genetic origin. This review examines current CRISPR therapeutic strategies for HD and FRDA, including allele-specific editing, transcriptional suppression, repeat excision, epigenetic reactivation, and emerging precision editing approaches such as base editing and prime editing. We compare the molecular rationale, preclinical outcomes, and translational limitations associated with each approach while highlighting how disease architecture influences therapeutic design. Although preclinical studies demonstrate promising restoration of cellular phenotypes and functional improvement, significant barriers remain. Efficient delivery to the central nervous system and cardiac tissue, control of editing duration, immune responses, off-target activity, and emerging concerns regarding on-target genomic instability continue to limit clinical translation. Recent advances in delivery engineering, non-viral systems, and programmable editing platforms suggest that future therapeutic success will depend on integrating disease-specific biology with increasingly precise and controllable genome engineering technologies. Ethical and regulatory concerns remain substantial, particularly regarding informed consent in the context of cognitive decline and the irreversibility of genomic modification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42439976What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.