Search

Successful gene therapies rely on methods that safely introduce DNA into target cells and enable subsequent expression of proteins. To that end, peptides are an attractive materials platform for DNA delivery, facilitating condensation into nanoparticles, delivery into cells, and subcellular release to enable protein expression. Peptides are programmable materials that can be designed to address biocompatibility, stability, and subcellular barriers that limit efficiency of non-viral gene delivery systems. This review focuses on fundamental structure-function relationships regarding peptide design and their impact on nanoparticle physical properties, biologic activity, and biocompatibility. Recent peptide technologies utilize multi-dimensional structures, non-natural chemistries, and combinations of peptides with lipids to achieve desired properties and efficient transfection. Advances in DNA cargo design are also presented to highlight further opportunities for peptide-based gene delivery. Modern DNA designs enable prolonged expression compared to traditional plasmids, providing an additional component that can be synergized with peptide carriers for improved transfection. Peptide transfection systems are poised to become a flexible and efficient platform incorporating new chemistries, functionalities, and improved DNA cargos to usher in a new era of gene therapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The authors declare the following competing financial interests: MU and RJC are current employees of AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Survival rates from mechanical ventilation (MV) in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation are poor, but little is known about the need for and outcomes from MV in patients who undergo autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT)., Study Objective: To determine the frequency of and risk factors for the use of MV in recipients of AHSCT and to identify predictors of survival in mechanically ventilated AHSCT patients., Design: Retrospective, cohort analysis, Setting: Tertiary-care, university-affiliated medical center., Patients: One hundred fifty-nine consecutive patients who underwent AHSCT., Interventions: Patient surveillance and data collection., Measurements and Results: The primary outcome measure was the need for MV, and the secondary end point was survival after MV. Of 159 patients, 17 required MV (10. 7%). Three variables were associated with the need for MV: increasing age, use of total body irradiation in the conditioning regimen, and treatment with amphotericin B. As a screening test to predict the need for MV, no risk factor had a sensitivity or specificity > 82%. Three of the 17 mechanically ventilated patients (17.6%) survived to discharge. Only the mean APACHE (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation) II score separated survivors from nonsurvivors (21.7 vs 31.4; p = 0.029). Both the duration of MV and the length of stay in the ICU were similar in survivors and nonsurvivors., Conclusions: We conclude that MV is infrequently needed following AHSCT. Although survival after MV in these patients is limited, clinical variables do not reliably allow clinicians to prospectively identify patients destined to die.