The list of successful gene therapy trials using adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based vectors continues to grow and includes a wide range of monogenic diseases. Replication incompetent AAV genomes typically remain episomal and expression dilutes as cells divide and die. Consequently, long-term transgene expression from AAV is best suited for quiescent cell types, such as retinal cells, myocytes, or neurons. For genetic diseases that involve cells with steady turnover, AAV-conferred correction may require routine readministration, where every dose carries the risk of developing an adaptive immune response that renders treatment ineffective. Here, we discuss innovative approaches to permanently modify the host genome using AAV-based platforms, thus potentially requiring only a single dose. Such approaches include using AAV delivery of DNA transposons, homologous recombination templates into safe harbors, and nucleases for targeting integration. In tissues with continual cell turnover, genetic modification of progenitor cell populations will help ensure persistent therapeutic outcomes. Combining the safety profile of AAV-based gene therapy vectors with the ability to integrate a therapeutic transgene creates novel solutions to the challenge of lifelong curative treatments for human genetic diseases.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BennettJ, AshtariM, WellmanJ, et al.AAV2 gene therapy readministration in three adults with congenital blindness. Sci Transl Med, 2012; 4:120ra115.
2.
NathwaniAC, ReissUM, TuddenhamEG, et al.Long-term safety and efficacy of factor IX gene therapy in hemophilia B. N Engl J Med, 2014; 371:1994–2004.
3.
MaguireAM, SimonelliF, PierceEA, et al.Safety and efficacy of gene transfer for Leber's congenital amaurosis. N Engl J Med, 2008; 358:2240–2248.
4.
MendellJR, Al-ZaidyS, ShellR, et al.Single-dose gene-replacement therapy for spinal muscular atrophy. N Engl J Med, 2017; 377:1713–1722.
5.
BowlesDE, McPheeSW, LiC, et al.Phase 1 gene therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy using a translational optimized AAV vector. Mol Ther, 2012; 20:443–455.
LauCH, SuhY. In vivo genome editing in animals using AAV-CRISPR system: applications to translational research of human disease. F1000Res, 2017; 6:2153.
8.
HeX, XieH, LiuX, et al.Basic and clinical application of adeno-associated virus-mediated genome editing. Hum Gene Ther, 2019; 30:673–681.
9.
ValdmanisPN, KayMA. Future of rAAV gene therapy: platform for RNAi, gene editing, and beyond. Hum Gene Ther, 2017; 28:361–372.
10.
CunninghamSC, DaneAP, SpinoulasA, et al.Gene delivery to the Juvenile Mouse liver using AAV2/8 vectors. Mol Ther, 2008; 16:1081–1088.
11.
HalbertCL, StandaertTA, AitkenML, et al.Transduction by adeno-associated virus vectors in the rabbit airway: efficiency, persistence, and readministration. J Virol, 1997; 71:5932–5941.
12.
WangZ, ZhuT, QiaoC, et al.Adeno-associated virus serotype 8 efficiently delivers genes to muscle and heart. Nat Biotechnol, 2005; 23:321–328.
13.
NakaiH, YantSR, StormTA, et al.Extrachromosomal recombinant adeno-associated virus vector genomes are primarily responsible for stable liver transduction in vivo. J Virol, 2001; 75:6969–6976.
14.
FriedlandAE, BaralR, SinghalP, et al.Characterization of Staphylococcus aureus Cas9: a smaller Cas9 for all-in-one adeno-associated virus delivery and paired nickase applications. Genome Biol, 2015; 16:257.
15.
ChamberlainK, RiyadJM, WeberT. Expressing transgenes that exceed the packaging capacity of adeno-associated virus capsids. Hum Gene Ther Methods, 2016; 27:1–12.
16.
MaddalenaA, TornabeneP, TiberiP, et al.Triple vectors expand AAV transfer capacity in the retina. Mol Ther, 2018; 26:524–541.
17.
YanZ, ZhangY, DuanD, et al.Trans-splicing vectors expand the utility of adeno-associated virus for gene therapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2000; 97:6716–6721.
18.
SunL, LiJ, XiaoX. Overcoming adeno-associated virus vector size limitation through viral DNA heterodimerization. Nat Med, 2000; 6:599–602.
19.
TornabeneP, TrapaniI, MinopoliR, et al.Intein-mediated protein trans-splicing expands adeno-associated virus transfer capacity in the retina. Sci Transl Med, 2019; 11.
20.
KotinRM, SiniscalcoM, SamulskiRJ, et al.Site-specific integration by adeno-associated virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1990; 87:2211–2215.
21.
SamulskiRJ, ZhuX, XiaoX, et al.Targeted integration of adeno-associated virus (AAV) into human chromosome 19. EMBO J, 1991; 10:3941–3950.
22.
KotinRM, LindenRM, BernsKI. Characterization of a preferred site on human chromosome 19q for integration of adeno-associated virus DNA by non-homologous recombination. EMBO J, 1992; 11:5071–5078.
23.
HuserD, Gogol-DoringA, LutterT, et al.Integration preferences of wildtype AAV-2 for consensus rep-binding sites at numerous loci in the human genome. PLoS Pathog, 2010; 6:e1000985.
24.
McCartyDM, RyanJH, ZolotukhinS, et al.Interaction of the adeno-associated virus Rep protein with a sequence within the A palindrome of the viral terminal repeat. J Virol, 1994; 68:4998–5006.
25.
WeitzmanMD, KyostioSR, KotinRM, et al.Adeno-associated virus (AAV) Rep proteins mediate complex formation between AAV DNA and its integration site in human DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1994; 91:5808–5812.
26.
Penaud-BudlooM, Le GuinerC, NowrouziA, et al.Adeno-associated viral vector genomes persist as episomal chromatin in primate muscle. Hum Gene Ther, 2007; 18:1044.
27.
DuanD, SharmaP, YangJ, et al.Circular intermediates of recombinant adeno-associated virus have defined structural characteristics responsible for long-term episomal persistence in muscle tissue. J Virol, 1998; 72:8568–8577.
28.
RussellDW, MillerAD, AlexanderIE. Adeno-associated virus vectors preferentially transduce cells in S phase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1994; 91:8915–8919.
29.
InadaE, SaitohI, WatanabeS, et al.PiggyBac transposon-mediated gene delivery efficiently generates stable transfectants derived from cultured primary human deciduous tooth dental pulp cells (HDDPCs) and HDDPC-derived iPS cells. Int J Oral Sci, 2015; 7:144–154.
30.
AronovichEL, McIvorRS, HackettPB. The Sleeping Beauty transposon system: a non-viral vector for gene therapy. Hum Mol Genet, 2011; 20:R14–R20.
31.
IvicsZ, HackettPB, PlasterkRH, et al.Molecular reconstruction of Sleeping Beauty, a Tc1-like transposon from fish, and its transposition in human cells. Cell, 1997; 91:501–510.
32.
TipaneeJ, ChaiYC, VandenDriesscheT, et al.Preclinical and clinical advances in transposon-based gene therapy. Biosci Rep, 2017; 37:BSR20160614.
33.
HuangX, GuoH, TammanaS, et al.Gene transfer efficiency and genome-wide integration profiling of Sleeping Beauty, Tol2, and piggyBac transposons in human primary T cells. Mol Ther, 2010; 18:1803–1813.
34.
DingS, WuX, LiG, et al.Efficient transposition of the piggyBac (PB) transposon in mammalian cells and mice. Cell, 2005; 122:473–483.
35.
WuSC, MeirYJ, CoatesCJ, et al.piggyBac is a flexible and highly active transposon as compared to sleeping beauty, Tol2, and Mos1 in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2006; 103:15008–15013.
36.
WilsonMH, CoatesCJ, GeorgeALJr. PiggyBac transposon-mediated gene transfer in human cells. Mol Ther, 2007; 15:139–145.
37.
NakanishiH, HiguchiY, KawakamiS, et al.piggyBac transposon-mediated long-term gene expression in mice. Mol Ther, 2010; 18:707–714.
38.
SarideySK, LiuL, DohertyJE, et al.PiggyBac transposon-based inducible gene expression in vivo after somatic cell gene transfer. Mol Ther, 2009; 17:2115–2120.
39.
BurnightER, StaberJM, KorsakovP, et al.A hyperactive transposase promotes persistent gene transfer of a piggyBac DNA transposon. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids, 2012; 1:e50.
40.
DohertyJE, HuyeLE, YusaK, et al.Hyperactive piggyBac gene transfer in human cells and in vivo. Hum Gene Ther, 2012; 23:311–320.
41.
ZhangW, SolankiM, MutherN, et al.Hybrid adeno-associated viral vectors utilizing transposase-mediated somatic integration for stable transgene expression in human cells. PLoS One, 2013; 8:e76771.
42.
CooneyAL, SinghBK, SinnPL. Hybrid nonviral/viral vector systems for improved piggyBac DNA transposon in vivo delivery. Mol Ther, 2015; 23:667–674.
43.
CooneyAL, ThornellIM, SinghBK, et al.A novel AAV-mediated gene delivery system corrects CFTR function in pigs. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol, 2019; 61:747–754.
44.
MarhJ, StoytchevaZ, UrschitzJ, et al.Hyperactive self-inactivating piggyBac for transposase-enhanced pronuclear microinjection transgenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2012; 109:19184–19189.
45.
BireS, GossetD, JegotG, et al.Exogenous mRNA delivery and bioavailability in gene transfer mediated by piggyBac transposition. BMC Biotechnol, 2013; 13:75.
46.
BireS, LeyD, CasteretS, et al.Optimization of the piggyBac transposon using mRNA and insulators: toward a more reliable gene delivery system. PLoS One, 2013; 8:e82559.
47.
BarzelA, PaulkNK, ShiY, et al.Promoterless gene targeting without nucleases ameliorates haemophilia B in mice. Nature, 2015; 517:360–364.
48.
FaustoN, CampbellJS. The role of hepatocytes and oval cells in liver regeneration and repopulation. Mech Dev, 2003; 120:117–130.
49.
ColellaP, RonzittiG, MingozziF. Emerging issues in AAV-mediated in vivo gene therapy. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev, 2018; 8:87–104.
50.
PeiX, HanM, ZhangL. Advances of adeno-associated virus applied in gene therapy to hemophilia from bench work to the clinical use. Blood Sci, 2019; 1:130–136.
51.
De CanevaA, PorroF, BortolussiG, et al.Coupling AAV-mediated promoterless gene targeting to SaCas9 nuclease to efficiently correct liver metabolic diseases. JCI Insight, 2019; 5:e128863.
52.
WardP, WalshCE. Targeted integration of a rAAV vector into the AAVS1 region. Virology, 2012; 433:356–366.
53.
AmmarI, Gogol-DoringA, MiskeyC, et al.Retargeting transposon insertions by the adeno-associated virus Rep protein. Nucleic Acids Res, 2012; 40:6693–6712.
54.
HanlonKS, KleinstiverBP, GarciaSP, et al.High levels of AAV vector integration into CRISPR-induced DNA breaks. Nat Commun, 2019; 10:4439.
55.
NelsonCE, WuY, GemberlingMP, et al.Long-term evaluation of AAV-CRISPR genome editing for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Nat Med, 2019; 25:427–432.
56.
Cavazzana-CalvoM, Hacein-BeyS, de Saint BasileG, et al.Gene therapy of human severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)-X1 disease. Science, 2000; 288:669–672.
57.
GasparHB, ParsleyKL, HoweS, et al.Gene therapy of X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency by use of a pseudotyped gammaretroviral vector. Lancet, 2004; 364:2181–2187.
58.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, Le DeistF, CarlierF, et al.Sustained correction of X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency by ex vivo gene therapy. N Engl J Med, 2002; 346:1185–1193.
59.
NeffT, BeardBC, KiemHP. Survival of the fittest: in vivo selection and stem cell gene therapy. Blood, 2006; 107:1751–1760.
60.
StephanV, WahnV, Le DeistF, et al.Atypical X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency due to possible spontaneous reversion of the genetic defect in T cells. N Engl J Med, 1996; 335:1563–1567.
61.
BoussoP, WahnV, DouagiI, et al.Diversity, functionality, and stability of the T cell repertoire derived in vivo from a single human T cell precursor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2000; 97:274–278.
62.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, GarrigueA, WangGP, et al.Insertional oncogenesis in 4 patients after retrovirus-mediated gene therapy of SCID-X1. J Clin Invest, 2008; 118:3132–3142.
63.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, Von KalleC, SchmidtM, et al.LMO2-associated clonal T cell proliferation in two patients after gene therapy for SCID-X1. Science, 2003; 302:415–419.
64.
HoweSJ, MansourMR, SchwarzwaelderK, et al.Insertional mutagenesis combined with acquired somatic mutations causes leukemogenesis following gene therapy of SCID-X1 patients. J Clin Invest, 2008; 118:3143–3150.
65.
GasparHB, CoorayS, GilmourKC, et al.Long-term persistence of a polyclonal T cell repertoire after gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. Sci Transl Med, 2011; 3:97ra79.
66.
DeichmannA, Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, SchmidtM, et al.Vector integration is nonrandom and clustered and influences the fate of lymphopoiesis in SCID-X1 gene therapy. J Clin Invest, 2007; 117:2225–2232.
67.
SteinS, OttMG, Schultze-StrasserS, et al.Genomic instability and myelodysplasia with monosomy 7 consequent to EVI1 activation after gene therapy for chronic granulomatous disease. Nat Med, 2010; 16:198–204.
68.
SilerU, ParuzynskiA, Holtgreve-GrezH, et al.Successful combination of sequential gene therapy and rescue Allo-HSCT in two children with X-CGD—importance of timing. Curr Gene Ther, 2015; 15:416–427.
69.
BraunCJ, BoztugK, ParuzynskiA, et al.Gene therapy for Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome—long-term efficacy and genotoxicity. Sci Transl Med, 2014; 6:227ra233.
70.
FischerA, Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, Cavazzana-CalvoM. 20 years of gene therapy for SCID. Nat Immunol, 2010; 11:457–460.
71.
MiyoshiH, BlomerU, TakahashiM, et al.Development of a self-inactivating lentivirus vector. J Virol, 1998; 72:8150–8157.
72.
ZuffereyR, DullT, MandelRJ, et al.Self-inactivating lentivirus vector for safe and efficient in vivo gene delivery. J Virol, 1998; 72:9873–9880.
73.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, PaiSY, GasparHB, et al.A modified gamma-retrovirus vector for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. N Engl J Med, 2014; 371:1407–1417.
74.
ClarkeEL, ConnellAJ, SixE, et al.T cell dynamics and response of the microbiota after gene therapy to treat X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. Genome Med, 2018; 10:70.
75.
CavazzanaM, SixE, Lagresle-PeyrouC, et al.Gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency: where do we stand?. Hum Gene Ther, 2016; 27:108–116.
76.
AiutiA, RoncaroloMG, NaldiniL. Gene therapy for ADA-SCID, the first marketing approval of an ex vivo gene therapy in Europe: paving the road for the next generation of advanced therapy medicinal products. EMBO Mol Med, 2017; 9:737–740.
77.
ShawKL, GarabedianE, MishraS, et al.Clinical efficacy of gene-modified stem cells in adenosine deaminase-deficient immunodeficiency. J Clin Invest, 2017; 127:1689–1699.
78.
RotheM, ModlichU, SchambachA. Biosafety challenges for use of lentiviral vectors in gene therapy. Curr Gene Ther, 2013; 13:453–468.
79.
BiascoL. Integration site analysis in gene therapy patients: expectations and reality. Hum Gene Ther, 2017; 28:1122–1129.
80.
RothSL, MalaniN, BushmanFD. Gammaretroviral integration into nucleosomal target DNA in vivo. J Virol, 2011; 85:7393–7401.
81.
WuX, LiY, CriseB, et al.Transcription start regions in the human genome are favored targets for MLV integration. Science, 2003; 300:1749–1751.
82.
CesanaD, SgualdinoJ, RudilossoL, et al.Whole transcriptome characterization of aberrant splicing events induced by lentiviral vector integrations. J Clin Invest, 2012; 122:1667–1676.
83.
De RijckJ, de KogelC, DemeulemeesterJ, et al.The BET family of proteins targets moloney murine leukemia virus integration near transcription start sites. Cell Rep, 2013; 5:886–894.
84.
BerryC, HannenhalliS, LeipzigJ, et al.Selection of target sites for mobile DNA integration in the human genome. PLoS Comput Biol, 2006; 2:e157.
85.
WangGP, CiuffiA, LeipzigJ, et al.HIV integration site selection: analysis by massively parallel pyrosequencing reveals association with epigenetic modifications. Genome Res, 2007; 17:1186–1194.
MontiniE, CesanaD, SchmidtM, et al.The genotoxic potential of retroviral vectors is strongly modulated by vector design and integration site selection in a mouse model of HSC gene therapy. J Clin Invest, 2009; 119:964–975.
88.
ChandlerRJ, LaFaveMC, VarshneyGK, et al.Vector design influences hepatic genotoxicity after adeno-associated virus gene therapy. J Clin Invest, 2015; 125:870–880.
89.
NakaiH, MontiniE, FuessS, et al.AAV serotype 2 vectors preferentially integrate into active genes in mice. Nat Genet, 2003; 34:297–302.
90.
BellP, WangL, LebherzC, et al.No evidence for tumorigenesis of AAV vectors in a large-scale study in mice. Mol Ther, 2005; 12:299–306.
91.
MillerDG, TrobridgeGD, PetekLM, et al.Large-scale analysis of adeno-associated virus vector integration sites in normal human cells. J Virol, 2005; 79:11434–11442.
92.
NakaiH, IwakiY, KayMA, et al.Isolation of recombinant adeno-associated virus vector-cellular DNA junctions from mouse liver. J Virol, 1999; 73:5438–5447.
93.
NakaiH, WuX, FuessS, et al.Large-scale molecular characterization of adeno-associated virus vector integration in mouse liver. J Virol, 2005; 79:3606–3614.
94.
InagakiK, LewisSM, WuX, et al.DNA palindromes with a modest arm length of greater, similar 20 base pairs are a significant target for recombinant adeno-associated virus vector integration in the liver, muscles, and heart in mice. J Virol, 2007; 81:11290–11303.
KobayashiT. Strategies to maintain the stability of the ribosomal RNA gene repeats—collaboration of recombination, cohesion, and condensation. Genes Genet Syst, 2006; 81:155–161.
98.
ShawCJ, LupskiJR. Implications of human genome architecture for rearrangement-based disorders: the genomic basis of disease. Hum Mol Genet, 2004; 13 Spec No 1:R57–R64.
99.
AguileraA. The connection between transcription and genomic instability. EMBO J, 2002; 21:195–201.
ZhangW, Muck-HauslM, WangJ, et al.Integration profile and safety of an adenovirus hybrid-vector utilizing hyperactive sleeping beauty transposase for somatic integration. PLoS One, 2013; 8:e75344.
102.
JangJH, KoerberJT, KimJS, et al.An evolved adeno-associated viral variant enhances gene delivery and gene targeting in neural stem cells. Mol Ther, 2011; 19:667–675.
103.
Smith-AricaJR, ThomsonAJ, AnsellR, et al.Infection efficiency of human and mouse embryonic stem cells using adenoviral and adeno-associated viral vectors. Cloning Stem Cells, 2003; 5:51–62.
104.
AsuriP, BartelMA, VazinT, et al.Directed evolution of adeno-associated virus for enhanced gene delivery and gene targeting in human pluripotent stem cells. Mol Ther, 2012; 20:329–338.
105.
LiuY, SiriwonN, RohrsJA, et al.Generation of targeted adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors for human gene therapy. Curr Pharm Des, 2015; 21:3248–3256.
106.
SongL, KaussMA, KopinE, et al.Optimizing the transduction efficiency of capsid-modified AAV6 serotype vectors in primary human hematopoietic stem cells in vitro and in a xenograft mouse model in vivo. Cytotherapy, 2013; 15:986–998.
107.
RawlinsEL, HoganBL. Epithelial stem cells of the lung: privileged few or opportunities for many?. Development, 2006; 133:2455–2465.
108.
RockJR, RandellSH, HoganBL. Airway basal stem cells: a perspective on their roles in epithelial homeostasis and remodeling. Dis Model Mech, 2010; 3:545–556.
109.
RandellSH. Airway epithelial stem cells and the pathophysiology of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Proc Am Thorac Soc, 2006; 3:718–725.
110.
LiN, CooneyAL, ZhangW, et al.Enhanced tropism of species B1 adenoviral-based vectors for primary human airway epithelial cells. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev, 2019; 14:228–236.
111.
LimberisMP, VandenbergheLH, ZhangL, et al.Transduction efficiencies of novel AAV vectors in mouse airway epithelium in vivo and human ciliated airway epithelium in vitro. Mol Ther, 2009; 17:294–301.
112.
DickeyDD, ExcoffonKJ, KoerberJT, et al.Enhanced sialic acid-dependent endocytosis explains the increased efficiency of infection of airway epithelia by a novel adeno-associated virus. J Virol, 2011; 85:9023–9030.
