Abstract
In this assignment four similar articles were summarized and evaluated for the purpose of integrating them into my literature review.
Annotated Bibliography
Bansal V, Libiger O. 2011 Aug 1. A probabilistic method for the detection and genotyping of small indels from population-scale sequence data. NCBI. [accessed 2019 Apr 29]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3137221/
This research identified one of the most prominent issues with modern genetic as the detection of minor errors in the genetic code. Minor errors such as deletions of nucleotides from a DNA strand or the insertion of incorrect nucleotides in a DNA strand are hindering physicians’ ability to perfect genetic modification. These genetic errors happen naturally in an organism and may not be an effect of artificial genome editing but these impurities in the DNA structure can impair the reading and replication of the inserted genome, rendering the strand the scientists altered faulty. Also, these natural errors in the genome make it hard for physicians to distinguish procedural mistakes from the ones occurring naturally. The research found this problem to be the second most prominent variation issue in the human genome meaning that this is a large hurdle to overcome. The purpose of this research was to propose their possible solution to this problem. They hypothesize that by using known sequences they could contextualize the new errors within a genome. This would solve a major problem in successful gene editing but gene editing and this procedure are both still far from perfect.
The two authors were, Vikas Bansal and Ondrej Libiger. Both of these authors have several publications and worked at Scripps Translational Science Institute under the genomic medicine department. The authors held no apparent bias in their research and substantiated the article with many numeric facts. The author’s scholarly backgrounds and substantial publications this research reliable.
Dzilic E, Lahm H, Dreßen M, Deutsch M-A, Lange R, Wu SM, Krane M, Doppler SA. 2018 Mar
14. Genome editing redefines precision medicine in the cardiovascular field. EBSCOhost. [accessed 2019 Apr 29]. https://web-a-ebscohost-com.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=84195b3c-6c5a-4d2c-a967-aa922a77fe14@sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#AN=128486611&db=a9h
This article focuses on the accomplishments and challenges of genome therapy in the cardiovascular field. The CRISPR protein has proven to be an effective tool in the efficient editing of genomes; CRISPR holds potential, especially, in regenerative medicine and personalized treatment. Personalized treatment, or, precision medicine is the ability to interpret a patient’s genetic information to analyze their risk for certain ailments and allow the physician to customize their treatment accordingly. This type of treatment is beneficial to many, if not all aspects of medicine, especially cardiovascular prevention and treatment. This is because many cardiovascular ailments begin in the genetic coding and later affects the function of the heart. With this technology, physicians are able to identify what their patients are at risk for and develop a unique plan formatted personally for them. The CRISPR protein is also a major breakthrough in regenerative medicine. A common occurrence associated with age or illness is the degeneration of cells, subsequently leading to the degeneration of tissues organs and such. With CRISPR and gene editing, physicians may be able to regenerate cells. Physicians can do this by programming the stem cells, naturally found in the body, to mature into any cell they need, thus replacing the original cells that were deteriorating. This technology is revolutionary and would practically stop aging but research still states that we have challenges to pass before this can be achieved.
Each of the authors has Ph.D.’s and are involved in several cardiac institutes, such as the Stanford regenerative medicine department, and the German Heart Center of Munich. Each author has an extensive background in this research and the research seems unbiased and reliable. This will serve as a comparative piece in the literature review.
Liang P, Xu Y, Zhang X, Ding C, Huang R, Zhang Z, Lv J, Xie X, Chen Y, Li Y, et al. 2015 Apr
18. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. SpringerLink. [accessed 2019 Apr 29]. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13238-015-0153-5#Sec1
This article highlights the fact that gene editing tools, most commonly CRISPR, are not yet ready for extensive use in a clinical setting. The research has identified that the current use of the CRISPR protein is not accurate or consistent enough to be used in clinical therapy just yet. Trials in embryos have solidified the idea that genes can be edited using the CRISPR protein, however, several complications have arisen within the process. The research determined that CRISPR efficiently cuts the desired genetic sequence and the genetic sequence is successfully repaired by other proteins, NHEJ and HDR. The problem occurs after the genetic sequence is already repaired. The genetic sequence can be repaired in two differing templates which makes it hard for scientists to accurately predict the consequences of the genetic sequence they just inserted. Another major limitation to current gene editing technology is that mutations can occur in the genetic sequence that was not intended or anticipated when initially modifying the genes. While there has been much success and progress in the use of CRISPR in modern years it is apparent that genetic editing is not ready for widespread use in human clinics.
This article was published by Springer Link, which publishes many credible research articles. The article had several authors that are all affiliated with the Guangdong Province Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine. This laboratory specializes in gene engineering and had the ability to conduct accurate research. This article substantiated their article with several numeric figures to further establish their credibility. Due to the credibility of this source, it would serve as a prime example in my literature review.
Bansal, V., Harismendy, O., Tewhey, R., Murray, S. S., Schork, N. J., Topol, E. J., & Frazer, K. A. (2010). Accurate detection and genotyping of SNPs utilizing population sequencing data. [accessed 2019 May 11]
This research emphasizes that while gene editing is a promising step in science and medicine it is not yet developed enough to be safely used in a human clinical setting. The current technique used for genetic modification is flawed because while it can efficiently detect incorrect genetic codes it is not efficient enough, yet, to properly edit them. This research had a breakthrough in both detecting and correcting genetic abnormalities by using population sequencing data as opposed to individual sequencing data. Properly predicting and correcting genetic abnormalities has been one of the major setbacks for scientists but by using population sequencing scientists have dramatically decreased the percentage of genetic errors. The current use of unsuccessful methods are hindering the use of gene editing in a medical setting, but this method could expedite the process and help save lives. Also, this technology has become much more reasonable because the price has dramatically decreased.
This research would perfectly support my literature review because it proves that current techniques are invalid and can be improved. The population technique specifically has been referenced by another article and seems to be a common solution.
(Bansal et al. 2011)
(Dzilic et al. 2018)
(Liang et al. 2015)
(Bansal et al. 2010)
