Team:Warwick
From 2014.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 144: | Line 144: | ||
The main advantages of our method of gene silencing as opposed to conventional gene silencing are that this method is cheaper, it can be performed in situe, and perhaps most importantly is safer, as there is no incorporation into the genome meaning that genes which are not the target of the therapy are not affected. In addition, the gene silencing machinery existing as RNA as opposed to in DNA makes it much more easily accessable, and the addition of certain extra RNA (or alternatively certain biobricks bolted on to our biobrick) could be used to create a feedback mechanism, where the expression of the target genes is regulated, as opposed to just reduced by a constant amount. | The main advantages of our method of gene silencing as opposed to conventional gene silencing are that this method is cheaper, it can be performed in situe, and perhaps most importantly is safer, as there is no incorporation into the genome meaning that genes which are not the target of the therapy are not affected. In addition, the gene silencing machinery existing as RNA as opposed to in DNA makes it much more easily accessable, and the addition of certain extra RNA (or alternatively certain biobricks bolted on to our biobrick) could be used to create a feedback mechanism, where the expression of the target genes is regulated, as opposed to just reduced by a constant amount. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <p> | ||
+ | |||
+ | To test our biobrick, we decided to focus on using it to inhibit the gene DPP4. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 is a gene responsible for the inhibition of insulin, among other functions. DPP4 inhibitors are already used as treatment for type-2 diabetes, but pills containing them must be taken regularly. Our replicon system should in theory exist permanently in human cells, and continuously inhibit DPP4, removing the need for type-2 diabetes sufferers to continuously take medication. | ||
<p> | <p> |
Revision as of 14:04, 4 August 2014