Next Article in Journal
Audiovestibular Dysfunction Related to Long COVID-19 Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Characteristics, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management
Next Article in Special Issue
Emerging Multi-Source Transmission of SFTS Virus on a Remote Japanese Island: A One-Health Perspective
Previous Article in Journal
Molecular Surveillance, Evolution, and Vaccine Strain Match of the HA and NA Genes of 2009 H1N1 Pandemic Virus Circulating in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mitogenome of Medicago lupulina L. Cultivar-Population VIK32, Line MlS-1: Dynamic Structural Organization and Foreign Sequences
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 27
Issue 3
10.3390/ijms27031418
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Translational Roadmap for Neurological Nonsense Mutation Disorders

by
Jiaqing Li
,
Zhenyun Zhu
and
Sanqing Xu
*
Department of Pediatrics, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27(3), 1418; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27031418
Submission received: 21 December 2025 / Revised: 23 January 2026 / Accepted: 27 January 2026 / Published: 30 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 25th Anniversary of IJMS: Updates and Advances in Molecular Genetics and Genomics)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Nonsense mutations, responsible for ~11% of gene lesions causing human monogenic diseases, introduce premature termination codons (PTCs) that lead to truncated proteins and nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD). In the central nervous system (CNS), these mutations drive severe, progressive neurological conditions such as spinal muscular atrophy, Rett syndrome, and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Readthrough therapies—strategies to override PTCs and restore full-length protein expression—have evolved from early aminoglycosides to modern precision tools including suppressor tRNAs, RNA editing, and CRISPR-based platforms. Yet clinical translation remains hampered by inefficient CNS delivery, variable efficacy, and the absence of personalized stratification. In this review, we propose a translational framework—the 4 Ds of Readthrough Therapy—to systematically address these barriers. The framework dissects the pipeline into Detection (precision patient identification and biomarker profiling), Delivery (engineered vectors for CNS targeting), Decoding (context-aware molecular correction), and Durability (long-term safety and efficacy). By integrating advances in machine learning, nanocarriers, base editing, and adaptive trial designs, this roadmap provides a structured strategy to bridge the translational gap. We advocate that a synergistic, modality-tailored approach will transform nonsense suppression from palliative care to durable, precision-based cures for once-untreatable neurological disorders.

1. Introduction: The Promise and Peril of Nonsense Suppression

Nonsense mutations, which generate premature termination codons (PTCs) within protein-coding sequences, are a catastrophic cause of inherited neurological disorders [1,2]. By truncating essential proteins and triggering nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD), these mutations disrupt synaptic integrity, neuronal survival, and myelination, leading to progressive and often irreversible neurological decline. Nonsense mutations affect a significant proportion of genetic disorders with major neurological or neuromuscular manifestations, including spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), Rett syndrome, Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), and genetic epileptic encephalopathies, thus the clinical need for effective interventions is urgent and unmet [3,4,5].
To address this, readthrough therapy has emerged as a promising precision medicine approach. It utilizes molecular agents to “suppress” the ribosome into bypassing these premature stop signals, allowing the cell to continue translation and produce a full-length, functional protein. The concept of translational readthrough—forcing the ribosome to bypass a PTC and synthesize a full-length protein—has captivated researchers for decades [6,7]. The therapeutic landscape has expanded from serendipitously discovered aminoglycosides to rationally designed small molecules [8,9], engineered suppressor tRNAs (sup-tRNAs), RNA editing platforms, and CRISPR-based gene correction [10,11,12]. Yet, the journey from bench to bedside has been fraught with setbacks. High-profile clinical failures, such as the mixed outcomes of ataluren in DMD, underscore a critical translational gap [13]. Variable efficacy, poor blood–brain barrier (BBB) penetration, off-target effects, and a one-size-fits-all approach have stymied progress [14].
To overcome this stagnation, we propose a paradigm shift from a modality-centric view to a translational pipeline perspective. This review introduces and elaborates the “4 Ds of Readthrough Therapy” framework: Detection, Delivery, Decoding, and Durability. Unlike general precision medicine frameworks that focus on broad diagnostic–therapeutic pairings, the “4 Ds” model is primarily an operational and predictive framework specifically designed for the unique molecular hurdles of nonsense suppression. It advances beyond existing translational models by explicitly linking the molecular detection of codon context and NMD efficiency with the selection of a decoding modality and the necessity for brain-penetrant delivery systems. By doing so, this model serves as a structured roadmap to diagnose specific translational bottlenecks, integrate emerging technologies, and accelerate the development of personalized, effective treatments for nonsense mutation disorders of the nervous system (Figure 1).

2. Detection: Precision Patient Identification and Stratification

The first critical step in the translational pipeline is accurately identifying patients who will benefit from readthrough and predicting their therapeutic response. This moves beyond simple genotyping to a multi-parametric profiling approach.

2.1. Beyond the Genotype: Codon Context and Transcriptomics

Readthrough efficiency is profoundly influenced by the nucleotide sequence surrounding the PTC (the “codon context”), the identity of the stop codon (UGA, UAG, UAA), and downstream exon junction complexes that govern NMD susceptibility [15]. Among disease-causing nonsense mutations, the relative frequencies are approximately 38.5% for UGA, 40.4% for UAG, and 21.1% for UAA [16]. Generally, UGA is the “leakiest” and most susceptible to pharmacological readthrough, followed by UAG and UAA [17,18,19,20]. Machine learning models trained on ribosome profiling and deep mutational scanning data can now predict mutation-specific readthrough potential, enabling pre-therapeutic stratification [21]. Recent studies demonstrate that NMD efficiency varies significantly among patients, influencing both baseline transcript levels and therapeutic response [22].

2.2. Biomarker Development and Patient-Derived Models

The lack of robust, quantifiable biomarkers for target engagement and functional protein restoration has plagued clinical trials [23]. Next-generation mass spectrometry now allows for the direct detection of low-level, full-length proteins in patient cerebrospinal fluid or via extracellular vesicles (EVs) [24]. These lipid bilayer nanoparticles, secreted by all CNS cell types, can traverse the BBB into the peripheral circulation while carrying a molecular cargo (proteins, nucleic acids) that mirrors the physiological state of their parent cells. In the context of nonsense suppression, the mass spectrometry-based detection of full-length proteins within CNS-derived EVs in blood or plasma provides a “liquid biopsy” to monitor therapeutic efficacy and protein restoration without the need for invasive brain biopsies. Meanwhile, patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) differentiated into cortical neurons, motor neurons, or 3D brain organoids provide a revolutionary platform [25,26]. These “patients-in-a-dish” models enable the high-throughput screening of readthrough compounds in a genetically authentic, human neural environment, de-risking drug candidates before clinical entry [27].

2.3. Integrating Multi-Omic Data for a Therapeutic Decision Matrix

The future of Detection lies in integrative diagnostics: combining genomic data (mutation, context), transcriptomic data (NMD efficiency, tRNA expression profiles), and proteomic readouts from iPSC models. This integrated profile can guide the selection of the optimal therapeutic modality—small molecule, sup-tRNA, or gene editing—for each individual, marking the true dawn of precision readthrough.

3. Delivery: Engineering Vehicles to Conquer the Blood–Brain Barrier

One of the most formidable obstacles to treating central nervous system (CNS) disorders with readthrough therapies is the restrictive nature of the BBB. The BBB is composed of tightly joined endothelial cells, astrocytic end-feet, and pericytes that collectively prevent the entry of most macromolecules and therapeutic agents into the brain parenchyma. This severely limits the efficacy of systemically administered small molecules, ASOs, or RNA-based therapies for neurological conditions [28]. Overcoming this requires innovative bioengineering.

3.1. Evolution of CNS-Capable Nanocarriers

Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), pivotal for mRNA vaccine delivery, are being repurposed for the brain. By functionalizing LNPs with BBB-penetrating peptides (e.g., targeting transferrin or LDL receptors), researchers can achieve receptor-mediated transcytosis [29]. Polymeric nanoparticles, such as those made from PLGA, offer sustained release and can be similarly targeted [30]. Engineered exosomes [31], inherently cross the BBB and can be loaded with RNAs (ASOs, guide RNAs, sup-tRNAs) and decorated with neuron-specific targeting motifs, dramatically enhancing brain accumulation while minimizing immunogenicity [32]. Recent advances in focused ultrasound with microbubbles provide a physical method to transiently open the BBB for therapeutic delivery [33].

3.2. Viral Vectors and Route of Administration

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors remain a mainstay for one-time gene therapy, but their immunogenicity, cargo limits, and preferential tropism are limitations [34]. Next-generation capsid engineering [35], using directed evolution in primate models, is yielding novel AAV variants with enhanced CNS tropism and reduced seroprevalence [35]. To bypass the restrictive BBB, these engineered capsids are designed to utilize receptor-mediated transcytosis, allowing them to cross from the vasculature into the brain parenchyma. While early variants like AAV-PHP.eB showed high CNS tropism in specific mouse strains by targeting the LY6A receptor—a mechanism not conserved in primates—recent efforts have identified primate-tropic variants such as AAV.CAP-B10 that exhibit superior distribution in the non-human primate brain. Furthermore, new capsids are being engineered to target human-specific receptors like Carbonic Anhydrase IV, which is highly expressed in brain endothelial cells, ensuring more reliable clinical translation. Alternatively, intranasal administration [36] offers a direct, non-invasive route to the brain via the olfactory and trigeminal nerves, bypassing the BBB entirely for oligonucleotides and small molecules [36]. Engineered virus-like particles (VLPs) represent another promising platform for efficient protein delivery without viral genome integration [35].

3.3. The Delivery–Decoding Interface

Effective Delivery is not generic; it must be tailored to the Decoding modality. This dictates that the vector’s persistence, tissue tropism, immunogenicity, and cargo capacity align with the therapeutic agent’s mechanism of action, required duration of activity, and molecular size. For example, sup-tRNAs require persistent expression to maintain therapeutic levels of the rescued protein, favoring AAV or integrating RNA vectors [37,38]. Conversely, CRISPR-based editors are designed as precise, transient catalysts where prolonged expression heightens the risk of off-target effects; for these agents, biodegradable delivery systems like LNPs, which facilitate a controlled, finite burst of activity, represent the optimal strategy [35]. This fundamental principle extends to other modalities, governing the development of next-generation ASO conjugates engineered to enhance central nervous system residency and bridge pharmacokinetic gaps [39,40]. Thus, a successful therapeutic strategy demands that the delivery platform is not merely a passive carrier but is co-optimized with the decoding modality, ensuring that the molecular precision engineered at the bench effectively translates to target engagement and functional correction at the bedside.

4. Decoding: Achieving Molecular Precision at the Ribosome

This pillar confronts the core therapeutic challenge: how to force the ribosome to bypass PTC with both efficiency and fidelity. The evolution from broad-spectrum compounds to context-aware, high-specificity molecular machines marks a critical paradigm shift.

4.1. The Renaissance of Small Molecule Design

Pharmacological agents that induce translational readthrough represent a promising, therapeutic approach for diseases caused by nonsense mutations. These compounds, such as aminoglycosides (e.g., Gentamicin, G418), next-generation synthetic aminoglycoside derivatives (e.g., ELX-02), and non-aminoglycoside small molecules like Ataluren (PTC124), promote the insertion of near-cognate tRNAs at PTCs, thereby allowing ribosomes to bypass the stop signal and produce full-length, potentially functional proteins.
Aminoglycosides were the first class of compounds identified to induce ribosomal readthrough by promoting the misincorporation of near-cognate tRNAs [10,41]. Since the landmark discovery of aminoglycosides G418 and paromomycin as readthrough compounds in 1985, other aminoglycosides, including gentamicin, neomycin, and paromomycin, have been tested for their ability to suppress PTCs. Their readthrough efficacies vary widely (1% to 25%), depending on the chemical composition, stop codon identity, and surrounding nucleotide context [6,19,20]. Moreover, the long-term use of aminoglycosides is limited by side effects including dose-dependent nephrotoxicity, ototoxicity [42,43], and the induction of translational errors [44]. Newer synthetic aminoglycosides have been developed for enhanced selectivity and reduced toxicity. One such compound, ELX-02, is a eukaryote-optimized aminoglycoside derivative that demonstrates improved ribosome specificity. Preclinical studies have shown that ELX-02 can restore CFTR activity in patient-derived organoids and stabilize CFTR mRNA by modulating NMD [45,46]. However, results from a Phase II trial (NCT04135495) in CF patients showed variable outcomes, likely due to heterogeneity in stop codon context, individual pharmacodynamics, and the incomplete suppression of the NMD pathway.
Considerable effort has been devoted to identifying non-aminoglycoside compounds with readthrough-inducing activity. The most well known is ataluren (PTC124), an oxadiazole compound that enhances readthrough by interfering with the interaction between release factors and the ribosome [11]. Ataluren received conditional approval from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for treating nonsense mutation-associated DMD, based on data showing modest benefits in walking ability and slowed disease progression (NCT00592553). However, subsequent Phase III trials (NCT03179631, NCT01826487) failed to meet primary efficacy endpoints, raising questions about patient stratification, dose optimization, and context-dependent responsiveness [13,47]. Beyond ataluren, several novel compounds are under investigation. For instance, 2,6-diaminopurine (DAP) enhances readthrough by inhibiting FTSJ1, a tRNA-specific methyltransferase, thereby altering tRNA modification and decoding fidelity [48] and cytosine analogs and compounds like clitocine have shown the ability to increase PTC suppression by modifying tRNA structure or enhancing its interaction with the ribosome [49]. RTC13, RTC14, and NV848 are newer small molecules identified through high-throughput screening that exhibit readthrough activity in preclinical models with reduced toxicity compared with aminoglycosides [50,51].
To date, over 30 pharmacological compounds with PTC readthrough activity have been characterized through in vitro and in vivo models. The overall clinical translation remains limited, primarily due to low and context-dependent readthrough efficacy, nonspecific amino acid incorporation at the PTC site, and off-target effects impacting global translation [7,14]. The new generation focuses on rational design informed by cryo-EM ribosomal structures. Compounds are being engineered to stabilize specific ribosome-near-cognate tRNA interactions at PTCs while minimizing interference at natural termination codons (NTCs) [21,48]. Furthermore, the concurrent administration of a readthrough inducer with a modulator of the NMD pathway—such as SMG1 inhibitors or an ASO that blocks the recruitment of UPF1—can create a synergistic effect, dramatically increasing the steady-state pool of target mRNA and thereby amplifying the yield of full-length proteins [52,53]. For many complex, multi-domain neuronal proteins, the translation of a full-length mRNA is insufficient; the nascent polypeptide must fold correctly, traverse cellular compartments, and achieve stable conformation. This introduces a third therapeutic layer: pharmacological chaperones. These compounds bind to and stabilize the correctly folded state of the rescued protein or assist in its trafficking, ensuring that translational rescue translates to durable functional restoration at the synapse or organelle level [54].

4.2. The Rise in Nucleic Acid Therapies

The field has witnessed the ascent of nucleic acid-based platforms, which offer a fundamentally distinct strategy by directly programming the cellular machinery to correct or bypass the error at the RNA or DNA level, often with nucleotide-level precision (Figure 2). Among these, sup-tRNAs represent a targeted genetic supplementation approach [37,55,56]. This strategy involves delivering an engineered tRNA gene designed to decode a specific PTC as a sense codon [12]. These tRNAs have demonstrated promising results across a range of genetic disorders, including DMD [57], CF [37,38,58], and CDKL5 deficiency disorders [59]. Sup-tRNAs have also been shown to antagonize NMD, increasing therapeutic effect by stabilizing PTC-containing mRNA [58]. Modern high-throughput functional profiling platforms, such as tRNA-ScreenSeq, enable the screening of thousands of tRNA variants to identify those with optimal suppression efficiency and, critically, minimal off-target recognition of NTCs [37,38]. The latest innovations are focused on enhancing this specificity through precise anticodon loop engineering and the incorporation of chemical modifications that improve molecular stability and reduce immunogenicity [60].
A complementary and reversible strategy is RNA editing, which corrects the PTC at the transcript level without altering the genome [61,62]. The most clinically advanced systems harness endogenous Adenosine Deaminases Acting on RNA (ADAR), which mediate the enzymatic conversion of adenosine (A) to inosine (I)—read as guanine (G) by the ribosome. This process can potentially correct nonsense mutations by converting stop codons (e.g., UGA) into sense codons (e.g., UGG for tryptophan), thereby allowing full-length protein production [63,64,65]. Emerging RNA-editing platforms such as REPAIR [61] and RESCUE [66], use guide RNAs to recruit ADAR enzymes to specific RNA sites. These systems have successfully corrected nonsense mutations in models of Rett syndrome [67], and DMD [62]. The appeal of this approach lies in its transient, RNA-targeted nature, which avoids permanent genomic changes. However, significant challenges remain in achieving a uniformly high editing efficiency in vivo across diverse tissues and in minimizing promiscuous bystander editing at non-target adenosines.
For a permanent, one-time curative intervention, CRISPR-based DNA editing systems offer the potential for direct genomic correction. Promising results have been observed in a wide range of disease models, including DMD [68,69,70,71,72,73], CF [74,75], Leber congenital amaurosis [76], Alzheimer’s disease [77], Huntington’s disease [78], and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis [79]. Moving beyond classic Cas9-mediated excision and error-prone repair pathways, base editing has emerged as a particularly promising tool for nonsense mutations [75,80]. Adenine Base Editors (ABEs) can directly convert an A-T base pair to a G-C pair, enabling the precise correction of PTCs like TAG to TGG or CAG without introducing double-strand DNA breaks or requiring donor DNA templates, thereby significantly improving the safety and efficiency profile of genomic correction [75,80]. For mutations that are not amenable to direct base editing, CRISPR-mediated transcriptional modulation provides a powerful alternative. This can involve using catalytically dead Cas9 (dCas9) fused to transcriptional activators to upregulate the expression of a healthy homologous allele or a functionally related gene, or employing CRISPR interference (CRISPRi) to knockdown key NMD factors, thereby stabilizing the mutant transcript and increasing its availability for other readthrough mechanisms [52].

4.3. A Modality Selection Framework

The Decoding pillar provides a diverse therapeutic toolkit, but its clinical success hinges on selecting the optimal modality for each specific patient and mutation context. This selection process must evolve from empirical trial-and-error to a rational, data-driven decision matrix informed by the comprehensive Detection profile. A rigorous framework should integrate multiple layers of patient-specific data to match the inherent advantages and limitations of each decoding strategy to the unique biological and clinical scenario. At the genomic level, the precise identity of the stop codon (UGA, UAG, UAA) and its immediate nucleotide context are primary determinants. These sequence features directly influence the predicted efficacy of small molecules, the design of suppressor tRNAs, and the feasibility of RNA or base editing approaches [15,21,48].
Beyond sequencing, the cellular and systemic context dictates feasibility. The genomic accessibility and chromatin state of the target locus critically impact the efficiency of CRISPR-mediated DNA editing. For RNA-level interventions, the endogenous expression levels of essential components—such as the abundance of specific ADAR isoforms for RNA editing or the cellular tRNA pool that a suppressor tRNA must compete with—must be considered [38,60]. The spatial requirement for protein restoration is equally vital: does the disease pathophysiology require global protein expression across diverse cell types in the CNS, or is correction within a specific neuronal subtype sufficient? This question guides the delivery strategy but also the modality choice; for example, a broadly expressed sup-tRNA delivered via a pan-neuronal AAV serotype might be suitable for global disorders, whereas a locally administered, self-replicating RNA vector encoding a base editor could be engineered for focal correction. By systematically evaluating these parameters, clinicians and researchers can move toward a future of “prescription readthrough,” where the decoding modality is not a one-size-fits-all solution but a precisely matched therapeutic component within the larger 4D framework.

5. Durability: Ensuring Long-Term Efficacy and Safety

The ultimate success of any readthrough therapy is measured not by transient biomarker changes but by sustained functional benefit and an acceptable long-term safety profile. Achieving Durability requires navigating a complex landscape where the initial molecular correction must be maintained over decades in non-dividing neuronal populations without eliciting detrimental immune responses, cumulative toxicity, or loss of the therapeutic effect. This pillar addresses the chronic challenges that determine whether a promising intervention translates into a viable cure.

5.1. Navigating Immune Recognition and Response

The administration of exogenous genetic material [28,39] or engineered macromolecules invariably poses an immunogenic risk that can undermine durability through the neutralization of the therapeutic agent or the induction of an inflammatory pathology. Viral vectors can trigger both pre-existing and de novo humoral and cell-mediated immune responses against the viral capsid, potentially limiting re-administration and, in some cases, causing the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-mediated clearance of transduced cells [34,81]. Similarly, bacterial-derived proteins such as Cas9 from Streptococcus pyogenes contain epitopes that can be recognized by human memory T-cells, posing risks of inflammatory reactions and reduced editing efficiency upon repeated exposure [82]. Strategies to mitigate these risks are multi-faceted. For editing enzymes, the humanization of protein sequences or the use of smaller, orthologous Cas variants (e.g., Cas12f, CasMINI) derived from non-pathogenic bacteria can minimize recognition by the adaptive immune system [83,84]. Furthermore, transient pharmacological immunosuppression regimens co-administered with the therapy, or the innovative concept of inducing antigen-specific immune tolerance through tolerogenic vaccination prior to treatment, are under investigation to create a permissive immunological window for durable engraftment [82].

5.2. Achieving and Maintaining Specificity

The risk of off-target effects poses a persistent threat to durability, especially in post-mitotic neurons where errors are permanent and cumulative [85]. For CRISPR-mediated genome editing, the deployment of high-fidelity Cas9 variants and comprehensive off-target screening methods like CIRCLE-seq has become standard practice to minimize genomic collateral damage [85]. The field of RNA editing faces its own specificity challenge, where the promiscuous activity of adenosine deaminase enzymes could lead to widespread transcriptome alterations [86]. Enhancing specificity requires engineering the enzyme-guide RNA complex. Systems like CLUSTER (Cas13 Leveraged for Undesired Sequence Toggling and Editing Reduction) employ dual-guide requirements to activate editing, thereby drastically increasing specificity by demanding two adjacent target sites for catalytic activity [87]. Additionally, the development of deactivated, “dead” ADAR2 variants that must be fused to a highly specific RNA-binding domain to regain activity offers another path to confine edits exclusively to the intended transcript [88].

5.3. The Inextricable Link Between Delivery and Longevity

The durability of a therapeutic effect is fundamentally governed by its delivery mechanism, creating a nexus that must be carefully evaluated. The AAV-mediated delivery of gene editing components or suppressor tRNA genes aims for a one-time, durable correction by achieving stable transduction [8,89]. However, this permanence carries the inherent risk of irreversible off-target edits or genotoxic events [90]. Conversely, the non-viral delivery of transient agents, such as lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA encoding an editor or the repeated administration of ASOs, offers a titratable and potentially reversible approach. This paradigm allows for dosing adjustments and halting therapy if adverse events occur but necessitates chronic treatment regimens with associated compliance and access challenges [29,90]. The choice between these strategies is not generic but must be informed by a risk–benefit calculus that considers the disease’s natural history, the patient’s age, and the specific window for therapeutic intervention to achieve lasting neurological benefits.

6. Integrating the 4 Ds: A Translational Roadmap to Clinical Implementation

The ultimate value of the 4 Ds framework lies not in its conceptual separation but in its systematic integration (Figure 3). Synthesizing these pillars provides an actionable, end-to-end roadmap to navigate the complex journey from mechanistic discovery to transformative clinical application.

6.1. Preclinical Validation Through the Integrated Lens

The preclinical development of any novel readthrough therapeutic technique must be re-envisioned through the integrated 4D model from its inception. This begins with rigorous Detection-phase validation in functionally relevant, patient-derived models, such as iPSC-derived neurons or cerebral organoids harboring the specific nonsense mutation, ensuring the intervention corrects the molecular defect in its native human cellular context [25,26]. Concurrently, Delivery must be rigorously assessed not in isolation but within models that recapitulate the pertinent biological barrier. This involves utilizing advanced systems such as microfluidic blood–brain barrier-on-a-chip platforms or relevant transgenic animal models to quantitatively evaluate central nervous system biodistribution, target tissue penetration, and functional engagement [29,36]. The Decoding efficacy—measured as the restoration of full-length, functional proteins—must be evaluated alongside a comprehensive off-target profile using transcriptomic and proteomic analyses to ensure specificity [14]. Finally, Durability assessments require long-term studies in humanized animal models to monitor the persistence of the therapeutic effect, the potential for immune clearance, and the long-term safety of any genetic or epigenetic alterations [89,90]. This multi-faceted preclinical package de-risks clinical translation by ensuring no critical pillar is overlooked.

6.2. Designing Next-Generation, Framework-Informed Clinical Trials

The failure of traditional, one-size-fits-all clinical trial designs in rare, genetically heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorders necessitates a paradigm shift informed by the 4 Ds principle. Future trials must embrace biomarker-enriched adaptive designs, where Detection-derived biomarkers—such as quantifiable target protein in cerebrospinal fluid or digital readouts of neuronal function—serve as intermediate endpoints [23]. Current patient stratification relies heavily on genomic sequencing to identify the specific PTC and its surrounding 3′ context [15,21]. Emerging biomarkers for clinical trials include the measurement of NMD efficiency via transcriptomic analysis and the quantification of residual protein levels in patient-derived iPSCs or CNS-derived EVs [22]. These biomarkers allow for the real-time, data-driven adaptation of dosing, patient stratification, or even therapeutic modality during the trial itself. Furthermore, the framework supports the logic of mutation-focused basket trials or N-of-1 studies, where a specific therapeutic agent (e.g., a suppressor tRNA engineered for a particular UGA context) is tested across a small cohort of patients sharing that precise genetic lesion, regardless of their clinical diagnosis [38,75]. This maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio and accelerates the path to approval for ultra-personalized interventions. Importantly, the framework provides a rational basis for combination therapy trials from the outset. Rather than testing single agents in sequence, trials can be designed to evaluate synergistic regimens—such as a readthrough inducer paired with an NMD modulator and a pharmacological chaperone—where preclinical data from integrated models suggest complementary mechanisms of action to enhance Durability and efficacy [8,54].

6.3. Navigating Regulatory Pathways and Ensuring Equitable Access

The personalized and technologically complex nature of next-generation readthrough therapies presents novel challenges for regulatory science and global health equity. Regulatory agencies will require new frameworks to evaluate integrated therapeutic packages where the drug product may be a unique combination of a delivery vector and a patient-specific nucleic acid payload. The development of standardized Detection biomarker toolkits and validated Delivery efficiency metrics will be crucial as surrogate endpoints to demonstrate biological activity, especially for disorders with slow clinical progression [23]. From an access perspective, the field must proactively address the daunting specter of cost and manufacturing complexity. Strategies such as platform manufacturing for modular delivery systems, the development of in vivo editing techniques that avoid ex vivo cell manipulation, and international pre-competitive consortia for data and resource sharing will be essential to translate these scientific breakthroughs into accessible cures for patients worldwide, ensuring the 4 Ds roadmap leads not just to regulatory approval but to real-world impact [39,91].

7. Conclusions: From Framework to Future Cures

The 4 Ds framework provides a holistic, structured approach to overcoming translational barriers in nonsense mutation disorders. By integrating precision Detection, tailored Delivery, context-aware Decoding, and Durability-focused design, the field can shift from palliative care to curative, personalized therapies. The convergence of advanced biomolecular tools, AI-driven stratification, and adaptive clinical designs will transform the promise of readthrough into life-altering reality for patients with neurological genetic disorders.
The next decade will see a shift from broad, poorly effective compounds to a new generation of “prescription readthrough”—where a patient’s integrated Detection profile leads to a prescribed, customized combination of Delivery and Decoding technologies, monitored for Durability. By embracing this integrated roadmap, the field can transform the enduring promise of nonsense suppression into a tangible, life-altering reality for patients with neurological genetic disorders.

Author Contributions

J.L. conceptualized and wrote the manuscript and created the tables and figures. Z.Z. critically reviewed and commented on the draft. S.X. conceptualized the manuscript, provided supervision, and revised the writing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology; grants no. 2023D50 and 2023B15.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ASOAntisense oligonucleotide
ADARAdenosine deaminases acting on the RNA
AAVAdeno-associated virus
ABEsAdenine base editors
BBBBlood–brain barrier
CNSCentral nervous system
DMDDuchenne muscular dystrophy
EMAEuropean Medicines Agency
EVsExtracellular vesicles
iPSCInduced pluripotent stem cell
LNPLipid nanoparticles
NMDNonsense-mediated mRNA decay
NTCNatural termination codons
PTCPremature termination codons
SMASpinal muscular atrophy
Sup-tRNANonsense suppressor tRNA
VLPVirus-like particles
CLUSTERCas13 Leveraged for Undesired Sequence Toggling and Editing Reduction

References

  1. Karousis, E.D.; Mühlemann, O. The Broader Sense of Nonsense. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2022, 47, 921–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mendell, J.T.; Dietz, H.C. When the Message Goes Awry: Disease-Producing Mutations That Influence mRNA Content and Performance. Cell 2001, 107, 411–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lefebvre, S.; Bürglen, L.; Reboullet, S.; Clermont, O.; Burlet, P.; Viollet, L.; Benichou, B.; Cruaud, C.; Millasseau, P.; Zeviani, M. Identification and Characterization of a Spinal Muscular Atrophy-Determining Gene. Cell 1995, 80, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hagberg, B.; Aicardi, J.; Dias, K.; Ramos, O. A Progressive Syndrome of Autism, Dementia, Ataxia, and Loss of Purposeful Hand Use in Girls: Rett’s Syndrome: Report of 35 Cases. Ann. Neurol. 1983, 14, 471–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Koenig, M.; Hoffman, E.P.; Bertelson, C.J.; Monaco, A.P.; Feener, C.; Kunkel, L.M. Complete Cloning of the Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) cDNA and Preliminary Genomic Organization of the DMD Gene in Normal and Affected Individuals. Cell 1987, 50, 509–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Floquet, C.; Hatin, I.; Rousset, J.-P.; Bidou, L. Statistical Analysis of Readthrough Levels for Nonsense Mutations in Mammalian Cells Reveals a Major Determinant of Response to Gentamicin. PLoS Genet. 2012, 8, e1002608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Keeling, K.M.; Xue, X.; Gunn, G.; Bedwell, D.M. Therapeutics Based on Stop Codon Readthrough. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 2014, 15, 371–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sharma, J.; Du, M.; Wong, E.; Mutyam, V.; Li, Y.; Chen, J.; Wangen, J.; Thrasher, K.; Fu, L.; Peng, N.; et al. A Small Molecule That Induces Translational Readthrough of CFTR Nonsense Mutations by eRF1 Depletion. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 4358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gonzalez-Hilarion, S.; Beghyn, T.; Jia, J.; Debreuck, N.; Berte, G.; Mamchaoui, K.; Mouly, V.; Gruenert, D.C.; Déprez, B.; Lejeune, F. Rescue of Nonsense Mutations by Amlexanox in Human Cells. Orphanet J. Rare Dis. 2012, 7, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pokrovskaya, V.; Nudelman, I.; Kandasamy, J.; Baasov, T. Aminoglycosides Redesign Strategies for Improved Antibiotics and Compounds for Treatment of Human Genetic Diseases. Methods Enzymol. 2010, 478, 437–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Peltz, S.W.; Morsy, M.; Welch, E.M.; Jacobson, A. Ataluren as an Agent for Therapeutic Nonsense Suppression. Annu. Rev. Med. 2013, 64, 407–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Mendonca, C.A.; Yukselen, O.; Muneeruddin, K.; Ren, L.; Liang, J.; Zhou, C.; Xie, J.; Li, J.; et al. AAV-Delivered Suppressor tRNA Overcomes a Nonsense Mutation in Mice. Nature 2022, 604, 343–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. McDonald, C.M.; Campbell, C.; Torricelli, R.E.; Finkel, R.S.; Flanigan, K.M.; Goemans, N.; Heydemann, P.; Kaminska, A.; Kirschner, J.; Muntoni, F.; et al. Ataluren in Patients with Nonsense Mutation Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (ACT DMD): A Multicentre, Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial. Lancet 2017, 390, 1489–1498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Spelier, S.; van Doorn, E.P.M.; van der Ent, C.K.; Beekman, J.M.; Koppens, M.A.J. Readthrough Compounds for Nonsense Mutations: Bridging the Translational Gap. Trends Mol. Med. 2023, 29, 297–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Manickam, N.; Joshi, K.; Bhatt, M.J.; Farabaugh, P.J. Effects of tRNA Modification on Translational Accuracy Depend on Intrinsic Codon-Anticodon Strength. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, 1871–1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Mort, M.; Ivanov, D.; Cooper, D.N.; Chuzhanova, N.A. A Meta-Analysis of Nonsense Mutations Causing Human Genetic Disease. Hum. Mutat. 2008, 29, 1037–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Loughran, G.; Chou, M.-Y.; Ivanov, I.P.; Jungreis, I.; Kellis, M.; Kiran, A.M.; Baranov, P.V.; Atkins, J.F. Evidence of Efficient Stop Codon Readthrough in Four Mammalian Genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, 8928–8938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Howard, M.T.; Shirts, B.H.; Petros, L.M.; Flanigan, K.M.; Gesteland, R.F.; Atkins, J.F. Sequence Specificity of Aminoglycoside-Induced Stop Condon Readthrough: Potential Implications for Treatment of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Ann. Neurol. 2000, 48, 164–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Manuvakhova, M.; Keeling, K.; Bedwell, D.M. Aminoglycoside Antibiotics Mediate Context-Dependent Suppression of Termination Codons in a Mammalian Translation System. RNA 2000, 6, 1044–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bidou, L.; Hatin, I.; Perez, N.; Allamand, V.; Panthier, J.-J.; Rousset, J.-P. Premature Stop Codons Involved in Muscular Dystrophies Show a Broad Spectrum of Readthrough Efficiencies in Response to Gentamicin Treatment. Gene Ther. 2004, 11, 619–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Mangkalaphiban, K.; Fu, L.; Du, M.; Thrasher, K.; Keeling, K.M.; Bedwell, D.M.; Jacobson, A. Extended Stop Codon Context Predicts Nonsense Codon Readthrough Efficiency in Human Cells. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 2486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Linde, L.; Boelz, S.; Nissim-Rafinia, M.; Oren, Y.S.; Wilschanski, M.; Yaacov, Y.; Virgilis, D.; Neu-Yilik, G.; Kulozik, A.E.; Kerem, E.; et al. Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Affects Nonsense Transcript Levels and Governs Response of Cystic Fibrosis Patients to Gentamicin. J. Clin. Investig. 2007, 117, 683–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dowling, P.; Holland, A.; Ohlendieck, K. Mass Spectrometry-Based Identification of Muscle-Associated and Muscle-Derived Proteomic Biomarkers of Dystrophinopathies. J. Neuromuscul. Dis. 2014, 1, 15–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Booth, B.J.; Nourreddine, S.; Katrekar, D.; Savva, Y.; Bose, D.; Long, T.J.; Huss, D.J.; Mali, P. RNA Editing: Expanding the Potential of RNA Therapeutics. Mol. Ther. 2023, 31, 1533–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Palasantzas, V.E.J.M.; Tamargo-Rubio, I.; Le, K.; Slager, J.; Wijmenga, C.; Jonkers, I.H.; Kumar, V.; Fu, J.; Withoff, S. iPSC-Derived Organ-on-a-Chip Models for Personalized Human Genetics and Pharmacogenomics Studies. Trends Genet. 2023, 39, 268–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Xu, Z.; Yang, J.; Xin, X.; Liu, C.; Li, L.; Mei, X.; Li, M. Merits and Challenges of iPSC-Derived Organoids for Clinical Applications. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2023, 11, 1188905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liang, F.; Shang, H.; Jordan, N.J.; Wong, E.; Mercadante, D.; Saltz, J.; Mahiou, J.; Bihler, H.J.; Mense, M. High-Throughput Screening for Readthrough Modulators of CFTR PTC Mutations. SLAS Technol. 2017, 22, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wu, D.; Chen, Q.; Chen, X.; Han, F.; Chen, Z.; Wang, Y. The Blood-Brain Barrier: Structure, Regulation, and Drug Delivery. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2023, 8, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mittal, K.R.; Pharasi, N.; Sarna, B.; Singh, M.; Rachana; Haider, S.; Singh, S.K.; Dua, K.; Jha, S.K.; Dey, A.; et al. Nanotechnology-Based Drug Delivery for the Treatment of CNS Disorders. Transl. Neurosci. 2022, 13, 527–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zielińska, A.; Carreiró, F.; Oliveira, A.M.; Neves, A.; Pires, B.; Venkatesh, D.N.; Durazzo, A.; Lucarini, M.; Eder, P.; Silva, A.M.; et al. Polymeric Nanoparticles: Production, Characterization, Toxicology and Ecotoxicology. Molecules 2020, 25, 3731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Choi, H.; Choi, K.; Kim, D.-H.; Oh, B.-K.; Yim, H.; Jo, S.; Choi, C. Strategies for Targeted Delivery of Exosomes to the Brain: Advantages and Challenges. Pharmaceutics 2022, 14, 672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Giebel, B.; Kordelas, L.; Börger, V. Clinical Potential of Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cell-Derived Extracellular Vesicles. Stem Cell Investig. 2017, 4, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Yang, Q.; Zhou, Y.; Chen, J.; Huang, N.; Wang, Z.; Cheng, Y. Gene Therapy for Drug-Resistant Glioblastoma via Lipid-Polymer Hybrid Nanoparticles Combined with Focused Ultrasound. Int. J. Nanomed. 2021, 16, 185–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Weber, T. Anti-AAV Antibodies in AAV Gene Therapy: Current Challenges and Possible Solutions. Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 658399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Banskota, S.; Raguram, A.; Suh, S.; Du, S.W.; Davis, J.R.; Choi, E.H.; Wang, X.; Nielsen, S.C.; Newby, G.A.; Randolph, P.B.; et al. Engineered Virus-like Particles for Efficient in Vivo Delivery of Therapeutic Proteins. Cell 2022, 185, 250–265.e16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Islam, S.U.; Shehzad, A.; Ahmed, M.B.; Lee, Y.S. Intranasal Delivery of Nanoformulations: A Potential Way of Treatment for Neurological Disorders. Molecules 2020, 25, 1929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lueck, J.D.; Yoon, J.S.; Perales-Puchalt, A.; Mackey, A.L.; Infield, D.T.; Behlke, M.A.; Pope, M.R.; Weiner, D.B.; Skach, W.R.; McCray, P.B.; et al. Engineered Transfer RNAs for Suppression of Premature Termination Codons. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Albers, S.; Allen, E.C.; Bharti, N.; Davyt, M.; Joshi, D.; Perez-Garcia, C.G.; Santos, L.; Mukthavaram, R.; Delgado-Toscano, M.A.; Molina, B.; et al. Engineered tRNAs Suppress Nonsense Mutations in Cells and in Vivo. Nature 2023, 618, 842–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Roberts, T.C.; Langer, R.; Wood, M.J.A. Advances in Oligonucleotide Drug Delivery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2020, 19, 673–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Desjardins, C.A.; Yao, M.; Hall, J.; O’Donnell, E.; Venkatesan, R.; Spring, S.; Wen, A.; Hsia, N.; Shen, P.; Russo, R.; et al. Enhanced Exon Skipping and Prolonged Dystrophin Restoration Achieved by TfR1-Targeted Delivery of Antisense Oligonucleotide Using FORCE Conjugation in Mdx Mice. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022, 50, 11401–11414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dabrowski, M.; Bukowy-Bieryllo, Z.; Zietkiewicz, E. Advances in Therapeutic Use of a Drug-Stimulated Translational Readthrough of Premature Termination Codons. Mol. Med. 2018, 24, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Swan, S.K. Aminoglycoside Nephrotoxicity. Semin. Nephrol. 1997, 17, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  43. Forge, A.; Schacht, J. Aminoglycoside Antibiotics. Audiol. Neurootol. 2000, 5, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Carnes, J.; Jacobson, M.; Leinwand, L.; Yarus, M. Stop Codon Suppression via Inhibition of eRF1 Expression. RNA 2003, 9, 648–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Xue, X.; Mutyam, V.; Tang, L.; Biswas, S.; Du, M.; Jackson, L.A.; Dai, Y.; Belakhov, V.; Shalev, M.; Chen, F.; et al. Synthetic Aminoglycosides Efficiently Suppress Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Nonsense Mutations and Are Enhanced by Ivacaftor. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol. 2014, 50, 805–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nudelman, I.; Rebibo-Sabbah, A.; Cherniavsky, M.; Belakhov, V.; Hainrichson, M.; Chen, F.; Schacht, J.; Pilch, D.S.; Ben-Yosef, T.; Baasov, T. Development of Novel Aminoglycoside (NB54) with Reduced Toxicity and Enhanced Suppression of Disease-Causing Premature Stop Mutations. J. Med. Chem. 2009, 52, 2836–2845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Haas, M.; Vlcek, V.; Balabanov, P.; Salmonson, T.; Bakchine, S.; Markey, G.; Weise, M.; Schlosser-Weber, G.; Brohmann, H.; Yerro, C.P.; et al. European Medicines Agency Review of Ataluren for the Treatment of Ambulant Patients Aged 5 Years and Older with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Resulting from a Nonsense Mutation in the Dystrophin Gene. Neuromuscul. Disord. 2015, 25, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Trzaska, C.; Amand, S.; Bailly, C.; Leroy, C.; Marchand, V.; Duvernois-Berthet, E.; Saliou, J.-M.; Benhabiles, H.; Werkmeister, E.; Chassat, T.; et al. 2,6-Diaminopurine as a Highly Potent Corrector of UGA Nonsense Mutations. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Friesen, W.J.; Trotta, C.R.; Tomizawa, Y.; Zhuo, J.; Johnson, B.; Sierra, J.; Roy, B.; Weetall, M.; Hedrick, J.; Sheedy, J.; et al. The Nucleoside Analog Clitocine Is a Potent and Efficacious Readthrough Agent. RNA 2017, 23, 567–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Corrao, F.; Zizzo, M.G.; Tutone, M.; Melfi, R.; Fiduccia, I.; Carollo, P.S.; Leonardo, A.D.; Caldara, G.; Perriera, R.; Pace, A.; et al. Nonsense Codons Suppression. An Acute Toxicity Study of Three Optimized TRIDs in Murine Model, Safety and Tolerability Evaluation. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2022, 156, 113886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Du, M.; Keeling, K.M.; Fan, L.; Liu, X.; Bedwell, D.M. Poly-L-Aspartic Acid Enhances and Prolongs Gentamicin-Mediated Suppression of the CFTR-G542X Mutation in a Cystic Fibrosis Mouse Model. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 6885–6892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Kim, Y.J.; Nomakuchi, T.; Papaleonidopoulou, F.; Yang, L.; Zhang, Q.; Krainer, A.R. Gene-Specific Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay Targeting for Cystic Fibrosis Therapy. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 2978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Nomakuchi, T.T.; Rigo, F.; Aznarez, I.; Krainer, A.R. Antisense Oligonucleotide-Directed Inhibition of Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay. Nat. Biotechnol. 2016, 34, 164–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Wang, Y.-J.; Di, X.-J.; Mu, T.-W. Using Pharmacological Chaperones to Restore Proteostasis. Pharmacol. Res. 2014, 83, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Temple, G.F.; Dozy, A.M.; Roy, K.L.; Kan, Y.W. Construction of a Functional Human Suppressor tRNA Gene: An Approach to Gene Therapy for Beta-Thalassaemia. Nature 1982, 296, 537–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Porter, J.J.; Heil, C.S.; Lueck, J.D. Therapeutic Promise of Engineered Nonsense Suppressor tRNAs. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. RNA 2021, 12, e1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kiselev, A.V.; Ostapenko, O.V.; Rogozhkina, E.V.; Kholod, N.S.; Seit Nebi, A.S.; Baranov, A.N.; Lesina, E.A.; Ivashchenko, T.E.; Sabetskiĭ, V.A.; Shavlovskiĭ, M.M.; et al. Suppression of nonsense mutations in the Dystrophin gene by a suppressor tRNA gene. Mol. Biol. 2002, 36, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ko, W.; Porter, J.J.; Sipple, M.T.; Edwards, K.M.; Lueck, J.D. Efficient Suppression of Endogenous CFTR Nonsense Mutations Using Anticodon-Engineered Transfer RNAs. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2022, 28, 685–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Pezzini, S.; Mustaccia, A.; Aboa, P.; Faustini, G.; Branchini, A.; Pinotti, M.; Frasca, A.; Porter, J.J.; Lueck, J.D.; Landsberger, N. Engineered tRNAs Efficiently Suppress CDKL5 Premature Termination Codons. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 31791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kierzek, E.; Malgowska, M.; Lisowiec, J.; Turner, D.H.; Gdaniec, Z.; Kierzek, R. The Contribution of Pseudouridine to Stabilities and Structure of RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, 3492–3501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cox, D.B.T.; Gootenberg, J.S.; Abudayyeh, O.O.; Franklin, B.; Kellner, M.J.; Joung, J.; Zhang, F. RNA Editing with CRISPR-Cas13. Science 2017, 358, 1019–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Katrekar, D.; Chen, G.; Meluzzi, D.; Ganesh, A.; Worlikar, A.; Shih, Y.-R.; Varghese, S.; Mali, P. In Vivo RNA Editing of Point Mutations via RNA-Guided Adenosine Deaminases. Nat. Methods 2019, 16, 239–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Aquino-Jarquin, G. Novel Engineered Programmable Systems for ADAR-Mediated RNA Editing. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2020, 19, 1065–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Birgaoanu, M.; Sachse, M.; Gatsiou, A. RNA Editing Therapeutics: Advances, Challenges and Perspectives on Combating Heart Disease. Cardiovasc. Drugs Ther. 2023, 37, 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Pfeiffer, L.S.; Stafforst, T. Precision RNA Base Editing with Engineered and Endogenous Effectors. Nat. Biotechnol. 2023, 41, 1526–1542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Abudayyeh, O.O.; Gootenberg, J.S.; Franklin, B.; Koob, J.; Kellner, M.J.; Ladha, A.; Joung, J.; Kirchgatterer, P.; Cox, D.B.T.; Zhang, F. A Cytosine Deaminase for Programmable Single-Base RNA Editing. Science 2019, 365, 382–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sinnamon, J.R.; Jacobson, M.E.; Yung, J.F.; Fisk, J.R.; Jeng, S.; McWeeney, S.K.; Parmelee, L.K.; Chan, C.N.; Yee, S.-P.; Mandel, G. Targeted RNA Editing in Brainstem Alleviates Respiratory Dysfunction in a Mouse Model of Rett Syndrome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2206053119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. El Refaey, M.; Xu, L.; Gao, Y.; Canan, B.D.; Adesanya, T.M.A.; Warner, S.C.; Akagi, K.; Symer, D.E.; Mohler, P.J.; Ma, J.; et al. In Vivo Genome Editing Restores Dystrophin Expression and Cardiac Function in Dystrophic Mice. Circ. Res. 2017, 121, 923–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kemaladewi, D.U.; Cohn, R.D. Exon Snipping in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Trends Mol. Med. 2016, 22, 187–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Long, C.; Amoasii, L.; Mireault, A.A.; McAnally, J.R.; Li, H.; Sanchez-Ortiz, E.; Bhattacharyya, S.; Shelton, J.M.; Bassel-Duby, R.; Olson, E.N. Postnatal Genome Editing Partially Restores Dystrophin Expression in a Mouse Model of Muscular Dystrophy. Science 2016, 351, 400–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Nelson, C.E.; Hakim, C.H.; Ousterout, D.G.; Thakore, P.I.; Moreb, E.A.; Castellanos Rivera, R.M.; Madhavan, S.; Pan, X.; Ran, F.A.; Yan, W.X.; et al. In Vivo Genome Editing Improves Muscle Function in a Mouse Model of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Science 2016, 351, 403–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Tabebordbar, M.; Zhu, K.; Cheng, J.K.W.; Chew, W.L.; Widrick, J.J.; Yan, W.X.; Maesner, C.; Wu, E.Y.; Xiao, R.; Ran, F.A.; et al. In Vivo Gene Editing in Dystrophic Mouse Muscle and Muscle Stem Cells. Science 2016, 351, 407–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Xu, L.; Park, K.H.; Zhao, L.; Xu, J.; El Refaey, M.; Gao, Y.; Zhu, H.; Ma, J.; Han, R. CRISPR-Mediated Genome Editing Restores Dystrophin Expression and Function in Mdx Mice. Mol. Ther. 2016, 24, 564–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Geurts, M.H.; de Poel, E.; Pleguezuelos-Manzano, C.; Oka, R.; Carrillo, L.; Andersson-Rolf, A.; Boretto, M.; Brunsveld, J.E.; van Boxtel, R.; Beekman, J.M.; et al. Evaluating CRISPR-Based Prime Editing for Cancer Modeling and CFTR Repair in Organoids. Life Sci. Alliance 2021, 4, e202000940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Geurts, M.H.; de Poel, E.; Amatngalim, G.D.; Oka, R.; Meijers, F.M.; Kruisselbrink, E.; van Mourik, P.; Berkers, G.; de Winter-de Groot, K.M.; Michel, S.; et al. CRISPR-Based Adenine Editors Correct Nonsense Mutations in a Cystic Fibrosis Organoid Biobank. Cell Stem Cell 2020, 26, 503–510.e7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Jo, D.H.; Song, D.W.; Cho, C.S.; Kim, U.G.; Lee, K.J.; Lee, K.; Park, S.W.; Kim, D.; Kim, J.H.; Kim, J.-S.; et al. CRISPR-Cas9–Mediated Therapeutic Editing of Rpe65 Ameliorates the Disease Phenotypes in a Mouse Model of Leber Congenital Amaurosis. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaax1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Sun, J.; Carlson-Stevermer, J.; Das, U.; Shen, M.; Delenclos, M.; Snead, A.M.; Koo, S.Y.; Wang, L.; Qiao, D.; Loi, J.; et al. CRISPR/Cas9 Editing of APP C-Terminus Attenuates β-Cleavage and Promotes α-Cleavage. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yang, S.; Chang, R.; Yang, H.; Zhao, T.; Hong, Y.; Kong, H.E.; Sun, X.; Qin, Z.; Jin, P.; Li, S.; et al. CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Gene Editing Ameliorates Neurotoxicity in Mouse Model of Huntington’s Disease. J. Clin. Investig. 2017, 127, 2719–2724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Gaj, T.; Ojala, D.S.; Ekman, F.K.; Byrne, L.C.; Limsirichai, P.; Schaffer, D.V. In Vivo Genome Editing Improves Motor Function and Extends Survival in a Mouse Model of ALS. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, eaar3952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Zheng, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhou, K.; Li, T.; VanDusen, N.J.; Hua, Y. Precise Genome-Editing in Human Diseases: Mechanisms, Strategies and Applications. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2024, 9, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Charlesworth, C.T.; Deshpande, P.S.; Dever, D.P.; Camarena, J.; Lemgart, V.T.; Cromer, M.K.; Vakulskas, C.A.; Collingwood, M.A.; Zhang, L.; Bode, N.M.; et al. Identification of Preexisting Adaptive Immunity to Cas9 Proteins in Humans. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 249–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Li, A.; Tanner, M.R.; Lee, C.M.; Hurley, A.E.; De Giorgi, M.; Jarrett, K.E.; Davis, T.H.; Doerfler, A.M.; Bao, G.; Beeton, C.; et al. AAV-CRISPR Gene Editing Is Negated by Pre-Existing Immunity to Cas9. Mol. Ther. 2020, 28, 1432–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Xu, X.; Chemparathy, A.; Zeng, L.; Kempton, H.R.; Shang, S.; Nakamura, M.; Qi, L.S. Engineered Miniature CRISPR-Cas System for Mammalian Genome Regulation and Editing. Mol. Cell 2021, 81, 4333–4345.e4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Ferdosi, S.R.; Ewaisha, R.; Moghadam, F.; Krishna, S.; Park, J.G.; Ebrahimkhani, M.R.; Kiani, S.; Anderson, K.S. Multifunctional CRISPR-Cas9 with Engineered Immunosilenced Human T Cell Epitopes. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Kleinstiver, B.P.; Pattanayak, V.; Prew, M.S.; Tsai, S.Q.; Nguyen, N.T.; Zheng, Z.; Joung, J.K. High-Fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 Nucleases with No Detectable Genome-Wide off-Target Effects. Nature 2016, 529, 490–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Vallecillo-Viejo, I.C.; Liscovitch-Brauer, N.; Montiel-Gonzalez, M.F.; Eisenberg, E.; Rosenthal, J.J.C. Abundant Off-Target Edits from Site-Directed RNA Editing Can Be Reduced by Nuclear Localization of the Editing Enzyme. RNA Biol. 2018, 15, 104–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Reautschnig, P.; Wahn, N.; Wettengel, J.; Schulz, A.E.; Latifi, N.; Vogel, P.; Kang, T.-W.; Pfeiffer, L.S.; Zarges, C.; Naumann, U.; et al. CLUSTER Guide RNAs Enable Precise and Efficient RNA Editing with Endogenous ADAR Enzymes in Vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022, 40, 759–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Katrekar, D.; Yen, J.; Xiang, Y.; Saha, A.; Meluzzi, D.; Savva, Y.; Mali, P. Efficient in Vitro and in Vivo RNA Editing via Recruitment of Endogenous ADARs Using Circular Guide RNAs. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022, 40, 938–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Gadalla, K.K.E.; Vudhironarit, T.; Hector, R.D.; Sinnett, S.; Bahey, N.G.; Bailey, M.E.S.; Gray, S.J.; Cobb, S.R. Development of a Novel AAV Gene Therapy Cassette with Improved Safety Features and Efficacy in a Mouse Model of Rett Syndrome. Mol. Ther. Methods Clin. Dev. 2017, 5, 180–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nidetz, N.F.; McGee, M.C.; Tse, L.V.; Li, C.; Cong, L.; Li, Y.; Huang, W. Adeno-Associated Viral Vector-Mediated Immune Responses: Understanding Barriers to Gene Delivery. Pharmacol. Ther. 2020, 207, 107453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Hügle, M.; Omoumi, P.; van Laar, J.M.; Boedecker, J.; Hügle, T. Applied Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology. Rheumatol. Adv. Pract. 2020, 4, rkaa005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 27 01418 g001
Figure 1. The 4 Ds translational framework for nonsense mutation therapy: A schematic overview of the integrated “4 Ds” framework for developing readthrough therapies for neurological nonsense mutation disorders. The framework comprises four interconnected pillars: Detection (molecular-level patient identification and stratification), Delivery (systemic engineering of vehicles for CNS targeting), Decoding (cellular-level precision correction of premature termination codons), and Durability (clinical-level assurance of long-term safety and efficacy). Specific components within each pillar are listed: Detection includes next-generation sequencing (NGS), PTC genotyping, and nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) pathway assessment; Delivery encompasses AAV and lipid nanoparticle (LNP) engineering and exosomal transport systems; Decoding involves suppressor tRNAs and antisense oligonucleotide (ASO)-mediated NMD inhibition; Durability focuses on protein stability and immunogenicity profiling.
Figure 1. The 4 Ds translational framework for nonsense mutation therapy: A schematic overview of the integrated “4 Ds” framework for developing readthrough therapies for neurological nonsense mutation disorders. The framework comprises four interconnected pillars: Detection (molecular-level patient identification and stratification), Delivery (systemic engineering of vehicles for CNS targeting), Decoding (cellular-level precision correction of premature termination codons), and Durability (clinical-level assurance of long-term safety and efficacy). Specific components within each pillar are listed: Detection includes next-generation sequencing (NGS), PTC genotyping, and nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) pathway assessment; Delivery encompasses AAV and lipid nanoparticle (LNP) engineering and exosomal transport systems; Decoding involves suppressor tRNAs and antisense oligonucleotide (ASO)-mediated NMD inhibition; Durability focuses on protein stability and immunogenicity profiling.
Ijms 27 01418 g001
Ijms 27 01418 g002
Figure 2. Therapeutic modalities for premature termination codon (PTC) readthrough: Overview of the four principal therapeutic strategies for nonsense mutation suppression. (1) Small Molecule Therapies: Pharmacological agents (e.g., Ataluren, aminoglycosides, ELX-02) that promote ribosomal readthrough by facilitating the incorporation of a near-cognate tRNA at the PTC, enabling synthesis of full-length proteins. (2) Suppressor tRNAs (sup-tRNAs): Engineered tRNA genes delivered via viral or non-viral vectors that are aminoacylated and decode the PTC as a sense codon, restoring translation of the full-length native protein. (3) RNA Editing: Endogenous adenosine deaminases acting on RNA (ADAR) recruited by engineered guide RNAs (e.g., circular RNAs in the LEAPER system) to catalyze the deamination of adenosine to inosine (read as guanosine) within a stop codon, thereby converting it into a sense codon at the transcript level. (4) DNA Editing Technologies: CRISPR-based precision genome editing tools, such as adenine base editors (ABEs), which directly convert an A-T to a G-C base pair at the genomic DNA level to correct the PTC (e.g., TAG→TGG) without inducing double-strand breaks, offering a permanent, one-time corrective solution. The schematic highlights the molecular mechanism, site of action (ribosomal, transcriptomic, or genomic), and key components of each therapeutic modality within the nonsense suppression toolkit.
Figure 2. Therapeutic modalities for premature termination codon (PTC) readthrough: Overview of the four principal therapeutic strategies for nonsense mutation suppression. (1) Small Molecule Therapies: Pharmacological agents (e.g., Ataluren, aminoglycosides, ELX-02) that promote ribosomal readthrough by facilitating the incorporation of a near-cognate tRNA at the PTC, enabling synthesis of full-length proteins. (2) Suppressor tRNAs (sup-tRNAs): Engineered tRNA genes delivered via viral or non-viral vectors that are aminoacylated and decode the PTC as a sense codon, restoring translation of the full-length native protein. (3) RNA Editing: Endogenous adenosine deaminases acting on RNA (ADAR) recruited by engineered guide RNAs (e.g., circular RNAs in the LEAPER system) to catalyze the deamination of adenosine to inosine (read as guanosine) within a stop codon, thereby converting it into a sense codon at the transcript level. (4) DNA Editing Technologies: CRISPR-based precision genome editing tools, such as adenine base editors (ABEs), which directly convert an A-T to a G-C base pair at the genomic DNA level to correct the PTC (e.g., TAG→TGG) without inducing double-strand breaks, offering a permanent, one-time corrective solution. The schematic highlights the molecular mechanism, site of action (ribosomal, transcriptomic, or genomic), and key components of each therapeutic modality within the nonsense suppression toolkit.
Ijms 27 01418 g002
Ijms 27 01418 g003
Figure 3. Pipeline for readthrough therapy development and clinical translation: Roadmap outlining the translational pipeline from discovery to clinical implementation of readthrough therapies. The pipeline is divided into three main phases: (1) Drug Discovery, involving rational design, high-throughput screening, and computational/AI-driven optimization of lead compounds. (2) Preclinical Testing, utilizing advanced biological models including patient-derived organoids, cellular models, and animal studies. This phase emphasizes combination therapies and mechanistic synergy, such as pairing NMD inhibitors with pharmacological chaperones. (3) Clinical Trials, featuring biomarker-guided patient stratification, adaptive trial designs, and protocols for long-term monitoring and individualized therapy. The pipeline emphasizes an iterative, data-driven approach integrating molecular insights with clinical outcomes.
Figure 3. Pipeline for readthrough therapy development and clinical translation: Roadmap outlining the translational pipeline from discovery to clinical implementation of readthrough therapies. The pipeline is divided into three main phases: (1) Drug Discovery, involving rational design, high-throughput screening, and computational/AI-driven optimization of lead compounds. (2) Preclinical Testing, utilizing advanced biological models including patient-derived organoids, cellular models, and animal studies. This phase emphasizes combination therapies and mechanistic synergy, such as pairing NMD inhibitors with pharmacological chaperones. (3) Clinical Trials, featuring biomarker-guided patient stratification, adaptive trial designs, and protocols for long-term monitoring and individualized therapy. The pipeline emphasizes an iterative, data-driven approach integrating molecular insights with clinical outcomes.
Ijms 27 01418 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, J.; Zhu, Z.; Xu, S. A Translational Roadmap for Neurological Nonsense Mutation Disorders. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27031418

AMA Style

Li J, Zhu Z, Xu S. A Translational Roadmap for Neurological Nonsense Mutation Disorders. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026; 27(3):1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27031418

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Jiaqing, Zhenyun Zhu, and Sanqing Xu. 2026. "A Translational Roadmap for Neurological Nonsense Mutation Disorders" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 27, no. 3: 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27031418

APA Style

Li, J., Zhu, Z., & Xu, S. (2026). A Translational Roadmap for Neurological Nonsense Mutation Disorders. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 27(3), 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27031418

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop