Premium
Gene therapy for haemophilia…yes, but…with non‐viral vectors?
Author(s) -
LIRAS A.,
OLMEDILLAS S.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
haemophilia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.213
H-Index - 92
eISSN - 1365-2516
pISSN - 1351-8216
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2009.02010.x
Subject(s) - genetic enhancement , haemophilia , immunogenicity , medicine , viral vector , vector (molecular biology) , transfection , haemophilia a , vectors in gene therapy , cell therapy , immunology , disease , haemophilia b , virology , recombinant dna , bioinformatics , gene , cell , biology , immune system , genetics , pediatrics
Summary. High‐purity plasma‐derived and recombinant factors are currently safe and efficient treatment for haemophilia. The mid‐term future of haemophilia treatment will involve the use of modified recombinant factors to achieve advantages such as decreased immunogenicity in inhibitor formation and enhanced efficacy as a result of their longer half‐life. In the long‐term, gene therapy and cell therapy strategies will have to be considered. Achievements in cell therapy to date have been using embryonic stem cells and hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cells. Current gene therapy strategies for haemophilia are based on gene transfer using adeno‐associated viruses and non‐viral vectors. Gene therapy for haemophilia is justified because it is a chronic disease and because a very regular factor infusion is required that may involve fatal risks and because it is very expensive. Haemophilia is a very good candidate for use of gene therapy protocols because it is a monogenic disease, and even low expression is able to achieve reversion from a severe to a moderate phenotype. The current trends in haemophilia using adeno‐associated viral vectors are safe but also involve immunogenicity problems. The other alternatives are non‐viral vectors. There have been in recent years relevant advances in non‐viral transfection that raise hope for considering this possibility. Several research groups are opting for this experimental alternative. An expression over 5%, representing a moderate phenotype, for a few months with a high safety, regarding vector, transfected cells, and implantation procedure, would already be a great success. This may represent an intermediate protocol in which the expression levels and times obtained are lower and shorter respectively as compared to viral vectors, but which provide a potential greater patient safety. This may more readily win acceptance among both patients and haematologists because fatal events in the past due to HIV/HCV infection may constrain the implementation of viruses as vectors.