Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading causes of death globally and urgently require new novel therapeutic strategies. Gene therapy is the application of gene modulation technology to treat abnormal gene expression under disease conditions. Viral- and nonviral-based gene delivery systems are the foundation of gene modulation in target cells. Moreover, plasmid- or oligo-based gene modulation tools as well as new advancements in gene editing using CRISPR/Cas technology are currently being tested in a variety of clinical trials. Here, we summarized state-of-the-art gene therapy technologies as well as recent clinical trials and discuss the applications and lessons of gene therapy in CVDs.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Background
Genes, originating from segments of DNA or RNA, are the basic building blocks for the traits that make up organisms [1]. Phenotypic traits derive from a combination of our genetic material and the environment we stem from. This genetic material, including nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, is expressed through the transcription into RNA, which can act as functional molecules themselves or which can be translated into functional proteins [2, 3].
Importantly, gene sequences can exhibit dysfunctional behaviors which are known as mutations, and these mutations have the potential to lead to the development of diseases. These diseases caused by gene mutations are categorized as chromosomal diseases, gene disorders, or mitochondrial dysfunction [4]. In addition, certain infectious diseases such as acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) as well as some noncommunicable diseases like cancer, are known to be mediated by gene abnormalities. For example, mutations in the DNA repair gene, breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1), are associated with an increased risk of a variety of cancers such as prostate, breast, and ovarian cancers owing to high loads of DNA damage and resulting in genomic instability [5, 6]. It is reported that people with a BRCA1 mutation have an extremely high risk for developing breast cancer (87%) and ovarian cancer (44%) compared to noncarriers of this mutation [7].
Several traditional treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation as well as novel approaches such as hormone-based therapies, stem cell therapies, or immunotherapies, are widely used for cancer treatments and for targeting cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) [8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. Quite often, traditional therapies are not always successful at correcting the mechanism by which the disease occurs and rather treats the symptoms of the disease instead. Gene therapy, on the other hand, aims to target and potentially correct any genetic mutation causing a disease, providing a new treatment option which focuses on the initial source of any illness [15]. Initially, gene therapy was designed to introduce a new healthy copy where a gene was either mutated or absent in cells via a vector. The restoration of gene function following a therapeutic modification results in the correction of genetic abnormalities stemming from hereditary or environmental processes. With the advancement of gene therapy, however, also comes new techniques by which to manipulate the genome. New mechanisms involving gene editing and inactivation have emerged in recent years such as the CRISPR/Cas system and antisense strategies encompassing RNA-based therapeutics. While the disruption and silencing of genes through direct DNA and RNA editing tools are new and exciting developments in this field, we will primarily focus here on the state-of-the-art vehicle delivery approaches of introducing genes into cells [16].
2 History of Gene Therapy
The concept of gene therapy as a gene modification tool has been around since the 1970s. Despite the beneficial potential in reversing possibly life-threatening mutations, gene therapy also raised deep ethical concerns surrounding genetic modifications [17]. However, the field of gene therapy continued to grow since the 1980s, when the retroviral vector system was developed to efficiently deliver transgenes into mammalian cells and modify preexisting genes [18]. By the 1990s, the first approved gene therapy was applied to two children in the USA who suffered from adenosine deaminase deficiency-severe combined immunodeficiency (ADA-SCID). Two years after the gene therapy treatment, which was performed ex vivo after T cell apheresis using cell culture expansion and reinfusion into the patients after 9–12 days, the integrated vector-mediated ADA gene remained expressed in T cells [19]. This report was the first positive indicator that gene therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients suffering from immune deficient diseases [19]. Apart from genomic modifications, RNA interference (RNAi), in particular small interfering RNA (siRNA), has also been developed as a gene silencing therapy to block abnormal RNA or protein expression which may lead to disease [20, 21]. In 2003, siRNAs were first shown to mediate Fas cell surface death receptor (FAS) knockdown in vivo, which allowed for a reduced threat from fulminant hepatitis [22]. Notably, the first human trial targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and kinesin spindle protein (KSP) used lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulation of siRNAs. This technique was applied to cancer patients in 2013, providing both safe and pharmacokinetically sound evidence that siRNA-mediated gene therapy could be used effectively in humans [23]. In 2008, treatment of Leber’s congenital amaurosis (a rare disease typically causing severe visual impairment) by recombinant adeno-associated virus 2 (rAAV2)-RPE65 became the first effective AAV-mediated gene therapy to show clinical efficacy and disease improvement in patients. Three parallel trials proved that patients who got a single subretinal injection of rAAV2-RPE65, to complement the causative mutation in the RPE65 gene, had long-term improvement in vision and light sensitivity [24,25,26]. Importantly, the follow-up studies showed persistent visual improvements in patients and did not raise any safety concerns [27,28,29]. Despite the successes seen with viral vectors in clinical trials, other gene editing techniques were advancing in parallel. With the development of the engineered clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) nuclease technology, the ability to manipulate DNA became increasingly simplified, efficient, and cost effective [30, 31]. The CRISPR-Cas technology improved the possibility of gene therapy mediated by engineered cells such as chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) [32]. These engineered CAR-Ts were produced to recognize, target, and destroy cancerous cells in a more effective and localized manner [33]. After the first successful clinical trials using engineered CAR-T therapy for lung cancer in 2016, they have since been further utilized in active clinical trials for the treatment of leukemia, lymphoma, and solid tumors [34,35,36,37,38]. The existence of clinical trials using multiple gene therapeutic techniques brings to light the high demand and great advancements of multiple technologies that are being pursued to treat genetic abnormalities.
3 Material and Approach of Gene Therapy
Currently, the field of gene therapy has been broadly studied; however, it is still a therapeutic concept predominantly based in research laboratories with only a limited number of ongoing clinical trials [39]. The efficiency and specificity of gene delivery as well as gene regulation utilized in target cells are the two major obstacles that must be overcome to successfully achieve safe and effective genetic modifications [40]. In this part, we will summarize the viral and nonviral approaches that are currently utilized in gene therapy.
4 CRISPR-Cas-Mediated Gene Editing
Primarily, we see gene therapy as using a vector to replace a mutated or missing copy of a gene. Another form of treatment that is newer to the field of gene therapy involving editing and inactivation is the CRISPR/Cas system. This mechanism avoids the complications and risks associated with some viral vector delivery and the correlating toxicities and safety concerns that have been seen in several clinical trials over the years [41]. The CRISPR/Cas system was the most recent gene editing technique after the foundational mechanisms using transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) and first zinc finger nucleases (ZFN). This genome editing tool can be delivered to cells through AAV vectors [42], which have a safer history comparative to other viral vectors, as well as through other nonviral delivery strategies. CRISPR/Cas operates via the specific targeting of a segment of DNA in the genome by utilizing a particularly designed single-guide RNA (sgRNA) to identify only the region requiring intervention. Optimizing this specificity allowed by sgRNAs will continue to help reduce off-target effects currently seen by this gene editing technique [43, 44]. The Cas protein, an endonuclease allowing for breaks in DNA at the target site, can also be modified to reduce side effects. These modifications, however, do not make the CRISPR/Cas system superior or inferior to standard gene replacement therapy using viral vectors. Both methods have different advantages and flaws unique to their mode of action and delivery mechanism [41]. The mechanism by which the Cas protein cuts DNA inducing double-stranded breaks (DSBs) can also lead to the unintended activation of apoptosis pathways, such as triggering p53, instead of editing the DNA segment after the break [45]. One recent development with this technique is using the base editing (BE) system. This allows for a single targeted base pair to be exchanged, for example, a C-G base pair can be exchanged for a T-A by cytidine base editors (CBEs) and the reverse mutation can also be corrected for A-T pairs exchanged for G-C using adenosine base editors (ABEs). This occurs by using a catalytically deactivated Cas9 endonuclease (dCas9) that does not induce DSBs, allowing for single base pair edits [46, 47]. RNA is also edited using CRISPR technology with the endonuclease Cas13 (Cas9 can be modified to target RNA instead of DNA as well; however, Cas13 exclusively targets RNA). Since this system does not require the protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) sequence that is necessary at the DNA editing sites, Cas13 can be more broadly used. There is an additional advantage, in that the Cas13 system does not permanently edit the genome since it is targeting RNA after transcription, resulting in nonpermanent changes (which could trigger immune reactions or lead to incorrect editing with DNA [48]). The method for base pair editing is similar to that of the dCas9 system, using dead Cas13 (dCas13) with the ADAR2 domain to edit adenosine to inosine in what is known as the REPAIR mechanism or with APOBEC1 for exchanging a cytidine to uridine using the RESCUE technique [41, 48,49,50].
The first CRISPR clinical trial utilized PD-1 edited T cells to treat non-small-cell lung cancer in China. Most patients had minimal side- and off-target effects, and a decrease in disease progression was also seen when edited T cells reached higher levels in patients [51, 52]. Edited PD-1 and CAR-T cells were also used as a combined treatment for the first CRISPR clinical trial to take place in the USA in 2018 to treat myeloma and sarcoma. The study was also deemed a success, in that it provided initial findings in combination with the first Chinese trial that CRISPR editing as a treatment for disease progression seemed to be relatively safe with acceptable side effects. Treatments in both trails did not produce an overwhelming immune response either, which was an early problem that was observed in some of the first clinical trials using gene replacement therapy [53]. Both off-target and on-target mutations were seen in both trials; however, while this safety concern is still valid and needs to be closely monitored in all future DNA editing trials, neither effects were detrimental to the patients and were found to take place primarily in noncoding segments of the genome.
Aside from cancers, CRISPR has also taken its first step in 2019 to treat a genetic disease, sickle cell disease (SCD), by increasing fetal hemoglobin levels in isolated and edited autologous blood stem cells [54]. These stem cells are reintroduced into the body of the patient and can then create a new population of hemoglobin-producing blood cells from the bone marrow. This technique is also quite specific as it involves ex vivo editing of the blood cells directly, which greatly reduces off- and on-target side effects seen with CRISPR editing through a delivery vector into the patient [55]. Overall, CRISPR editing to treat diseases of both genetic and acquired origins is still in its early stages. So far, the clinical trials that have taken place in the last few years have been used to primarily assess feasibility, toxicity, tolerability, and practicality before shifting the focus to successfully cure a disease [56].
5 Nonviral-Mediated Gene Therapy Methods
In the early 2000s, nonviral approaches were not a common tool for gene therapy due to low delivery efficiency and specificity [57]. In the past few years, production and modification of nonviral methods have greatly improved and led to a higher gene transfer efficiency while also allowing for long-term gene expression, not only in vitro but also in vivo. In addition, the low cost, ease of production, and reduced pathogenicity of nonviral applications have important manufactory and safety advantages over viral approaches [58]. Currently, siRNAs or RNA inhibitors, RNA mimics, modified mRNAs (modRNA), and other oligonucleotide-based molecular products are gaining attention as potential therapeutic materials in the application for gene therapy [59].
6 siRNA and RNA Inhibitors
Since the first RNAi phenomenon was reported in 1990 [60] and the mechanisms behind it were clarified in 1998 [61], siRNAs have become a regular tool to perform gene inhibition in cell culture. SiRNAs are small RNA transcripts with a length of approximately 20–22 nucleotides and can disrupt protein translation by promoting the degradation of RNA transcripts through binding to the targeted mRNA [62]. Similar gene silencing can also be reached by antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs). These synthetic, single-stranded oligonucleotides prevent expression of a target protein by blocking the specific region of target RNA or DNA [63, 64]. For example, locked nucleic acid (LNA) is a kind of modified ASO with a bridged, bicyclic sugar moiety. LNA will bind to the target RNA forming a DNA-RNA hybrid, and RNase H-dependent degradation of the targeted RNA will then be activated [65].
MiR-132 is a breakthrough example of RNA gene therapy and is the first antisense gene therapy to treat CVDs. Since 2011, miR-132 has been reported as a regulator of cardiac fibrosis [66, 67], cardiac hypertrophy, and cardiomyocyte autophagy [68]. A series of preclinical investigations further proved that the inhibitor of miR-132 (antimiR-132) could rescue cardiac hypertrophy and heart failure in mice and more importantly in pigs [68,69,70]. Notably, CDR132L, the miR-132 inhibitor applied in pigs, is a synthetic LNA-ASO modified with a fully phosphorylated backbone. In addition, large animal investigations reported a safe administration, high cardiac delivery efficiency, and clear reduction of miR-132 expression in the myocardium and plasma [69, 70]. With these promising preclinical results, CDR132L moved forward for the first-in-human study in 2019 involving 28 patients with stable chronic heart failure of ischemic origin (NCT04045405). Safety, pharmacokinetics, and heart failure relevant pharmacodynamic parameters are all intensively evaluated in this phase I clinical trial. After a 1-year follow-up, CDR132L has proved to be safe to administer to patients and can also be well tolerated without an apparent dose-limiting toxicity. Interesting, reductions of NT-proBNP, significant QRS narrowing, and positive trends for relevant cardiac fibrosis biomarkers were reported after CDR132L treatment in heart failure patients with the standard care of treatment [71].
Notably, several siRNA-mediated gene therapies have been approved and applied in the clinics [72]. For example, Alnylam’s Onpattro (Patisiran) (NCT01960348) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a novel RNA interference drug to treat hereditary transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis (hATTR), a rare disease characterized by extracellular amyloid protein deposition leading to multiple organ dysfunction [73]. In addition, several siRNA-mediated RNAi drugs are currently in clinical trials (phase II/III) such as SYL1001Sylentis (NCT 03108664) for dry eye disease or QPI-1007 Quark (NCT 02341560) for non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. Detailed siRNA and RNA inhibitor clinical trials are excellently summarized elsewhere [72, 74].
7 Nucleic Acid Drugs
The first successful genetic transfer in mice occurred in the 1990s with an overexpression of chloramphenicol acetyltransferase, luciferase, and β-galactosidase by an in vitro transcribed (IVT) RNA or DNA plasmid in the skeletal muscle [75]. In the following years, IVT mRNA was introduced for diverse applications, including protein substitution and vaccination approaches for cancer and infectious diseases [76,77,78,79]. IVT RNAs are synthesized RNAs that can be transcribed in vitro from DNA templates containing the sequence from either protein coding genes or noncoding RNA transcripts [80]. ModRNAs are IVT RNAs with modified nucleosides or synthetic nucleoside analogues which could reduce the innate immune response of the host cell and improve tissue specificity. IVT RNAs have come into focus as novel drugs to revise abnormal genetic disorders, allowing for the overall improvement in the field of RNA pharmacology [81].
Although oligo nucleic drugs remain in the initial stages of preclinical or phase I/II clinical trials, some of the pilot investigations have broaden the potential applications of IVT RNA as the future of medicine. For example, in cancer immunotherapy, Melan-A, tyrosinase, gp100, Mage-A1, Mage-A3, and survivin IVT mRNA were utilized in metastatic melanoma patients in a phase I/II trial (NCT00204607) [82]. In addition, several phase I/II clinical trials using IVT mRNAs for the treatment of HIV infections demonstrated the safety of IVT mRNA vaccines and observed the induced responses of immunogens in CD8+ and CD4+ T cells [83,84,85]. Detailed IVT RNA clinical trials are well reviewed by Sahin et al. [86].
8 Viral-Based Approach for Gene Therapy
The advantage of viral vectors is their high infection efficiency in a broad spectrum of cells, ranging from prokaryotes to many eukaryotic cells. Therefore, recombinant viral vectors have the potential to package and deliver the transgene to the targeted cells. Viral vectors can be divided into genome-integrating vectors as well as non-integrating vectors, classified by whether the transgene can be continuously expressed in dividing cells [87].
Most RNA viruses with single-stranded RNA (ssRNA) or double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) are not able to integrate their genome into the host chromosome, with the exception of retroviruses. One of the best studied retroviruses is the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) [88]. The first retroviral vectors which were used in human gene therapy trials [19] are derived from the Moloney murine leukemia virus (MLV) [89].
Lentiviruses are a complex subtype of retroviruses which can cause chronic and deadly diseases. Notably, the outstanding feature of lentiviruses is the high efficiency of infection and genomic integration in nondividing and terminally differentiated mammalian cells, including lymphocytes and macrophages. In addition, the ability to transport large genetic payloads as well as their stable long-term transgene expression makes them a very attractive tool for gene delivery [90, 91]. So far, three generations of lentiviral vectors have been developed for transgene modification [92]. First-generation lentiviral vectors originate from a significant portion of the HIV genome, including the gag and pol genes encoding for viral structural proteins and the viral RNA reverse transcriptase, respectively, as well as several additional viral proteins such as the envelope protein (VSV-G) [93]. VSV-G recognizes a ubiquitously expressed receptor such as low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDL-R) [94], which aids in a high transduction efficiency of the lentiviral vector in a wide range of cells [95]. The main improvements that were made to the second and third generations of lentiviral vectors were regarding safety. Second-generation lentiviral vectors were subsequently developed to remove accessory gene factors such as vif, vpr, vpu, and nef. Third-generation vectors split the viral genome into separate plasmids and removed the tat gene to further improve the safety of the vectors [96]. In 2003, the first lentiviral clinical application occurred by delivering a long antisense RNA sequence targeting the HIV-1 envelope gene for anti-HIV therapy [97]. It is important to note that eight years after the study, there was no apparent risk for serious adverse or long-term events occurring in this clinical trial [98].
The Sendai virus (SeV) is a member of the Respirovirus genus, a negative sense ssRNA virus from the Paramyxoviridae family. Due to the cytoplasmic gene expression of SeV, the absence of genomic integration is a unique feature of recombinant SeV vectors compared to a retroviral vector [99, 100]. SeV vectors have been used in clinical trials and tested in a live attenuated vaccine [101], in cancer [102], as well as in critical limb ischemia [103] for gene therapy.
A DNA viral vector is an additional virus system that employs double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) or single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) as its genomic materials. Adenoviruses (AdVs) are non-enveloped DNA viruses with a diameter of 70nm, a 36 kb dsDNA, and about 50 viral polypeptides [104]. So far, more than 50 different AdV serotypes have been characterized, and a majority of them can also be observed naturally in humans. In gene therapy, AdV types 2 and 5 were found to be good options for clinical trials due to the fact that they were not already associated with human diseases [105, 106]. In addition, adenoviral vectors have a packaging capacity of up to 8000 base pairs (bps) of foreign DNA, which is sufficient for the delivery of most therapeutic genes. Similar to lentiviruses, recombinant AdVs (rAdV) can also infect dividing and quiescent cells with equal transduction efficiency [107]. Notably, rAdVs can obtain a higher production yield (1010–1011 infectious particles/ml) compared to other vector systems such as retroviral vectors [108]. However, rAdVs show no integration into the targeting cell genome, indicating short-term expression particularly in dividing cells. In addition, in vivo applications of adenoviral vectors could lead to cellular immunity and the generation of a humoral response, also reducing the expression or the effect of adenoviral therapy. Furthermore, the generation of neutralizing antibodies of rAdV could strongly reduce their utility, resulting in the difficulties of repetitive treatments [109]. In 1993, the first AdV-mediated gene therapy was performed to transfer cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) cDNA to treat cystic fibrosis in humans. The benefits of AdV treatment were observed, and no virus-associated adverse effect was detected, indicating that adenoviral vectors were effective at transferring genes to most organs in vivo [110]. However, immunogenicity still limits application of the AdVs in clinical trials [111].
In 1965, a number of “satellite viruses” were observed by electron microscopy (EM) from AdVs prepared in the lab [112, 113]. These small DNA viruses (20–25 nm in diameter) were dubbed AAVs due to their ability to replicate in the presence of AdVs [113]. Two years later, AAVs were first isolated from human tissue [114]. AAVs are one kind of Dependoparvovirus within the family Parvoviridae, and they have not only been found in humans but also in nonhuman primates. In addition, they are comprised of an icosahedral protein capsid of ~26 nm in diameter and a single-stranded DNA genome of ~4.7 kb [115]. The wild-type AAV capsid is composed of three types of subunits (VP1, VP2, and VP3). Two T-shaped inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) are located at the ends of the viral genome, and the viral replication and packaging signals are flanked between ITRs. Four rep gene-encoded proteins are the source of viral replication, and capsid subunits are alternatively spliced and translated by cap genes through different start codons [116]. The wild-type AAVs also have the ability to integrate into the human AAVS1 genomic locus [117]. In the early 1980s, the secondary structure of the AAV ITR region only allowed for a very limited number of plasmids cloned with AAV sequences [115]. Until 1984, engineered rAAV2 vectors were generated as a useful tool for gene transfer in mammalian cells and had become the foundation of AAV-mediated gene therapy [118]. rAAVs consist of the same capsid sequence and structure as wild-type AAVs. Importantly, removal of viral coding sequences enlarged the packaging capacity of rAAVs and reduced the genomic integration, immunogenicity, and cytotoxicity of AAVs. However, the gene packaging capacity of rAAVs is still under 5 kbs [119]. The best characterized and most widely applied AAV serotype is the naturally occurring AAV2. Notably, AAV9, a clade F AAV serotype isolated from human liver tissues, demonstrates the ability to bypass the blood-brain barrier [120]. Till now, 13 different human or nonhuman primate AAV serotypes have been classified [121]. However, rAAVs are a major type of AAVs which have been utilized in preclinical investigation and clinical trials. Since the early 1990s, clinical trials mediated by rAAV2 and rAAV1 vectors have been tested in several diseases including CF, hemophilia B, Canavan disease, and α1-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency [122,123,124,125]. These pilot phase I/II trials demonstrated a good gene expression duration of rAAV therapy as well as proved the safety of injection of rAAV.
9 Gene Therapy in CVDs
In the last three decades, several gene therapies have been tested for cardiovascular disorders including coronary or peripheral artery disease and heart failure [126]. After over 100 clinical trials, there has so far been no successful therapeutic effect reported for gene therapy in CVDs. In angiogenesis, therapeutic attempts are focused on the formation of new blood vessels driven by the production of cytokines which have so far been shown to recover some heart function in animal experiments [127]. For heart failure therapy, the modulation of Ca2+ in cardiomyocytes has become the main target of interventional therapy. Similar to therapies in angiogenesis, the beneficial effects of gene therapy in heart failure observed in animal studies did not translate to clinical trials in the last two decades [40]. Here, we will summarize the current clinical trials of gene therapy in CVDs.
To induce the formation of new capillaries or blood vessels, cytokines such as VEGF, FGF (basic fibroblast growth factor), and G-CSF (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) have been tested in clinical trials as a form of gene therapy for CVDs [128, 129]. This technique has been used in over 20 clinical trials using naked plasmid DNA which carries the VEGF gene, injected into the myocardium of patients with severe coronary artery disease (CAD) in the late 1990s and early 2000s [130,131,132,133,134,135]. These randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials failed to show a beneficial effect on either the symptomatic or clinical outcome. One of possible reasons for this is the poor cardiac uptake of the naked DNA plasmid, thus limiting the biological activity in the human heart. Therefore, adenoviral-based cDNA delivery vehicles have also been tested for cardiac gene therapy in clinical trials. For example, AdGVVEGF121.10NH (commercial name: BIOBYPASS, adenoviral vector with a strong CMV enhancer/promoter, and VEGF-A121 cDNA) was used in a series of clinical trials to treat patients with CAD [136]. In preclinical animal studies, myocardium injection of an adeno-vector was able to improve myocardial angiogenesis, increase blood flow, and rescue heart function in the ischemic porcine heart [137,138,139,140]. A phase I clinical trial tested in patients with severe CAD also demonstrated that an intramyocardial injection of AdVEGF121 was well tolerated and provided some promising initial findings that showed a trend toward the reduction of myocardial ischemia injury [141, 142]. Interestingly, the Randomized Evaluation of VEGF for Angiogenesis (REVASC) trial reported that AdVEGF121 was associated with significantly improved symptoms and exercise capacity of CAD patients [143]. Unfortunately, other AdVEGF121 trials showed no difference of exercise capacity, time to ischemic threshold, or myocardial perfusion compared to the control patients [144]. Although these completed trials showed no significant beneficial effect in patients, there are still some ongoing clinical studies based on adenoviral vectors, such as three different VEGF-A isoforms in a phase I/II trial (NCT01757223) that had recently begun in 2020 to optimize the therapy.
Another interesting study of gene therapy in CVDs occurred by targeting Ca2+ ATPse and SERCA2a, a key factor for Ca2+ reuptake by the sarcoplasmic reticulum [145]. Since the early 1970s, the sarcoplasmic Ca2+ ATPase was found to be an important molecule for heart function in animal models and was also found to be reduced in different CVDs [146,147,148,149]. The idea to restore levels of SERCA2a has been an extremely popular strategy for gene therapeutics in heart failure [150]. In 2007, patients with advanced heart failure were treated with an AAV1 containing the SERCA2a gene to restore protein expression (known as the CUPID trial, calcium upregulation by percutaneous administration of gene therapy in patients with CVDs; NCT00454818) [151, 152]. It was the first phase I clinical trial to use an AAV gene therapy for heart failure and simultaneously verified the safety and feasibility of the treatment [153]. Unfortunately, the blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter study failed to demonstrate positive clinical outcomes. The AAV1- SERCA2a treatment does not improve heart function in patients with heart failure and severely reduced ejection fraction, ischemic and nonischemic etiology (NCT01643330), or left ventricular assist devices (NCT01966887) [154, 155]. Although these current attempts did not show positive therapeutic results, several other approaches are currently ongoing to improve gene therapy in heart failure. For example, a phase I clinical study (NCT04179643) that commenced in 2020 is testing BNP116.sc-CMV.I1c, a chimeric AAV2/AAV8 capsid with a high specificity for cardiac and skeletal muscles with less off-target effects in the liver and lungs [156], in patients with class III heart failure.
10 Future Perspectives of Gene Therapy in CVDs
Critical problems of gene therapy in CVDs involve the insufficient gene transduction into heart tissue or cells [157]. Currently, heart-specific gene delivery technology still limits the application of gene therapy in CVDs. Notably, naked plasmid transfection as well as viral-mediated gene delivery did not cause major safety concerns in most phase I/II trials (summarized above). Transfection of the naked plasmid showed a short-term expression time when compared to the AAV systems which could prolong gene expression [158]. However, the neutralizing antibodies of AAVs reduce the vector transduction efficiency and lead to a big obstacle of AAV application in the clinics [159]. In addition, the high cost of AAV manufacturing for clinical applications is still a challenge for normal patients. Thus, improving cardiac cell specificity, reducing the innate immune response, and reducing production price as well as long-term gene expression and stability are the main goals for the next generation of AAVs used in gene therapy.
11 AAV Engineering for Heart-Specific Therapy
To overcome low specificity in the heart, or more specifically cardiomyocytes, capsid engineering of AAVs tries to improve cell-type tropism. Several AAV serotypes have now been identified since the first AAV was observed, and they have been seen to share similar structures such as genome size and genetic organization. However, the differences are in the amino acid composition of the capsid proteins. Thus, it is possible to obtain chimeric viral particles by AAV engineering through transencapsidation [160]. The capsid reengineering can help to optimize receptor binding and transduction efficiency and more importantly tissue target selectivity of rAAV. Currently, capsid chimera libraries are derived from a variety of AAV serotypes or the random mutation of the capsid region and are a good platform for heart-specific peptide selection [161, 162].
In addition, engineered or random capsid mutagenesis, DNA shuffling, and direct selection are the most commonly used techniques to generate new rAAV variants [163,164,165]. For example, AAV2i8 and AAV-SASTG, two AAV2 chimeras, achieved a higher cardiac and skeletal muscle transduction efficiency with a lower off-target phenotype seen in the liver [166, 167]. In addition, Pulicherla and colleagues generated engineered liver-detargeted AAV9 vectors which had a similar transduction efficiency to the heart and muscle as wild-type AAV9 but 10- to 25-fold lower infection of the liver [168]. The modification of the AAV capsid could be a solution to improve AAV-mediated gene therapy in CVDs.
12 Successful Viral-Based Gene Therapy in Clinical Trials
While every new gene therapy trial helps advance this technique of repairing the genome, crucial safety concerns have arisen with the development of this treatment option. One of the major benefits of AAVs is their low potential to produce immunological responses due to the absence of viral protein expression and the extremely limited viral elements present in the vector. The cellular immune response decreases without presentation markers on the surface of cells transduced by the AAV [169]. This is not to say, however, that AAVs cannot produce any immune response. A limitation to using AAVs involves an adaptive humoral response which occurs in an organism when they have been previously infected by an AAV of the same serotype. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) have the capacity to neutralize this additional infection from the same AAV serotype in 30–60% of humans [170]. NAbs are capable of limiting this possibly lifesaving gene delivery by blocking AAV transduction into cells of a person who was previously infected. The delivery of alternate serotypes is one possible solution, although some NAbs against one specific serotype have also been seen to neutralize additional serotypes as well [170]. To overcome this obstacle, studies have been performed such as one that simultaneously administered anti-CD20 antibodies in order to reduce the internal titer of NAbs to reduce the neutralization of the added gene therapeutic vectors and to also engineer AAV capsids as was previously discussed above [171].
With many decades of research, gene therapy was eventually successful in clinical trials. In 2017, a study was published where the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene was delivered to patients born with a mutation or deletion that led to spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (SMA1). SMN proteins are produced primarily through the SMN1 gene, as the SMN2 gene is missing an exon, leading to a reduced protein production from this gene alone. Therefore, having an SMN1 deletion and only copies of SMN2 almost guarantees that a patient will have SMA1 as the SMN2 gene alone produces an insufficient level of protein for neuronal cells. Without the SMN1 gene, motor neurons lose the ability to function, resulting in severe motor disabilities, leading to lifelong ventilation and/or death in 75% of patients before 2 years of age [171,172,173]. Zolgensma (biologically known as AVXS-101), first approved for use in the USA in 2019, is a gene therapy developed using an AAV9 vector to deliver a healthy copy of the SMN1 gene to motor neurons to hinder disease progression and improve the quality of life of these infants. The study showed improvements in motor function in 11 out of 12 patients in the initial trial with more than half not requiring further ventilation and even two gaining the ability to walk [172]. Interestingly, Zolgensma was not the first FDA-approved drug to treat SMA. In late 2016, an antisense oligonucleotide drug known as Spinraza (nusinersen) was first approved to treat SMA through a multi-dose system approach in patients from the early stages of birth [174]. This treatment option was administered through direct injection into the cerebrospinal fluid four times in the first 64 days of the trial [175]. It was determined at the completion of the study that Spinraza would need to be consistently administered for the duration of the patient’s life [173]. It is important to note that the mechanism of action by which this antisense oligonucleotide works is quite different to that of Zolgensma. The aim of Spinraza is to have more full-length SMN proteins expressed in motor neurons by targeting the pre-messenger RNA of the existing copy of SMN2 [175]. Since the therapy only interacts at an RNA level, a continuous treatment plan is required to manage disease progression. Zolgensma, on the other hand, is a direct form of gene replacement therapy that only involves a single administration of a healthy SMN gene via an AAV vector, which can then directly produce full-length SMA proteins without consistent manipulation at the RNA level [173].
Even though the treatment only requires a one-time administration, Zolgensma is currently the most expensive drug on the market, partially due to this single-dose treatment, the cost of developing the drug, and the rarity of the disease itself, highlighting another (in this case, economic) limitation of AAV-based gene therapy [176]. Despite the high costs, this drug is not perfect and can lead to elevated liver enzymes in patients who have taken it, which can cause safety concerns in those with preexisting liver conditions. Other AAV-based therapeutics undergoing clinical trials have also been seen to cause severe problems, even death, in patients with preexisting liver conditions. The FDA has even halted clinical trials after two patients died while receiving a high dose of AT132 in the Audentes Therapuetics’ trial [177]. This AAV8 vector is used to deliver a healthy copy of the myotubularin-1 gene to treat X-linked myotubular myopathy. Since this was the highest dose of AAV gene therapy given to date in a clinical trial and the patients who died as a result also had underlying liver conditions, safety concerns relating to low-dose treatments especially in patients with healthy livers are relatively low. Other trials for AAVs used to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy have also observed toxicities in patients; however, the knowledge and understanding of gene replacement therapy continues to grow with each trial, especially when complications arise [177]. This was especially true in the case of Jesse Gelsinger who was the first patient to die from an immune reaction to an rAV to treat ornithine transcarbamoylase back in 1999. The severe immune reaction that he experienced that ultimately led to his death was extremely rare as none of the other 4000 patients from other clinical trials experienced the same side effects. The reevaluation that this led to by the FDA to intensely study and determine why and which vectors could be harmful as delivery vehicles has undoubtedly saved lives and ensured safer treatment for all future studies after this tragic loss [178].
13 Novel Therapeutic Target Genes
Current gene therapy candidates in CVDs are mainly focusing on cytokines or calcium-related proteins such as VEGF or SERCA2a. Apart from coding genes which only comprise 1–2% of the human genome [179], noncoding RNA (ncRNA) transcripts (without coding potential) are worth noting as future therapeutic targets. Although the function of most ncRNAs is still unknown, growing evidence has proven that ncRNAs are key modulators in diseases (such as cancer or CVDs) [180]. For exploring a clinical application, numerous independent studies regarding circulating ncRNAs have been reported as biomarkers to predict and monitor the response of CVDs and treatments [181, 182]. Notably, preclinical investigations of ncRNAs are also heading in the direction of potential therapeutic options for CVD patients. For example, a conserved long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) H19 is a powerful ncRNA molecule for the protection of pathological cardiac hypertrophy. Restoration of H19 expression mediated by AAV injection four weeks after induction of chronic left ventricular pressure overload successfully attenuated cardiac hypertrophy in mice. In addition, AAV6-mediated H19 overexpression improves contractility of human engineered heart tissue, highlighting translational potential of H19 [183]. In addition, miRNAs and ncRNAs approximately 20 nt in length have also been evaluated in several preclinical studies for the treatment of CVDs such as miR-181a [184]. Overexpressed miR-181a mediated by AAV9 delivery one week after MI was able to show recovered heart function in mice [185]. Apart from these novel ncRNAs, some traditional protein coding genes were also validated as putative CVD therapeutic targets in preclinical investigations. For example, Tert, a telomerase reverse transcriptase encoding gene, is well known for its role in cellular senescence. Cardiac-specific overexpression of Tert by AAV9 attenuated cardiac dilatation, improved ventricular function, and reduced infarct scarring after an acute MI [186]. Following studies proved that AAV-Tert overexpression protected against cardiac apoptosis and cardiac dysfunction from doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity in mice [187]. These encouraging preclinical studies recognized the potential to utilize ncRNAs as well as protein coding genes as novel therapeutic candidates to treat CVDs.
14 Conclusion
After over 30 years from the first gene therapy clinical trial, no successful application has since been reported in CVDs, indicating that this field is still young and needs further development which is currently pursued with tremendous efforts both in academia and in the pharmaceutical industry. The improvement of gene delivery platforms and preclinical investigation systems, as well as for novel therapeutic candidates, are supporting the development of next-generation gene therapy in rare genetic disorders as well as CVDs.
References
Gericke NM, Hagberg M (2007) Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students’ understanding of genetics. Sci & Educ 16(7):849–881
Noller HF (2012) Evolution of protein synthesis from an RNA world. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 4(4):3681
Eddy SR (2001) Non-coding RNA genes and the modern RNA world. Nat Rev Genet 2(12):919–929
Human Genomics in Global Health. https://www.who.int/genomics/public/geneticdiseases/en/
Huszno J, Kolosza Z, Grzybowska E (2019) BRCA1 mutation in breast cancer patients: analysis of prognostic factors and survival. Oncol Lett 17(2):1986–1995
Cavanagh H, Rogers KM (2015) The role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in prostate, pancreatic and stomach cancers. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 13(1):16
Ford D, Easton DF, Bishop DT, Narod SA, Goldgar DE (1994) Risks of cancer in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Lancet 343(8899):692–695
Heidelberger C, Chaudhuri NK, Danneberg P, Mooren D, Griesbach L, Duschinsky R, Schnitzer RJ, Pleven E, Scheiner J (1957) Fluorinated pyrimidines, a new class of tumour-inhibitory compounds. Nature 179(4561):663–666
Farber S, Diamond LK (1948) Temporary remissions in acute leukemia in children produced by folic acid antagonist, 4-aminopteroyl-glutamic acid. N Engl J Med 238(23):787–793
Li MC, Hertz R, Bergenstal DM (1958) Therapy of choriocarcinoma and related trophoblastic tumors with folic acid and purine antagonists. N Engl J Med 259(2):66–74
Miles WE (1971) A method of performing abdomino-perineal excision for carcinoma of the rectum and of the terminal portion of the pelvic colon. CA Cancer J Clin 21(6):361–364
Sherwood JT, Brock MV (2007) Lung cancer: new surgical approaches. Respirology 12(3):326–332
James ND, Caty A, Borre M, Zonnenberg BA, Beuzeboc P, Morris T, Phung D, Dawson NA (2009) Safety and efficacy of the specific endothelin-A receptor antagonist ZD4054 in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases who were pain free or mildly symptomatic: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial. Eur Urol 55(5):1112–1123
Couzin-Frankel J (2013) Breakthrough of the year 2013. Cancer immunotherapy. Science 342(6165):1432–1433
Bulaklak K, Gersbach CA (2020) The once and future gene therapy. Nat Commun 11(1):5820
Senechal M (2014) What is the best therapeutic strategy in patients with low flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis, and wide QRS? Eur J Heart Fail 6(6):598–600
Friedmann T, Roblin R (1972) Gene therapy for human genetic disease? Science 175(4025):949–955
Cepko CL, Roberts BE, Mulligan RC (1984) Construction and applications of a highly transmissible murine retrovirus shuttle vector. Cell 37(3):1053–1062
Blaese RM, Culver KW, Miller AD, Carter CS, Fleisher T, Clerici M, Shearer G, Chang L, Chiang Y, Tolstoshev P, Greenblatt JJ, Rosenberg SA, Klein H, Berger M, Mullen CA, Ramsey WJ, Muul L, Morgan RA, Anderson WF (1995) T lymphocyte-directed gene therapy for ADA- SCID: initial trial results after 4 years. Science 270(5235):475–480
Ozcan G, Ozpolat B, Coleman RL, Sood AK, Lopez-Berestein G (2015) Preclinical and clinical development of siRNA-based therapeutics. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 87:108–119
Wittrup A, Lieberman J (2015) Knocking down disease: a progress report on siRNA therapeutics. Nat Rev Genet 16(9):543–552
Song E, Lee SK, Wang J, Ince N, Ouyang N, Min J, Chen J, Shankar P, Lieberman J (2003) RNA interference targeting Fas protects mice from fulminant hepatitis. Nat Med 9(3):347–351
Tabernero J, Shapiro GI, LoRusso PM, Cervantes A, Schwartz GK, Weiss GJ, Paz-Ares L, Cho DC, Infante JR, Alsina M, Gounder MM, Falzone R, Harrop J, White AC, Toudjarska I, Bumcrot D, Meyers RE, Hinkle G, Svrzikapa N, Hutabarat RM, Clausen VA, Cehelsky J, Nochur SV, Gamba-Vitalo C, Vaishnaw AK, Sah DW, Gollob JA, Burris HA (2013) First-in-humans trial of an RNA interference therapeutic targeting VEGF and KSP in cancer patients with liver involvement. Cancer Discov 3(4):406–417
Cideciyan AV, Aleman TS, Boye SL, Schwartz SB, Kaushal S, Roman AJ, Pang JJ, Sumaroka A, Windsor EA, Wilson JM, Flotte TR, Fishman GA, Heon E, Stone EM, Byrne BJ, Jacobson SG, Hauswirth WW (2008) Human gene therapy for RPE65 isomerase deficiency activates the retinoid cycle of vision but with slow rod kinetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105(39):15112–15117
Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, Kaushal S, Cideciyan AV, Schwartz SB, Wang L, Conlon TJ, Boye SL, Flotte TR, Byrne BJ, Jacobson SG (2008) Treatment of leber congenital amaurosis due to RPE65 mutations by ocular subretinal injection of adeno-associated virus gene vector: short-term results of a phase I trial. Hum Gene Ther 19(10):979–990
Bainbridge JW, Smith AJ, Barker SS, Robbie S, Henderson R, Balaggan K, Viswanathan A, Holder GE, Stockman A, Tyler N, Petersen-Jones S, Bhattacharya SS, Thrasher AJ, Fitzke FW, Carter BJ, Rubin GS, Moore AT, Ali RR (2008) Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber’s congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med 358(21):2231–2239
Jacobson SG, Cideciyan AV, Ratnakaram R, Heon E, Schwartz SB, Roman AJ, Peden MC, Aleman TS, Boye SL, Sumaroka A, Conlon TJ, Calcedo R, Pang JJ, Erger KE, Olivares MB, Mullins CL, Swider M, Kaushal S, Feuer WJ, Iannaccone A, Fishman GA, Stone EM, Byrne BJ, Hauswirth WW (2012) Gene therapy for leber congenital amaurosis caused by RPE65 mutations: safety and efficacy in 15 children and adults followed up to 3 years. Arch Ophthalmol 130(1):9–24. https://doi.org/10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.298
Cideciyan AV, Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, Kaushal S, Schwartz SB, Boye SL, Windsor EA, Conlon TJ, Sumaroka A, Pang JJ, Roman AJ, Byrne BJ, Jacobson SG (2009) Human RPE65 gene therapy for Leber congenital amaurosis: persistence of early visual improvements and safety at 1 year. Hum Gene Ther 20(9):999–1004
Cideciyan AV, Hauswirth WW, Aleman TS, Kaushal S, Schwartz SB, Boye SL, Windsor EA, Conlon TJ, Sumaroka A, Roman AJ, Byrne BJ, Jacobson SG (2009) Vision 1 year after gene therapy for Leber’s congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med 361(7):725–727
Doudna JA, Charpentier E (2014) Genome editing. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science 346(6213):1258096
Fellmann C, Gowen BG, Lin PC, Doudna JA, Corn JE (2017) Cornerstones of CRISPR-Cas in drug discovery and therapy. Nat Rev Drug Discov 16(2):89–100
Jensen TI, Axelgaard E, Bak RO (2019) Therapeutic gene editing in haematological disorders with CRISPR/Cas9. Br J Haematol 185(5):821–835
Srivastava S, Riddell SR (2015) Engineering CAR-T cells: design concepts. Trends Immunol 36(8):494–502
Cyranoski D (2016) Chinese scientists to pioneer first human CRISPR trial. Nature 535(7613):476–477
Liu B, Song Y, Liu D (2017) Clinical trials of CAR-T cells in China. J Hematol Oncol 10(1):166
Cai B, Guo M, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Yang J, Guo Y, Dai H, Yu C, Sun Q, Qiao J, Hu K, Zuo H, Dong Z, Zhang Z, Feng M, Li B, Sun Y, Liu T, Liu Z, Wang Y, Huang Y, Yao B, Han W, Ai H (2016) Co-infusion of haplo-identical CD19-chimeric antigen receptor T cells and stem cells achieved full donor engraftment in refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Hematol Oncol 9(1):131
Fan D, Li Z, Zhang X, Yang Y, Yuan X, Zhang X, Yang M, Zhang Y, Xiong D (2015) AntiCD3Fv fused to human interleukin-3 deletion variant redirected T cells against human acute myeloid leukemic stem cells. J Hematol Oncol 8:18
Nakazawa Y, Matsuda K, Kurata T, Sueki A, Tanaka M, Sakashita K, Imai C, Wilson MH, Koike K (2016) Anti-proliferative effects of T cells expressing a ligand-based chimeric antigen receptor against CD116 on CD34(+) cells of juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia. J Hematol Oncol 9:27
Goncalves GAR, Paiva RMA (2017) Gene therapy: advances, challenges and perspectives. Einstein 15(3):369–375
Cannata A, Ali H, Sinagra G, Giacca M (2020) Gene therapy for the heart lessons learned and future perspectives. Circ Res 126(10):1394–1414
Uddin F, Rudin CM, Sen T (2020) CRISPR gene therapy: applications, limitations, and implications for the future. Front Oncol 10:1387
Moreno AM, Palmer N, Aleman F, Chen G, Pla A, Jiang N, Leong Chew W, Law M, Mali P (2019) Immune-orthogonal orthologues of AAV capsids and of Cas9 circumvent the immune response to the administration of gene therapy. Nat Biomed Eng 3(10):806–816
Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E (2012) A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337(6096):816–821
Zhang XH, Tee LY, Wang XG, Huang QS, Yang SH (2015) Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome engineering. Mol Ther Nucl Acids 4:e264
Ihry RJ, Worringer KA, Salick MR, Frias E, Ho D, Theriault K, Kommineni S, Chen J, Sondey M, Ye C, Randhawa R, Kulkarni T, Yang Z, McAllister G, Russ C, Reece-Hoyes J, Forrester W, Hoffman GR, Dolmetsch R, Kaykas A (2018) p53 inhibits CRISPR-Cas9 engineering in human pluripotent stem cells. Nat Med 24(7):939–946
Eid A, Alshareef S, Mahfouz MM (2018) CRISPR base editors: genome editing without double-stranded breaks. Biochem J 475(11):1955–1964
Kantor A, McClements ME, MacLaren RE (2020) CRISPR-Cas9 DNA base-editing and prime-editing. Int J Mol Sci 21(17):6240
Reardon S (2020) Step aside CRISPR, RNA editing is taking off. Nature 578(7793):24–27
Cox DBT, Gootenberg JS, Abudayyeh OO, Franklin B, Kellner MJ, Joung J, Zhang F (2017) RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13. Science 358(6366):1019–1027
Abudayyeh OO, Gootenberg JS, Franklin B, Koob J, Kellner MJ, Ladha A, Joung J, Kirchgatterer P, Cox DBT, Zhang F (2019) A cytosine deaminase for programmable single-base RNA editing. Science 365(6451):382–386
Lu Y, Xue J, Deng T, Zhou X, Yu K, Deng L, Huang M, Yi X, Liang M, Wang Y, Shen H, Tong R, Wang W, Li L, Song J, Li J, Su X, Ding Z, Gong Y, Zhu J, Wang Y, Zou B, Zhang Y, Li Y, Zhou L, Liu Y, Yu M, Wang Y, Zhang X, Yin L, Xia X, Zeng Y, Zhou Q, Ying B, Chen C, Wei Y, Li W, Mok T (2020) Safety and feasibility of CRISPR-edited T cells in patients with refractory non-small-cell lung cancer. Nat Med 26(5):732–740
Lacey SF, Fraietta JA (2020) First trial of CRISPR-edited T cells in lung cancer. Trends Mol Med 26(8):713–715
Stadtmauer EA, Fraietta JA, Davis MM, Cohen AD, Weber KL, Lancaster E, Mangan PA, Kulikovskaya I, Gupta M, Chen F, Tian L, Gonzalez VE, Xu J, Jung IY, Melenhorst JJ, Plesa G, Shea J, Matlawski T, Cervini A, Gaymon AL, Desjardins S, Lamontagne A, Salas-Mckee J, Fesnak A, Siegel DL, Levine BL, Jadlowsky JK, Young RM, Chew A, Hwang WT, Hexner EO, Carreno BM, Nobles CL, Bushman FD, Parker KR, Qi Y, Satpathy AT, Chang HY, Zhao Y, Lacey SF, June CH (2020) CRISPR-engineered T cells in patients with refractory cancer. Science 367:6481
Wu Y, Zeng J, Roscoe BP, Liu P, Yao Q, Lazzarotto CR, Clement K, Cole MA, Luk K, Baricordi C, Shen AH, Ren C, Esrick EB, Manis JP, Dorfman DM, Williams DA, Biffi A, Brugnara C, Biasco L, Brendel C, Pinello L, Tsai SQ, Wolfe SA, Bauer DE (2019) Highly efficient therapeutic gene editing of human hematopoietic stem cells. Nat Med 25(5):776–783
Frangoul H, Altshuler D, Cappellini MD, Chen YS, Domm J, Eustace BK, Foell J, de la Fuente J, Grupp S, Handgretinger R, Ho TW, Kattamis A, Kernytsky A, Lekstrom-Himes J, Li AM, Locatelli F, Mapara MY, de Montalembert M, Rondelli D, Sharma A, Sheth S, Soni S, Steinberg MH, Wall D, Yen A, Corbacioglu S (2021) CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia. N Engl J Med 384(3):252–260
Henderson H (2021) CRISPR clinical trials: a 2021 update. https://synbiobeta.com/crispr-clinical-trials-a-2021-update/
Smith L, Byers JF (2002) Gene therapy in the post-Gelsinger era. JONAS Healthc Law Ethics Regul 4(4):104–110
Glover DJ, Lipps HJ, Jans DA (2005) Towards safe, non-viral therapeutic gene expression in humans. Nat Rev Genet 6(4):299–310
Kormann MS, Hasenpusch G, Aneja MK, Nica G, Flemmer AW, Herber-Jonat S, Huppmann M, Mays LE, Illenyi M, Schams A, Griese M, Bittmann I, Handgretinger R, Hartl D, Rosenecker J, Rudolph C (2011) Expression of therapeutic proteins after delivery of chemically modified mRNA in mice. Nat Biotechnol 29(2):154–157
Napoli C, Lemieux C, Jorgensen R (1990) Introduction of a chimeric chalcone synthase gene into petunia results in reversible co-suppression of homologous genes in trans. Plant Cell 2(4):279–289
Fire A, Xu S, Montgomery MK, Kostas SA, Driver SE, Mello CC (1998) Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature 391(6669):806–811
Bernstein E, Caudy AA, Hammond SM, Hannon GJ (2001) Role for a bidentate ribonuclease in the initiation step of RNA interference. Nature 409(6818):363–366
Evers MM, Toonen LJ, van Roon-Mom WM (2015) Antisense oligonucleotides in therapy for neurodegenerative disorders. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 87:90–103
Rinaldi C, Wood MJA (2018) Antisense oligonucleotides: the next frontier for treatment of neurological disorders. Nat Rev Neurol 14(1):9–21
Kaur H, Arora A, Wengel J, Maiti S (2006) Thermodynamic, counterion, and hydration effects for the incorporation of locked nucleic acid nucleotides into DNA duplexes. Biochemistry 45(23):7347–7355
Jiang X, Ning Q, Wang J (2013) Angiotensin II induced differentially expressed microRNAs in adult rat cardiac fibroblasts. JPS 63(1):31–38
Eskildsen TV, Jeppesen PL, Schneider M, Nossent AY, Sandberg MB, Hansen PB, Jensen CH, Hansen ML, Marcussen N, Rasmussen LM, Bie P, Andersen DC, Sheikh SP (2013) Angiotensin II regulates microRNA-132/-212 in hypertensive rats and humans. Int J Mol Sci 14(6):11190–11207
Ucar A, Gupta SK, Fiedler J, Erikci E, Kardasinski M, Batkai S, Dangwal S, Kumarswamy R, Bang C, Holzmann A, Remke J, Caprio M, Jentzsch C, Engelhardt S, Geisendorf S, Glas C, Hofmann TG, Nessling M, Richter K, Schiffer M, Carrier L, Napp LC, Bauersachs J, Chowdhury K, Thum T (2012) The miRNA-212/132 family regulates both cardiac hypertrophy and cardiomyocyte autophagy. Nat Commun 3:1078
Foinquinos A, Batkai S, Genschel C, Viereck J, Rump S, Gyongyosi M, Traxler D, Riesenhuber M, Spannbauer A, Lukovic D, Weber N, Zlabinger K, Hasimbegovic E, Winkler J, Fiedler J, Dangwal S, Fischer M, de la Roche J, Wojciechowski D, Kraft T, Garamvolgyi R, Neitzel S, Chatterjee S, Yin X, Bar C, Mayr M, Xiao K, Thum T (2020) Preclinical development of a miR-132 inhibitor for heart failure treatment. Nat Commun 11(1):633
Batkai S, Genschel C, Viereck J, Rump S, Bar C, Borchert T, Traxler D, Riesenhuber M, Spannbauer A, Lukovic D, Zlabinger K, Hasimbegovic E, Winkler J, Garamvolgyi R, Neitzel S, Gyongyosi M, Thum T (2021) CDR132L improves systolic and diastolic function in a large animal model of chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 42(2):192–201
Taubel J, Hauke W, Rump S, Viereck J, Batkai S, Poetzsch J, Rode L, Weigt H, Genschel C, Lorch U, Theek C, Levin AA, Bauersachs J, Solomon SD, Thum T (2021) Novel antisense therapy targeting microRNA-132 in patients with heart failure: results of a first-in-human Phase 1b randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eur Heart J 42(2):178–188
Saw PE, Song EW (2020) siRNA therapeutics: a clinical reality. Sci China Life Sci 63(4):485–500
Adams D, Gonzalez-Duarte A, O’Riordan WD, Yang CC, Ueda M, Kristen AV, Tournev I, Schmidt HH, Coelho T, Berk JL, Lin KP, Vita G, Attarian S, Plante-Bordeneuve V, Mezei MM, Campistol JM, Buades J, Brannagan TH, Kim BJ, Oh J, Parman Y, Sekijima Y, Hawkins PN, Solomon SD, Polydefkis M, Dyck PJ, Gandhi PJ, Goyal S, Chen J, Strahs AL, Nochur SV, Sweetser MT, Garg PP, Vaishnaw AK, Gollob JA, Suhr OB (2018) Patisiran, an RNAi therapeutic, for hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis. N Engl J Med 379(1):11–21
Chakraborty C, Sharma AR, Sharma G, Lee SS (2021) Therapeutic advances of miRNAs: a preclinical and clinical update. J Adv Res 28:127–138
Wolff JA, Malone RW, Williams P, Chong W, Acsadi G, Jani A, Felgner PL (1990) Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science 247(4949):1465–1468
Jirikowski GF, Sanna PP, Maciejewski-Lenoir D, Bloom FE (1992) Reversal of diabetes insipidus in Brattleboro rats: intrahypothalamic injection of vasopressin mRNA. Science 255(5047):996–998
Mandl CW, Aberle JH, Aberle SW, Holzmann H, Allison SL, Heinz FX (1998) In vitro-synthesized infectious RNA as an attenuated live vaccine in a flavivirus model. Nat Med 4(12):1438–1440
Zhou WZ, Hoon DS, Huang SK, Fujii S, Hashimoto K, Morishita R, Kaneda Y (1999) RNA melanoma vaccine: induction of antitumor immunity by human glycoprotein 100 mRNA immunization. Hum Gene Ther 10(16):2719–2724
Martinon F, Krishnan S, Lenzen G, Magne R, Gomard E, Guillet JG, Levy JP, Meulien P (1993) Induction of virus-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in vivo by liposome-entrapped mRNA. Eur J Immunol 23(7):1719–1722
Pokrovskaya ID, Gurevich VV (1994) In vitro transcription: preparative RNA yields in analytical scale reactions. Anal Biochem 220(2):420–423
Kariko K (2019) In vitro-transcribed mRNA therapeutics: out of the shadows and into the spotlight. Mol Ther 27(4):691–692
Weide B, Pascolo S, Scheel B, Derhovanessian E, Pflugfelder A, Eigentler TK, Pawelec G, Hoerr I, Rammensee HG, Garbe C (2009) Direct injection of protamine-protected mRNA: results of a phase 1/2 vaccination trial in metastatic melanoma patients. J Immunother 32(5):498–507
Routy JP, Boulassel MR, Yassine-Diab B, Nicolette C, Healey D, Jain R, Landry C, Yegorov O, Tcherepanova I, Monesmith T, Finke L, Sekaly RP (2010) Immunologic activity and safety of autologous HIV RNA-electroporated dendritic cells in HIV-1 infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy. Clin Immunol 134(2):140–147
Allard SD, De Keersmaecker B, de Goede AL, Verschuren EJ, Koetsveld J, Reedijk ML, Wylock C, De Bel AV, Vandeloo J, Pistoor F, Heirman C, Beyer WE, Eilers PH, Corthals J, Padmos I, Thielemans K, Osterhaus AD, Lacor P, van der Ende ME, Aerts JL, van Baalen CA, Gruters RA (2012) A phase I/IIa immunotherapy trial of HIV-1-infected patients with Tat, Rev and Nef expressing dendritic cells followed by treatment interruption. Clin Immunol 142(3):252–268
Van Gulck E, Vlieghe E, Vekemans M, Van Tendeloo VF, Van De Velde A, Smits E, Anguille S, Cools N, Goossens H, Mertens L, De Haes W, Wong J, Florence E, Vanham G, Berneman ZN (2012) mRNA-based dendritic cell vaccination induces potent antiviral T-cell responses in HIV-1-infected patients. AIDS 26(4):1–12
Sahin U, Kariko K, Tureci O (2014) mRNA-based therapeutics–developing a new class of drugs. Nat Rev Drug Discov 13(10):759–780
Somia N, Verma IM (2000) Gene therapy: trials and tribulations. Nat Rev Genet 1(2):91–99
Friedrich BM, Dziuba N, Li G, Endsley MA, Murray JL, Ferguson MR (2011) Host factors mediating HIV-1 replication. Virus Res 161(2):101–114
Daly G, Chernajovsky Y (2000) Recent developments in retroviral-mediated gene transduction. Mol Ther 2(5):423–434
Cockrell AS, Kafri T (2007) Gene delivery by lentivirus vectors. Mol Biotechnol 36(3):184–204
Trono D (2000) Lentiviral vectors: turning a deadly foe into a therapeutic agent. Gene Ther 7(1):20–23
Milone MC, O’Doherty U (2018) Clinical use of lentiviral vectors. Leukemia 32(7):1529–1541
Vannucci L, Lai M, Chiuppesi F, Ceccherini-Nelli L, Pistello M (2013) Viral vectors: a look back and ahead on gene transfer technology. New Microbiol 36(1):1–22
Finkelshtein D, Werman A, Novick D, Barak S, Rubinstein M (2013) LDL receptor and its family members serve as the cellular receptors for vesicular stomatitis virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(18):7306–7311
Burns JC, Friedmann T, Driever W, Burrascano M, Yee JK (1993) Vesicular stomatitis virus G glycoprotein pseudotyped retroviral vectors: concentration to very high titer and efficient gene transfer into mammalian and nonmammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 90(17):8033–8037
Dull T, Zufferey R, Kelly M, Mandel RJ, Nguyen M, Trono D, Naldini L (1998) A third-generation lentivirus vector with a conditional packaging system. J Virol 72(11):8463–8471
Levine BL, Humeau LM, Boyer J, MacGregor RR, Rebello T, Lu X, Binder GK, Slepushkin V, Lemiale F, Mascola JR, Bushman FD, Dropulic B, June CH (2006) Gene transfer in humans using a conditionally replicating lentiviral vector. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103(46):17372–17377
McGarrity GJ, Hoyah G, Winemiller A, Andre K, Stein D, Blick G, Greenberg RN, Kinder C, Zolopa A, Binder-Scholl G, Tebas P, June CH, Humeau LM, Rebello T (2013) Patient monitoring and follow-up in lentiviral clinical trials. J Gene Med 15(2):78–82
Yamaki Y, Fukushima T, Yoshida N, Nishimura K, Fukuda A, Hisatake K, Aso M, Sakasai T, Kijima-Tanaka J, Miwa Y, Nakanishi M, Sumazaki R, Takada H (2021) Utilization of a novel Sendai virus vector in ex vivo gene therapy for hemophilia A. Int J Hematol 113(4):493–499
Park A, Hong P, Won ST, Thibault PA, Vigant F, Oguntuyo KY, Taft JD, Lee B (2016) Sendai virus, an RNA virus with no risk of genomic integration, delivers CRISPR/Cas9 for efficient gene editing. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev 3:16057
Hurwitz JL (2008) Development of recombinant Sendai virus vaccines for prevention of human parainfluenza and respiratory syncytial virus infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 27(10):126–128
Hasegawa Y, Kinoh H, Iwadate Y, Onimaru M, Ueda Y, Harada Y, Saito S, Furuya A, Saegusa T, Morodomi Y, Hasegawa M, Saito S, Aoki I, Saeki N, Yonemitsu Y (2010) Urokinase-targeted fusion by oncolytic Sendai virus eradicates orthotopic glioblastomas by pronounced synergy with interferon-beta gene. Mol Ther 18(10):1778–1786
Masaki I, Yonemitsu Y, Yamashita A, Sata S, Tanii M, Komori K, Nakagawa K, Hou X, Nagai Y, Hasegawa M, Sugimachi K, Sueishi K (2002) Angiogenic gene therapy for experimental critical limb ischemia: acceleration of limb loss by overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor 165 but not of fibroblast growth factor-2. Circ Res 90(9):966–973
Graham FL (2000) Adenovirus vectors for high-efficiency gene transfer into mammalian cells. Immunol Today 21(9):426–428
Graham FL, Smiley J, Russell WC, Nairn R (1977) Characteristics of a human cell line transformed by DNA from human adenovirus type 5. J Gen Virol 36(1):59–74
Fallaux FJ, Kranenburg O, Cramer SJ, Houweling A, Van Ormondt H, Hoeben RC, Van Der Eb AJ (1996) Characterization of 911: a new helper cell line for the titration and propagation of early region 1-deleted adenoviral vectors. Hum Gene Ther 7(2):215–222
Kay MA, Glorioso JC, Naldini L (2001) Viral vectors for gene therapy: the art of turning infectious agents into vehicles of therapeutics. Nat Med 7(1):33–40
Ritter T, Lehmann M, Volk H-D (2002) Improvements in gene therapy. BioDrugs 16(1):3–10
Nemerow GR (2000) Cell receptors involved in adenovirus entry. Virology 274(1):1–4
Zabner J, Couture LA, Gregory RJ, Graham SM, Smith AE, Welsh MJ (1993) Adenovirus-mediated gene transfer transiently corrects the chloride transport defect in nasal epithelia of patients with cystic fibrosis. Cell 75(2):207–216
Crystal RG (2014) Adenovirus: the first effective in vivo gene delivery vector. Hum Gene Ther 25(1):3–11
Atchison RW, Casto BC, Hammon WM (1965) Adenovirus-associated defective virus particles. Science 149(3685):754–755
Hoggan MD, Blacklow NR, Rowe W (1966) Studies of small DNA viruses found in various adenovirus preparations: physical, biological, and immunological characteristics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 55(6):1467
Blacklow NR, Hoggan MD, Rowe WP (1967) Isolation of adenovirus-associated viruses from man. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 58(4):1410
Wang D, Tai PWL, Gao G (2019) Adeno-associated virus vector as a platform for gene therapy delivery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 18(5):358–378
Sonntag F, Köther K, Schmidt K, Weghofer M, Raupp C, Nieto K, Kuck A, Gerlach B, Böttcher B, Müller O (2011) The assembly-activating protein promotes capsid assembly of different adeno-associated virus serotypes. J Virol 85(23):12686–12697
Samulski R, Zhu X, Xiao X, Brook J, Housman D, Epstein N, Hunter L (1991) Targeted integration of adeno-associated virus (AAV) into human chromosome 19. EMBO J 10(12):3941–3950
Tratschin JD, West MH, Sandbank T, Carter BJ (1984) A human parvovirus, adeno-associated virus, as a eucaryotic vector: transient expression and encapsidation of the procaryotic gene for chloramphenicol acetyltransferase. Mol Cell Biol 4(10):2072–2081
Dong J-Y, Fan P-D, Frizzell RA (1996) Quantitative analysis of the packaging capacity of recombinant adeno-associated virus. Hum Gene Ther 7(17):2101–2112
Gao G, Vandenberghe LH, Alvira MR, Lu Y, Calcedo R, Zhou X, Wilson JM (2004) Clades of adeno-associated viruses are widely disseminated in human tissues. J Virol 78(12):6381–6388
Mietzsch M, Broecker F, Reinhardt A, Seeberger PH, Heilbronn R (2014) Differential adeno-associated virus serotype-specific interaction patterns with synthetic heparins and other glycans. J Virol 88(5):2991–3003
Wagner JA, Moran ML, Messner AH, Daifuku R, Conrad CK, Reynolds T, Guggino WB, Moss RB, Carter BJ, Wine JJ, Flotte TR, Gardner P (1998) A phase I/II study of tgAAV-CF for the treatment of chronic sinusitis in patients with cystic fibrosis. Hum Gene Ther 9(6):889–909
Kay MA, Manno CS, Ragni MV, Larson PJ, Couto LB, McClelland A, Glader B, Chew AJ, Tai SJ, Herzog RW, Arruda V, Johnson F, Scallan C, Skarsgard E, Flake AW, High KA (2000) Evidence for gene transfer and expression of factor IX in haemophilia B patients treated with an AAV vector. Nat Genet 24(3):257–261
McPhee SW, Janson CG, Li C, Samulski RJ, Camp AS, Francis J, Shera D, Lioutermann L, Feely M, Freese A, Leone P (2006) Immune responses to AAV in a phase I study for Canavan disease. J Gene Med 8(5):577–588
Flotte TR, Trapnell BC, Humphries M, Carey B, Calcedo R, Rouhani F, Campbell-Thompson M, Yachnis AT, Sandhaus RA, McElvaney NG, Mueller C, Messina LM, Wilson JM, Brantly M, Knop DR, Ye GJ, Chulay JD (2011) Phase 2 clinical trial of a recombinant adeno-associated viral vector expressing alpha1-antitrypsin: interim results. Hum Gene Ther 22(10):1239–1247
Nabel EG (1995) Gene therapy for cardiovascular disease. Circulation 91(2):541–548
Rincon MY, VandenDriessche T, Chuah MK (2015) Gene therapy for cardiovascular disease: advances in vector development, targeting, and delivery for clinical translation. Cardiovasc Res 108(1):4–20
Kukula K, Chojnowska L, Dabrowski M, Witkowski A, Chmielak Z, Skwarek M, Kadziela J, Teresinska A, Malecki M, Janik P, Lewandowski Z, Klopotowski M, Wnuk J, Ruzyllo W (2011) Intramyocardial plasmid-encoding human vascular endothelial growth factor A165/basic fibroblast growth factor therapy using percutaneous transcatheter approach in patients with refractory coronary artery disease (VIF-CAD). Am Heart J 161(3):581–589
Ripa RS, Wang Y, Jorgensen E, Johnsen HE, Hesse B, Kastrup J (2006) Intramyocardial injection of vascular endothelial growth factor-A165 plasmid followed by granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to induce angiogenesis in patients with severe chronic ischaemic heart disease. Eur Heart J 27(15):1785–1792
Losordo DW, Vale PR, Symes JF, Dunnington CH, Esakof DD, Maysky M, Ashare AB, Lathi K, Isner JM (1998) Gene therapy for myocardial angiogenesis: initial clinical results with direct myocardial injection of phVEGF165 as sole therapy for myocardial ischemia. Circulation 98(25):2800–2804
Symes JF, Losordo DW, Vale PR, Lathi KG, Esakof DD, Mayskiy M, Isner JM (1999) Gene therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor for inoperable coronary artery disease. Ann Thorac Surg 68(3):830–836
Fortuin FD, Vale P, Losordo DW, Symes J, DeLaria GA, Tyner JJ, Schaer GL, March R, Snell RJ, Henry TD (2003) One-year follow-up of direct myocardial gene transfer of vascular endothelial growth factor-2 using naked plasmid deoxyribonucleic acid by way of thoracotomy in no-option patients. Am J Cardiol 92(4):436–439
Reilly JP, Grise MA, Fortuin FD, Vale PR, Schaer GL, Lopez J, Van Camp JR, Henry T, Richenbacher WE, Losordo DW (2005) Long-term (2-year) clinical events following transthoracic intramyocardial gene transfer of VEGF-2 in no-option patients. J Interv Cardiol 18(1):27–31
Vale PR, Losordo DW, Milliken CE, Maysky M, Esakof DD, Symes JF, Isner JM (2000) Left ventricular electromechanical mapping to assess efficacy of phVEGF165 gene transfer for therapeutic angiogenesis in chronic myocardial ischemia. Circulation 102(9):965–974
Sarkar N, Rück A, Källner G, Hassan S, Blomberg P, Islam K, Van Der Linden J, Lindblom D, Nygren A, Lind B (2001) Effects of intramyocardial injection of phVEGF-A165 as sole therapy in patients with refractory coronary artery disease–12-month follow-up: angiogenic gene therapy. J Intern Med 250(5):373–381
Rosengart TK, Lee LY, Patel SR, Sanborn TA, Parikh M, Bergman GW, Hachamovitch R, Szulc M, Kligfield PD, Okin PM, Hahn RT, Devereux RB, Post MR, Hackett NR, Foster T, Grasso TM, Lesser ML, Isom OW, Crystal RG (1999) Angiogenesis gene therapy: phase I assessment of direct intramyocardial administration of an adenovirus vector expressing VEGF121 cDNA to individuals with clinically significant severe coronary artery disease. Circulation 100(5):468–474
Mack CA, Patel SR, Schwarz EA, Zanzonico P, Hahn RT, Ilercil A, Devereux RB, Goldsmith SJ, Christian TF, Sanborn TA (1998) Biologic bypass with the use of adenovirus-mediated gene transfer of the complementary deoxyribonucleic acid for vascular endothelial growth factor 121 improves myocardial perfusion and function in the ischemic porcine heart. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 115(1):168–177
Mack CA, Magovern CJ, Budenbender KT, Patel SR, Schwarz EA, Zanzonico P, Ferris B, Sanborn T, Isom OW, Crystal RG (1998) Salvage angiogenesis induced by adenovirus-mediated gene transfer of vascular endothelial growth factor protects against ischemic vascular occlusion. J Vasc Surg 27(4):699–709
Magovern CJ, Mack CA, Zhang J, Hahn RT, Wilson K, Isom OW, Crystal RG, Rosengart TK (1996) Direct in vivo gene transfer to canine myocardium using a replication-deficient adenovirus vector. Ann Thorac Surg 62(2):425–434
Magovern CJ, Mack CA, Zhang J, Rosengart TK, Isom OW, Crystal RG (1997) Regional angiogenesis induced in nonischemic tissue by an adenoviral vector expressing vascular endothelial growth factor. Hum Gene Ther 8(2):215–227
Rosengart TK, Lee LY, Patel SR, Kligfield PD, Okin PM, Hackett NR, Isom OW, Crystal RG (1999) Six-month assessment of a phase I trial of angiogenic gene therapy for the treatment of coronary artery disease using direct intramyocardial administration of an adenovirus vector expressing the VEGF121 cDNA. Ann Surg 230(4):466
Rosengart TK, Lee LY, Patel SR, Sanborn TA, Parikh M, Bergman GW, Hachamovitch R, Szulc M, Kligfield PD, Okin PM (1999) Angiogenesis gene therapy: phase I assessment of direct intramyocardial administration of an adenovirus vector expressing VEGF121 cDNA to individuals with clinically significant severe coronary artery disease. Circulation 100(5):468–474
Stewart DJ, Hilton JD, Arnold JM, Gregoire J, Rivard A, Archer SL, Charbonneau F, Cohen E, Curtis M, Buller CE, Mendelsohn FO, Dib N, Page P, Ducas J, Plante S, Sullivan J, Macko J, Rasmussen C, Kessler PD, Rasmussen HS (2006) Angiogenic gene therapy in patients with nonrevascularizable ischemic heart disease: a phase 2 randomized, controlled trial of AdVEGF(121) (AdVEGF121) versus maximum medical treatment. Gene Ther 13(21):1503–1511
Kastrup J, Jorgensen E, Fuchs S, Nikol S, Botker HE, Gyongyosi M, Glogar D, Kornowski R (2011) A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study of the safety and efficacy of BIOBYPASS (AdGVVEGF121.10NH) gene therapy in patients with refractory advanced coronary artery disease: the NOVA trial. EuroIntervention 6(7):813–818
Periasamy M, Bhupathy P, Babu GJ (2008) Regulation of sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase pump expression and its relevance to cardiac muscle physiology and pathology. Cardiovasc Res 77(2):265–273
England PJ (1975) Correlation between contraction and phosphorylation of the inhibitory subunit of troponin in perfused rat heart. FEBS Lett 50(1):57–60
Kranias E, Solaro R (1982) Phosphorylation of troponin I and phospholamban during catecholamine stimulation of rabbit heart. Nature 298(5870):182–184
Lindemann JP, Jones L, Hathaway D, Henry B, Watanabe A (1983) beta-Adrenergic stimulation of phospholamban phosphorylation and Ca2+-ATPase activity in guinea pig ventricles. J Biol Chem 258(1):464–471
Kranias E, Garvey J, Srivastava R, Solaro R (1985) Phosphorylation and functional modifications of sarcoplasmic reticulum and myofibrils in isolated rabbit hearts stimulated with isoprenaline. Biochem J 226(1):113–121
Kranias EG, Hajjar RJ (2012) Modulation of cardiac contractility by the phospholamban/SERCA2a regulatome. Circ Res 110(12):1646–1660. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.111.259754
Hajjar RJ, Zsebo K, Deckelbaum L, Thompson C, Rudy J, Yaroshinsky A, Ly H, Kawase Y, Wagner K, Borow K (2008) Design of a phase 1/2 trial of intracoronary administration of AAV1/SERCA2a in patients with heart failure. J Card Fail 14(5):355–367
Jaski BE, Jessup ML, Mancini DM, Cappola TP, Pauly DF, Greenberg B, Borow K, Dittrich H, Zsebo KM, Hajjar RJ (2009) Calcium upregulation by percutaneous administration of gene therapy in cardiac disease (CUPID Trial), a first-in-human phase 1/2 clinical trial. J Card Fail 15(3):171–181
Jessup M, Greenberg B, Mancini D, Cappola T, Pauly DF, Jaski B, Yaroshinsky A, Zsebo KM, Dittrich H, Hajjar RJ (2011) Calcium upregulation by percutaneous administration of gene therapy in cardiac disease (CUPID): a phase 2 trial of intracoronary gene therapy of sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca2+-ATPase in patients with advanced heart failure. Circulation 124(3):304–313
Greenberg B, Butler J, Felker GM, Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Desai AS, Barnard D, Bouchard A, Jaski B, Lyon AR (2016) Calcium upregulation by percutaneous administration of gene therapy in patients with cardiac disease (CUPID 2): a randomised, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial. Lancet 387(10024):1178–1186
Hulot JS, Salem JE, Redheuil A, Collet JP, Varnous S, Jourdain P, Logeart D, Gandjbakhch E, Bernard C, Hatem SN (2017) Effect of intracoronary administration of AAV1/SERCA2a on ventricular remodelling in patients with advanced systolic heart failure: results from the AGENT-HF randomized phase 2 trial. Eur J Heart Fail 19(11):1534–1541
Ishikawa K, Fish KM, Tilemann L, Rapti K, Aguero J, Santos-Gallego CG, Lee A, Karakikes I, Xie C, Akar FG, Shimada YJ, Gwathmey JK, Asokan A, McPhee S, Samulski J, Samulski RJ, Sigg DC, Weber T, Kranias EG, Hajjar RJ (2014) Cardiac I-1c overexpression with reengineered AAV improves cardiac function in swine ischemic heart failure. Mol Ther 22(12):2038–2045
Ylä-Herttuala S, Markkanen JE, Rissanen TT (2004) Gene therapy for ischemic cardiovascular diseases: some lessons learned from the first clinical trials. Trends Cardiovasc Med 14(8):295–300
Mingozzi F, High KA (2013) Immune responses to AAV vectors: overcoming barriers to successful gene therapy. Blood 122(1):23–36
Mingozzi F, Anguela XM, Pavani G, Chen Y, Davidson RJ, Hui DJ, Yazicioglu M, Elkouby L, Hinderer CJ, Faella A, Howard C, Tai A, Podsakoff GM, Zhou S, Basner-Tschakarjan E, Wright JF, High KA (2013) Overcoming preexisting humoral immunity to AAV using capsid decoys. Sci Transl Med 5:194. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3005795
Zacchigna S, Zentilin L, Giacca M (2014) Adeno-associated virus vectors as therapeutic and investigational tools in the cardiovascular system. Circ Res 114(11):1827–1846
Müller OJ, Kaul F, Weitzman MD, Pasqualini R, Arap W, Kleinschmidt JA, Trepel M (2003) Random peptide libraries displayed on adeno-associated virus to select for targeted gene therapy vectors. Nat Biotechnol 21(9):1040–1046
Grimm D, Lee JS, Wang L, Desai T, Akache B, Storm TA, Kay MA (2008) In vitro and in vivo gene therapy vector evolution via multispecies interbreeding and retargeting of adeno-associated viruses. J Virol 82(12):5887–5911
Koerber JT, Jang J-H, Schaffer DV (2008) DNA shuffling of adeno-associated virus yields functionally diverse viral progeny. Mol Ther 16(10):1703–1709
Maersch S, Huber A, Büning H, Hallek M, Perabo L (2010) Optimization of stealth adeno-associated virus vectors by randomization of immunogenic epitopes. Virology 397(1):167–175
Yang L, Xiao X (2013) Creation of a cardiotropic adeno-associated virus: the story of viral directed evolution. Virol J 10(1):1–8
Piacentino V III, Milano CA, Bolanos M, Schroder J, Messina E, Cockrell AS, Jones E, Krol A, Bursac N, Mao L (2012) X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis protein-mediated attenuation of apoptosis, using a novel cardiac-enhanced adeno-associated viral vector. Hum Gene Ther 23(6):635–646
Asokan A, Conway JC, Phillips JL, Li C, Hegge J, Sinnott R, Yadav S, DiPrimio N, Nam H-J, Agbandje-McKenna M (2010) Reengineering a receptor footprint of adeno-associated virus enables selective and systemic gene transfer to muscle. Nat Biotechnol 28(1):79–82
Pulicherla N, Shen S, Yadav S, Debbink K, Govindasamy L, Agbandje-McKenna M, Asokan A (2011) Engineering liver-detargeted AAV9 vectors for cardiac and musculoskeletal gene transfer. Mol Ther 19(6):1070–1078
Weber T (2021) Anti-AAV antibodies in AAV gene therapy: current challenges and possible solutions. Front Immunol 12:658399
Li C, Narkbunnam N, Samulski RJ, Asokan A, Hu G, Jacobson LJ, Manco-Johnson MJ, Monahan PE (2012) Neutralizing antibodies against adeno-associated virus examined prospectively in pediatric patients with hemophilia. Gene Ther 19(3):288–294
Bartel M, Schaffer D, Buning H (2011) Enhancing the clinical potential of AAV vectors by capsid engineering to evade pre-existing immunity. Front Microbiol 2:204
Al-Zaidy S, Pickard AS, Kotha K, Alfano LN, Lowes L, Paul G, Church K, Lehman K, Sproule DM, Dabbous O, Maru B, Berry K, Arnold WD, Kissel JT, Mendell JR, Shell R (2019) Health outcomes in spinal muscular atrophy type 1 following AVXS-101 gene replacement therapy. Pediatr Pulmonol 54(2):179–185
Al-Zaidy SA, Mendell JR (2019) From clinical trials to clinical practice: practical considerations for gene replacement therapy in SMA type 1. Pediatr Neurol 100:3–11
FDA approves first drug for spinal muscular atrophy. 2016. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-drug-spinal-muscular-atrophy
Finkel RS, Mercuri E, Darras BT, Connolly AM, Kuntz NL, Kirschner J, Chiriboga CA, Saito K, Servais L, Tizzano E, Topaloglu H, Tulinius M, Montes J, Glanzman AM, Bishop K, Zhong ZJ, Gheuens S, Bennett CF, Schneider E, Farwell W (2017) Nusinersen versus sham control in infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy. N Engl J Med 377(18):1723–1732
Keown A (2021) Top 10 most expensive drugs on the market. https://www.biospace.com/article/gene-therapy-zolgensma-tops-goodrx-list-of-10-most-expensive-drugs/
Author (2020) High-dose AAV gene therapy deaths. Nat Biotechnol 38(8):910
Sibbald B (2001) Death but one unintended consequence of gene-therapy trial. CMAJ 164(11):1612
Consortium EP (2012) An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489(7414):57
Beermann J, Piccoli MT, Viereck J, Thum T (2016) Non-coding RNAs in development and disease: background, mechanisms, and therapeutic approaches. Physiol Rev 96(4):1297–1325
de Gonzalo-Calvo D, Vea A, Bar C, Fiedler J, Couch LS, Brotons C, Llorente-Cortes V, Thum T (2019) Circulating non-coding RNAs in biomarker-guided cardiovascular therapy: a novel tool for personalized medicine? Eur Heart J 40(20):1643–1650
Viereck J, Thum T (2017) Circulating noncoding RNAs as biomarkers of cardiovascular disease and injury. Circ Res 120(2):381–399
Viereck J, Buhrke A, Foinquinos A, Chatterjee S, Kleeberger JA, Xiao K, Janssen-Peters H, Batkai S, Ramanujam D, Kraft T, Cebotari S, Gueler F, Beyer AM, Schmitz J, Brasen JH, Schmitto JD, Gyongyosi M, Loser A, Hirt MN, Eschenhagen T, Engelhardt S, Bar C, Thum T (2020) Targeting muscle-enriched long non-coding RNA H19 reverses pathological cardiac hypertrophy. Eur Heart J 41(36):3462–3474
Lu D, Thum T (2019) RNA-based diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 16(11):661–674
Garg A, Foinquinos A, Jung M, Janssen-Peters H, Biss S, Bauersachs J, Gupta SK, Thum T (2020) MiRNA-181a is a novel regulator of aldosterone-mineralocorticoid receptor-mediated cardiac remodelling. Eur J Heart Fail 22(8):1366–1377
Bär C, de Jesus BB, Serrano R, Tejera A, Ayuso E, Jimenez V, Formentini I, Bobadilla M, Mizrahi J, de Martino A, Gomez G, Pisano D, Mulero F, Wollert KC, Bosch F, Blasco MA (2014) Telomerase expression confers cardioprotection in the adult mouse heart after acute myocardial infarction. Nat Commun 5(1):5863
Chatterjee S, Hofer T, Costa A, Lu D, Batkai S, Gupta SK, Bolesani E, Zweigerdt R, Megias D, Streckfuss-Bömeke K, Brandenberger C, Thum T, Bär C (2021) Telomerase therapy attenuates cardiotoxic effects of doxorubicin. Mol Ther 29(4):1395–1410
Acknowledgments
C.B. and T.T. received funding from the German Research Foundation, DFG (SFB/Transregio TRR267). D.C.L. acknowledges the China Scholarship Council for the funding of his PhD study.
Competing Financial Interests
TT is a founder and shareholder of the Cardior Pharmaceuticals GmbH. D.C.L.; T.T. and C.B. have filed and licensed patents for noncoding RNAs for the treatment of CVDs.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lu, D., Cushman, S., Thum, T., Bär, C. (2023). Gene Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases. In: Xiao, J. (eds) Genome Editing in Cardiovascular and Metabolic Diseases. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 1396. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5642-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5642-3_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-5641-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-5642-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)