Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 1, 2025

Testing Targeted Therapies in Cancer using Structural DNA Alteration Analysis and Patient-Derived Xenografts
Published on: July 25, 2020
An evidence map of randomised controlled trials evaluating genetic therapies
Eric A Apaydin1,2, Andrea S Richardson3, Sangita Baxi4
1Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center, Health Care, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, USA eapaydin@rand.org.
Objectives:
Genetic therapies replace or inactivate disease-causing genes or introduce new or modified genes. These therapies have the potential to cure in a single application rather than treating symptoms through repeated administrations. This evidence map provides a broad overview of the genetic therapies that have been evaluated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for efficacy and safety.
Eligibility Criteria:
Two independent reviewers screened publications using predetermined eligibility criteria. Study details and data on safety and efficacy were abstracted from included trials. Results were visualised in an evidence map.
Information Sources:
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and grey literature to November 2018.
Risk Of Bias:
Only RCTs were included in this review to reduce the risk of selection bias in the evaluation of genetic therapy safety and efficacy.
Included Studies:
We identified 119 RCTs evaluating genetic therapies for a variety of clinical conditions.
Synthesis Of Results:
On average, samples included 107 participants (range: 1-1022), and were followed for 15 months (range: 0-124). Interventions using adenoviruses (40%) to treat cardiovascular diseases (29%) were the most common.
Description Of The Effect:
In RCTs reporting safety and efficacy outcomes, in the majority (60%) genetic therapies were associated with improved symptoms but in nearly half (45%) serious adverse event (SAEs) were also reported. Improvement was reported in trials treating cancer, cardiovascular, ocular and muscular diseases. However, only 19 trials reported symptom improvement for at least 1 year.
Strengths And Limitations Of Evidence:
This is the first comprehensive evidence map of RCTs evaluating the safety and efficacy of genetic therapies. Evidence for long-term effectiveness and safety is still sparse. This lack of evidence has implications for the use, ethics, pricing and logistics of genetic therapies.
Interpretation:
This evidence map provides a broad overview of research studies that allow strong evidence statements regarding the safety and efficacy of genetic therapies. Most interventions improve symptoms, but SAE are also common. More research is needed to evaluate genetic therapies with regard to the potential to cure diseases.
Insights
Genetic therapies show promise for treating diseases, with most improving symptoms. However, serious adverse events are common, and long-term effectiveness data is limited, necessitating further research.
Area of Science:
- Genetics and Genomics
- Clinical Trials
- Therapeutics
Background:
- Genetic therapies offer potential cures by targeting disease-causing genes.
- Unlike traditional treatments, genetic therapies aim for a one-time application rather than symptom management.
- Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are crucial for evaluating the efficacy and safety of these novel interventions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To provide a comprehensive overview of genetic therapies evaluated in RCTs.
- To map the existing evidence on the safety and efficacy of genetic interventions.
- To identify gaps in research regarding long-term outcomes of genetic therapies.
Main Methods:
- Systematic search of multiple databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science) and clinical trial registries.
- Inclusion of only RCTs to minimize bias in safety and efficacy assessments.
- Data abstraction on study characteristics, safety, and efficacy outcomes, visualized in an evidence map.
Main Results:
- 119 RCTs on genetic therapies for diverse conditions were identified.
- Adenovirus vectors were common (40%), primarily for cardiovascular diseases (29%).
- While 60% of trials showed symptom improvement, nearly half (45%) reported serious adverse events; long-term improvement data was sparse (19 trials).
Conclusions:
- Genetic therapies demonstrate potential for symptom improvement across various diseases.
- The co-occurrence of symptom improvement and serious adverse events highlights a complex risk-benefit profile.
- Significant gaps exist in evidence for long-term effectiveness and safety, impacting clinical adoption and ethical considerations.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Genetic Screens
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Gene Therapy
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...

