Literature DB >> 27261202

The democratization of gene editing: Insights from site-specific cleavage and double-strand break repair.

Maria Jasin1, James E Haber2.   

Abstract

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are dangerous lesions that if not properly repaired can lead to genomic change or cell death. Organisms have developed several pathways and have many factors devoted to repairing DSBs, which broadly occurs by homologous recombination, which relies on an identical or homologous sequence to template repair, or nonhomologous end-joining. Much of our understanding of these repair mechanisms has come from the study of induced DNA cleavage by site-specific endonucleases. In addition to their biological role, these cellular pathways can be co-opted for gene editing to study gene function or for gene therapy or other applications. While the first gene editing experiments were done more than 20 years ago, the recent discovery of RNA-guided endonucleases has simplified approaches developed over the years to make gene editing an approach that is available to the entire biomedical research community. Here, we review DSB repair mechanisms and site-specific cleavage systems that have provided insight into these mechanisms and led to the current gene editing revolution.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRISPR-Cas9; Double-strand break repair; Gene editing; HO endonuclease; Homologous recombination; Homology-directed repair; I-SceI endonuclease; Nonhomologous end-joining

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27261202      PMCID: PMC5529214          DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2016.05.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)        ISSN: 1568-7856


  181 in total

1.  Transient stability of DNA ends allows nonhomologous end joining to precede homologous recombination.

Authors:  Marie Frank-Vaillant; Stéphane Marcand
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 17.970

2.  RAG proteins shepherd double-strand breaks to a specific pathway, suppressing error-prone repair, but RAG nicking initiates homologous recombination.

Authors:  Gregory S Lee; Matthew B Neiditch; Sandra S Salus; David B Roth
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2004-04-16       Impact factor: 41.582

Review 3.  Mechanisms of germ line genome instability.

Authors:  Seoyoung Kim; Shaun E Peterson; Maria Jasin; Scott Keeney
Journal:  Semin Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 7.727

4.  Double-strand breaks at the target locus stimulate gene targeting in embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  F Smih; P Rouet; P J Romanienko; M Jasin
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  1995-12-25       Impact factor: 16.971

5.  Site-specific recombination determined by I-SceI, a mitochondrial group I intron-encoded endonuclease expressed in the yeast nucleus.

Authors:  A Plessis; A Perrin; J E Haber; B Dujon
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  DNA repair. PAXX, a paralog of XRCC4 and XLF, interacts with Ku to promote DNA double-strand break repair.

Authors:  Takashi Ochi; Andrew N Blackford; Julia Coates; Satpal Jhujh; Shahid Mehmood; Naoka Tamura; Jon Travers; Qian Wu; Viji M Draviam; Carol V Robinson; Tom L Blundell; Stephen P Jackson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  A mechanism for the suppression of homologous recombination in G1 cells.

Authors:  Alexandre Orthwein; Sylvie M Noordermeer; Marcus D Wilson; Sébastien Landry; Radoslav I Enchev; Alana Sherker; Meagan Munro; Jordan Pinder; Jayme Salsman; Graham Dellaire; Bing Xia; Matthias Peter; Daniel Durocher
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Recovery from checkpoint-mediated arrest after repair of a double-strand break requires Srs2 helicase.

Authors:  Moreshwar B Vaze; Achille Pellicioli; Sang Eun Lee; Grzegorz Ira; Giordano Liberi; Ayelet Arbel-Eden; Marco Foiani; James E Haber
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 17.970

9.  Chromosome rearrangements via template switching between diverged repeated sequences.

Authors:  Ranjith P Anand; Olga Tsaponina; Patricia W Greenwell; Cheng-Sheng Lee; Wei Du; Thomas D Petes; James E Haber
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 11.361

10.  DNA end resection, homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint activation require CDK1.

Authors:  Grzegorz Ira; Achille Pellicioli; Alitukiriza Balijja; Xuan Wang; Simona Fiorani; Walter Carotenuto; Giordano Liberi; Debra Bressan; Lihong Wan; Nancy M Hollingsworth; James E Haber; Marco Foiani
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  76 in total

1.  Strategies for Efficient Genome Editing Using CRISPR-Cas9.

Authors:  Behnom Farboud; Aaron F Severson; Barbara J Meyer
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Marker-free coselection for CRISPR-driven genome editing in human cells.

Authors:  Daniel Agudelo; Alexis Duringer; Lusiné Bozoyan; Caroline C Huard; Sophie Carter; Jeremy Loehr; Dafni Synodinou; Mathieu Drouin; Jayme Salsman; Graham Dellaire; Josée Laganière; Yannick Doyon
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2017-04-17       Impact factor: 28.547

Review 3.  Non-viral delivery of genome-editing nucleases for gene therapy.

Authors:  M Wang; Z A Glass; Q Xu
Journal:  Gene Ther       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 5.250

4.  HIV Receives a "One Two Knockout Punch".

Authors:  Conrad Russell Cruz; Catherine M Bollard
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 11.454

5.  Genetically engineered mouse models for studying radiation biology.

Authors:  Katherine D Castle; Mark Chen; Amy J Wisdom; David G Kirsch
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.241

6.  Computational Analysis Concerning the Impact of DNA Accessibility on CRISPR-Cas9 Cleavage Efficiency.

Authors:  Cheng-Han Chung; Alexander G Allen; Neil T Sullivan; Andrew Atkins; Michael R Nonnemacher; Brian Wigdahl; Will Dampier
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2019-10-15       Impact factor: 11.454

7.  BE-PLUS: a new base editing tool with broadened editing window and enhanced fidelity.

Authors:  Wen Jiang; Songjie Feng; Shisheng Huang; Wenxia Yu; Guanglei Li; Guang Yang; Yajing Liu; Yu Zhang; Lei Zhang; Yu Hou; Jia Chen; Jieping Chen; Xingxu Huang
Journal:  Cell Res       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 25.617

8.  Attaining the promise of plant gene editing at scale.

Authors:  Ryan A Nasti; Daniel F Voytas
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  Checkpoint Responses to DNA Double-Strand Breaks.

Authors:  David P Waterman; James E Haber; Marcus B Smolka
Journal:  Annu Rev Biochem       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 23.643

10.  CRISPR-Mediated Base Editing Enables Efficient Disruption of Eukaryotic Genes through Induction of STOP Codons.

Authors:  Pierre Billon; Eric E Bryant; Sarah A Joseph; Tarun S Nambiar; Samuel B Hayward; Rodney Rothstein; Alberto Ciccia
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 17.970

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.