Topical cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene replacement for cystic fibrosis-related lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is caused by a defective gene encoding a protein called the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), and is characterised by chronic lung infection resulting in inflammation and progressive lung damage that results in a reduced life expectancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether topical CFTR gene replacement therapy to the lungs in people with cystic fibrosis is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes, and to assess any adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of most recent search: 05 May 2016.An additional search of the National Institutes for Health (NIH) Genetic Modification Clinical Research Information System (GeMCRIS) was also performed for the years 1992 to 2015.Date of most recent search: 20 April 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies comparing topical CFTR gene delivery to the lung, using either viral or non-viral delivery systems, with placebo or an alternative delivery system in people with confirmed cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Authors of included studies were contacted and asked for any available additional data. Meta-analysis was limited due to differing study designs. MAIN RESULTS: Four randomised controlled studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, involving a total of 302 participants lasting from 29 days to 13 months; 14 studies were excluded. The included studies differed in terms of CFTR gene replacement agent and study design, which limited the meta-analysis. One study only enrolled adult males, the remaining studies included both males and females aged 12 years and over.Risk of bias in the studies was moderate. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment was only described in the more recent study; the remaining three studies were judged to have an unclear risk of bias. All four studies documented double-blinding to the intervention, but there is some uncertainty with regards to participant blinding in one study. Some outcome data were missing from all four studies.There were no differences in either the number of respiratory exacerbations or the number of participants with an exacerbation between replacement therapy or placebo groups at any time point. Meta-analysis of most respiratory function tests showed no difference between treatment and placebo groups, but the smallest study (n = 16) reported forced vital capacity (litres) increased more in the placebo group at up to 24 hours. A further study reported a significant improvement in forced expiratory volume at one second (litres) at 30 days after participants had received their first dose of favouring the gene therapy agent, but this finding was not confirmed when combined with at second study in the meta-analysis. The more recent study (n = 140) demonstrated a small improvement in forced vital capacity (per cent predicted) at two and three months and again at 11 and 12 months for participants receiving CFTR gene replacement therapy compared to those receiving placebo. The same study reported a significant difference in the relative change in forced expiratory volume at one second (per cent predicted) at two months, three months and 12 months.One small study reported significant concerns with "influenza-like" symptoms in participants treated with CFTR gene replacement therapy; this was not reported on repeated use of the same agent in a larger recent study.There was no other evidence of positive impact on outcomes, in particular improved quality of life or reduced treatment burden.Two studies measured ion transport in the lower airways; one (n = 16) demonstrated significant changes toward normal values in the participants who received gene transfer agents (P < 0.0001), mean difference 6.86 (95% confidence interval 3.77 to 9.95). The second study (n = 140) also reported significant changes toward normal values (P = 0.032); however, aggregate data were not available for analysis. In the most recent study, there was also evidence of increased salt transport in cells obtained by brushing the lower airway. These outcomes, whilst important, are not of direct clinical relevance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: One study of liposome-based CFTR gene transfer therapy demonstrated some improvements in respiratory function in people with CF, but this limited evidence of efficacy does not support this treatment as a routine therapy at present. There was no evidence of efficacy for viral-mediated gene delivery.Future studies need to investigate clinically important outcome measures.

International regulatory landscape and integration of corrective genome editing into in vitro fertilization.

Genome editing technology, including zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/Cas, has enabled far more efficient genetic engineering even in non-human primates. This biotechnology is more likely to develop into medicine for preventing a genetic disease if corrective genome editing is integrated into assisted reproductive technology, represented by in vitro fertilization. Although rapid advances in genome editing are expected to make germline gene correction feasible in a clinical setting, there are many issues that still need to be addressed before this could occur. We herein examine current status of genome editing in mammalian embryonic stem cells and zygotes and discuss potential issues in the international regulatory landscape regarding human germline gene modification. Moreover, we address some ethical and social issues that would be raised when each country considers whether genome editing-mediated germline gene correction for preventive medicine should be permitted.

Topical cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene replacement for cystic fibrosis-related lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is caused by a defective gene encoding a protein called the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), and is characterised by chronic lung infection resulting in inflammation and progressive lung damage that results in a reduced life expectancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether topical CFTR gene replacement therapy to the lungs in people with cystic fibrosis is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes, and to assess any adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of most recent search: 22 August 2013.An additional search of the National Institutes for Health (NIH) Genetic Modification Clinical Research Information System (GeMCRIS) was also performed for the years 1992 to 2013.Date of most recent search: 04 September 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing topical CFTR gene delivery to the lung, using either viral or non-viral delivery systems, with placebo or an alternative delivery system in people with confirmed cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Authors of included studies were contacted and asked for any available additional data. Meta-analysis was limited due to differing study designs. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, involving a total of 155 participants. Fourteen studies were excluded. The included studies differed in terms of CFTR gene replacement agent and study design, which limited the meta-analysis.Although the first Moss study reported a significant improvement in respiratory function (forced expiratory volume at one second) 30 days after participants had received their first dose of gene therapy agent, this finding was not confirmed in their larger second study or in our meta-analysis.In participants who received the CFTR gene transfer agents in the Alton study, "influenza-like" symptoms were found (risk ratio 7.00 (95% confidence interval 1.10 to 44.61)). There were no other significant increases in adverse events in any of the studies.Alton measured ion transport in the lower airways and demonstrated significant changes toward normal values in the participants who received gene transfer agents (P < 0.0001), mean difference 6.86 (95% confidence interval 3.77 to 9.95). In these participants there was also evidence of increased salt transport in cells obtained by brushing the lower airway. These outcomes, whilst important, are not of direct clinical relevance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence to support the use of CFTR gene transfer agents as a treatment for lung disease in people with cystic fibrosis. Future studies need to investigate clinically important outcome measures.

Topical cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene replacement for cystic fibrosis-related lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis is caused by a defective gene encoding a protein called the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), and is characterised by chronic lung infection resulting in inflammation and progressive lung damage that results in a reduced life expectancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether topical CFTR gene replacement therapy to the lungs in people with cystic fibrosis is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes, and to assess any adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.Date of most recent search: 19 July 2012.An additional search of the National Institutes for Health (NIH) Genetic Modification Clinical Research Information System (GeMCRIS) was also performed for the years 1992 to 2012.Date of most recent search: 25 July 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing topical CFTR gene delivery to the lung, using either viral or non-viral delivery systems, with placebo or an alternative delivery system in people with confirmed cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Authors of included studies were contacted and asked for any available additional data. Meta-analysis was limited due to differing study designs. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, involving a total of 155 participants. Fourteen studies were excluded. The included studies differed in terms of CFTR gene replacement agent and study design, which limited the meta-analysis.Although the first Moss study reported a significant improvement in respiratory function (forced expiratory volume at one second) 30 days after participants had received their first dose of gene therapy agent, this finding was not confirmed in their larger second study or in our meta-analysis.In participants who received the CFTR gene transfer agents in the Alton study, "influenza-like" symptoms were found (risk ratio 7.00 (95% confidence interval 1.10 to 44.61)). There were no other significant increases in adverse events in any of the studies.Alton measured ion transport in the lower airways and demonstrated significant changes toward normal values in the participants who received gene transfer agents (P < 0.0001), mean difference 6.86 (95% CI of 3.77 to 9.95). In these participants there was also evidence of increased salt transport in cells obtained by brushing the lower airway. These outcomes, whilst important, are not of direct clinical relevance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence to support the use of CFTR gene transfer reagents as a treatment for lung disease in people with cystic fibrosis. Future studies need to investigate clinically important outcome measures.

Gene therapy for cystic fibrosis.

Cystic Fibrosis (CF) is an autosomal recessive disorder due to mutations in the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene that lead to defective ion transport in the conducting pulmonary airways and exocrine glands. Through a process that is not fully understood, CFTR defects predispose affected patients to chronic endobronchial infections with organisms such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Following the discovery of the CFTR gene in 1989, CF became one of the primary targets for gene therapy research. Early enthusiasm surrounded the new field of gene therapy during most of the 1990s and it led academics and clinicians on a big effort to apply gene therapy for cystic fibrosis. Clinical studies have been pursued using recombinant adenovirus, recombinant adeno-associated virus, cationic liposomes, and cationic polymer vectors. Although to this date no dramatic therapeutic benefits have been observed, a lot of information has been gained from the pre-clinical and clinical studies that were performed. This learning curve has led to the optimization of vector technology and an appreciation of immune and mechanical barriers that have to be overcome for successful delivery.