• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Sangamo's Zinc Finger Protein Gene Editor


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 manofsan

  • Guest
  • 1,223 posts
  • 56

Posted 11 April 2005 - 04:30 AM


I was surfing around reading about Sangamo's Zinc Finger Protein Transcription Factor (aka 'gene editor'), and ended up on their website:

http://www.sangamo.com/index.php

I just want to better understand how this thing works, and what its weaknesses/limitations are.

Their transcription factor is made of 2 main components (domains). The first is the binding/recognition domain, to properly target the right area of the genome. The second is the functional domain, which is basically the gene you're trying to insert (can even be a knocked-out gene, if you're trying to disable rather than enable something). This apparently is how natural transcription factors work.

What worries me is suppose the binding domain makes a mistake? Seems to me that if if you have some unrelated genomic region that matches most of the binding sequence, there's a chance of the binding sequence still attaching to that genomic site. So I'd think you'd really want detailed information on a patient's genomic sequence before you try to alter it.

I'd like to know just how big a sequence can you slap in there? At what point does this method become unreliable?
What are things that help or favor this technique working correctly?

What is the epigenetic impact? From what you've told me, the methylation regulatory stuff only applies to the promoter portion of a gene sequence, so it sounds to me that if you don't mess with the promoter portion, you're not going affect the epigenetic side of things. Correct?

What are the various possible ways in which this thing can go wrong, and cause problems?

#2 manofsan

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,223 posts
  • 56

Posted 11 April 2005 - 04:35 AM

Oh, here's the abstract for that article that was published in Nature:

http://www.nature.co...s=doi1113194443

Darn, I wish I could access the actual article itself (no subscription) :(

Click HERE to rent this GENETICS advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3

  • Lurker
  • 1

Posted 11 April 2005 - 04:02 PM

TOWARDS SAFE,NON-VIRAL THERAPEUTIC GENE EXPRESSION  IN HUMANS
Dominic J.Glover, Hans J.Lipps and David A.Jans
The potential dangers of using viruses to deliver and integrate DNA into host cells in gene therapy have been poignantly highlighted in recent clinical trials. Safer, non-viral gene delivery approaches have been largely ignored in the past because of their inefficient delivery and the resulting transient transgene expression. However, recent advances indicate that efficient, long-term gene expression can be achieved by non-viral means. In particular, integration of DNA can be targeted to specific genomic sites without deleterious consequences and it is possible to maintain transgenes as small episomal plasmids or artificial chromosomes. The application of these approaches to human gene therapy is gradually becoming a reality.

Attached Files






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users