4.0 Article

Safety Findings of Dosing Gene Therapy Vectors in NHP With Pre-existing or Treatment-Emergent Anti-capsid Antibodies

期刊

TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/01926233231202995

关键词

gene therapy; adeno-associated virus; adeno-associated virus vector; antibodies; transduction inhibitor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two studies in nonhuman primates demonstrate the safety of AAV-based vector administration in the presence of either low-titer pre-existing anti-AAV5 antibodies or re-administration, even in the presence of high-titer antibodies.
Replication-incompetent adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based vectors are nonpathogenic viral particles used to deliver therapeutic genes to treat multiple monogenic disorders. AAVs can elicit immune responses; thus, one challenge in AAV-based gene therapy is the presence of neutralizing antibodies against vector capsids that may prevent transduction of target cells or elicit adverse findings. We present safety findings from two 12-week studies in nonhuman primates (NHPs) with pre-existing or treatment-emergent antibodies. In the first study, NHPs with varying levels of naturally acquired anti-AAV5 antibodies were dosed with an AAV5-based vector encoding human factor VIII (hFVIII). In the second study, NHPs with no pre-existing anti-AAV antibodies were dosed with an AAV5-based vector carrying the beta subunit of choriogonadotropic hormone (bCG); this led to the induction of high-titer antibodies against the AAV5 capsid. Four weeks later, the same NHPs received an equivalent dose of an AAV5-based vector carrying human factor IX (hFIX). In both of these studies, the administration of vectors carrying hFVIII, bCG, and hFIX was well-tolerated in NHPs with no adverse clinical pathology or microscopic findings. These two studies demonstrate the safety of AAV-based vector administration in NHPs with either low-titer pre-existing anti-AAV5 antibodies or re-administration, even in the presence of high-titer antibodies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据