Literature DB >> 28875305

Highly efficient base editing in human tripronuclear zygotes.

Changyang Zhou1,2, Meiling Zhang3, Yu Wei1, Yidi Sun2,4,5,6, Yun Sun3, Hong Pan1,7, Ning Yao3, Wanxia Zhong3, Yixue Li2,4,5,6, Weiping Li8, Hui Yang9, Zi-Jiang Chen10,11.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28875305      PMCID: PMC5636752          DOI: 10.1007/s13238-017-0459-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Protein Cell        ISSN: 1674-800X            Impact factor:   14.870


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, There are hundreds of disease-causing single-gene mutations, mainly caused by single-nucleotide substitutions or point mutations rather than small insertions/deletions (indels), and often there are no cures for these diseases. By introducing the CRISPR/Cas9 system into mouse zygotes, disease-causing mutations could be corrected, leading to the production of healthy adult animals (Long et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2013; Wu et al., 2013; Yang et al., 2013). Several studies have demonstrated that CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing could also introduce precise genetic modifications in early human embryos (Kang et al., 2016; Liang et al., 2015; Tang et al., 2017). However, indels rather than single-nucleotide substitutions are obtained frequently, because most DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) produced by programmable nucleases are repaired by error-prone non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) rather than homologous recombination (HR) using a template donor DNA. Recently, base editors, composed of cytidine deaminase, Cas9 nickase (nCas9), and uracil DNA glycosylase inhibitor (UGI), have recently been developed to substitute a C at a target site with T without generating DSBs in plant, yeast, mouse zygotes, and human cells, and shown to be >100-fold more efficient than HR at generating point mutations (Kim et al., 2017a; Komor et al., 2016; Liang et al., 2017; Ma et al., 2016; Nishida et al., 2016; Zong et al., 2017). Moreover, the genome-targeting scope has been increased by using staphylococcus aureus CRISPR/Cas9 (SaCas9) with modified protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) recognition (Kim et al., 2017b). Yet, the efficiency and specificity of base editors has not been demonstrated in human embryos. Here, we report that both base editor 3 (BE3) using nCas9 and SaKKH-BE3 using SaKKH-nCas9 can introduce single-nucleotide substitutions efficiently in human tripronuclear (3PN) zygotes. We first used BE3 (rAPOBEC1-nCas9-UGI) to induce point mutations in human β-globin (HBB), which associated with human diseases β-thalassemia (Fig. 1A and 1B). We expected to introduce a premature stop codon in HBB by G-to-A conversions at the target site. We carried out base editing in human 3PN zygotes by microinjection of BE3 mRNA and sgRNAs. The injected 3PN zygotes were cultured into 4 to 8-cell embryos and used for targeted-deep-sequencing analysis. Targeted point mutations were observed in 8 out of 19 (42%) embryos at the target site in the HBB gene, with mutation frequencies that ranged from 6% to 52% (Figs. 1C, 1D, 1K, and S1A). Targeted deep sequencing showed that 7 out of 8 embryos for HBB base editing contained a nonsense mutation at the target site, generated by a single G-to-A conversion (Figs. 1D and S1A).
Figure 1

Base editing in human 3PN zygotes using BE3 and SaKKH-BE3. (A) Schematic diagram showing the structure of BE3 and SaKKH-BE3. XTEN, a linker; UGI, uracil glycosylase inhibitor. (B) The target sequence at the HBB locus. The sgRNA sequencing and the PAM sequence are shown in black and blue, respectively. The nucleotide substituted by BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (C) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and HBB-E1 mutant embryo. The red arrow indicates the substituted nucleotide. The relevant codon identities at the target site are shown under the DNA sequence. (D) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with BE3-mediated editing at the HBB locus. The target sequence is underlined. The substitutions and PAM site are shown in red and blue, respectively. The column on the right indicates the percent of relevant genotype in total sequencing reads. Wt, wild-type. (E) The target sequence at the FANCF locus. The nucleotide substituted by SaKKH-BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (F) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and FANCF-E16 mutant embryo. (G) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with SaKKH-BE3-mediated editing at the FANCF locus. (H) The target sequence at the DNMT3B locus. The nucleotide substituted by SaKKH-BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (I) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and DNMT3B-E4 mutant embryo. (J) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with SaKKH-BE3-mediated editing at the DNMT3B locus. (K) Summary of base editing by BE3 and SaKKH-BE3 in human 3PN zygotes

Base editing in human 3PN zygotes using BE3 and SaKKH-BE3. (A) Schematic diagram showing the structure of BE3 and SaKKH-BE3. XTEN, a linker; UGI, uracil glycosylase inhibitor. (B) The target sequence at the HBB locus. The sgRNA sequencing and the PAM sequence are shown in black and blue, respectively. The nucleotide substituted by BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (C) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and HBB-E1 mutant embryo. The red arrow indicates the substituted nucleotide. The relevant codon identities at the target site are shown under the DNA sequence. (D) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with BE3-mediated editing at the HBB locus. The target sequence is underlined. The substitutions and PAM site are shown in red and blue, respectively. The column on the right indicates the percent of relevant genotype in total sequencing reads. Wt, wild-type. (E) The target sequence at the FANCF locus. The nucleotide substituted by SaKKH-BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (F) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and FANCF-E16 mutant embryo. (G) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with SaKKH-BE3-mediated editing at the FANCF locus. (H) The target sequence at the DNMT3B locus. The nucleotide substituted by SaKKH-BE3-mediated base editing is shown in red. (I) Sanger sequencing chromatograms of DNA from wild-type and DNMT3B-E4 mutant embryo. (J) Alignments of mutant sequences from embryos with SaKKH-BE3-mediated editing at the DNMT3B locus. (K) Summary of base editing by BE3 and SaKKH-BE3 in human 3PN zygotes To broaden the genome-targeting scope of base editors, we used the recently reported SaKKH-BE3 that relaxes the variant’s PAM requirement to NNNRRT (Fig. 1A). Targeted deep sequencing on the injected embryos revealed that 17 out of 17 (100%) or 6 out of 9 (67%) embryos carried targeted point mutations at the target site in the FANCF or DNMT3B gene, respectively (Fig. 1E–K). Note that we observed very low percentage (<5%) of wild-type (Wt) allele in 5 FANCF mutant embryos (FANCF-E2, E7, E9, E11, and E17) and no Wt allele in 3 FANCF mutant embryos (FANCF-E13, E14, and E15), indicating high base-editing efficiencies in human 3PN embryos using SaKKH-BE3 (Figs. 1G, S1B, and S1C). Targeted deep sequencing showed that a C-to-T conversion was the major mutagenic pattern at all three target sites, with frequencies range from 78.8% to 98.5% (Fig. S2). C-to-A or C-to-G conversions were also observed in 1 HBB (11%), 7 FANCF (70%), and 3 DNMT3B (50%) mutant embryos (Figs. 1 and S1). We also found C–T conversion on the upstream or downstream of the sgRNA target site in 0 HBB (0%), 10 FANCF (59%), and 3 DNMT3B (50%) mutant embryos (Fig. S2), consistent with previous studies (Kim et al., 2017a; Kim et al., 2017b; Komor et al., 2016). Using engineered base editors containing mutated cytidine deaminase domains, such as YE1-BE3, may narrow the width of the editing window (Kim et al., 2017b). To avoid the PCR bias, we further examined 4- to 8-cell embryos with FANCF or DNMT3B base editing at the single-cell level. Single blastomeres of 4- to 8-cell embryos were isolated and picked up under the microscope for PCR amplification and Sanger sequencing. We found that 10 out of 10 (100%) or 9 out of 9 (100%) embryos carried targeted point mutations at the target site in the FANCF or DNMT3B gene, respectively (Figs. 1K, S3, and S4). Based on single-cell sequencing reads, 79% or 83% alleles carried targeted point mutations in the FANCF or DNMT3B (Fig. S5). Among these mutant embryos, two FANCF base-editing embryos (FANCF-E20, E24) and two DNMT3B base-editing embryos (DNMT3B-E11, E14) contained only targeted point mutations (Figs. S3 and S4). C-to-T conversion was the major mutagenic pattern, and C-to-A or C-to-G conversions were also observed in FANCF and DNMT3B mutant embryos (Fig. S5). Furthermore, compared with CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing (Kang et al., 2016), although 7 out of 10 FANCF mutant embryos contained indels alleles (Fig. S3), the percentage of total DNA alleles with indels was very low (13% for FANCF and 0% for DNMT3B) (Fig. S5D). Further optimizing base editors with inactive Cas9 mutant or Cpf1 mutant may reduce the indels to a lower level. Finally, to assess base editors off-target effects, we performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) to identify SaKKH-BE3 off-target mutations in the three FANCF mutant embryos (FANCF-E28, E29, and E30) (Fig. S6). Of 1,187 possible off-target sites that differ from the on-target site by up to 5 mismatches, we observed just 1 potential off-target site in 1 out of 3 FANCF mutant embryos (Fig. S6). Taken together, these results indicate that BE3 did not induce significant off-target alterations in gene-edited human embryos. In summary, our results show that microinjection of BE3 or SaKKH-BE3 mRNA resulted in efficient and precise base editing in human 3PN zygotes. These results demonstrate that base editors can be used for correcting genetic defects in human embryos in the future. Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Supplementary material 1 (PDF 1555 kb)
  14 in total

1.  Introducing precise genetic modifications into human 3PN embryos by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing.

Authors:  Xiangjin Kang; Wenyin He; Yuling Huang; Qian Yu; Yaoyong Chen; Xingcheng Gao; Xiaofang Sun; Yong Fan
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human zygotes using Cas9 protein.

Authors:  Lichun Tang; Yanting Zeng; Hongzi Du; Mengmeng Gong; Jin Peng; Buxi Zhang; Ming Lei; Fang Zhao; Weihua Wang; Xiaowei Li; Jianqiao Liu
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomics       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.291

3.  Precise base editing in rice, wheat and maize with a Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusion.

Authors:  Yuan Zong; Yanpeng Wang; Chao Li; Rui Zhang; Kunling Chen; Yidong Ran; Jin-Long Qiu; Daowen Wang; Caixia Gao
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  Highly efficient RNA-guided base editing in mouse embryos.

Authors:  Kyoungmi Kim; Seuk-Min Ryu; Sang-Tae Kim; Gayoung Baek; Daesik Kim; Kayeong Lim; Eugene Chung; Sunghyun Kim; Jin-Soo Kim
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 54.908

5.  Correction of a genetic disease in mouse via use of CRISPR-Cas9.

Authors:  Yuxuan Wu; Dan Liang; Yinghua Wang; Meizhu Bai; Wei Tang; Shiming Bao; Zhiqiang Yan; Dangsheng Li; Jinsong Li
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 24.633

6.  Targeted AID-mediated mutagenesis (TAM) enables efficient genomic diversification in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Yunqing Ma; Jiayuan Zhang; Weijie Yin; Zhenchao Zhang; Yan Song; Xing Chang
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2016-10-10       Impact factor: 28.547

7.  Targeted nucleotide editing using hybrid prokaryotic and vertebrate adaptive immune systems.

Authors:  Keiji Nishida; Takayuki Arazoe; Nozomu Yachie; Satomi Banno; Mika Kakimoto; Mayura Tabata; Masao Mochizuki; Aya Miyabe; Michihiro Araki; Kiyotaka Y Hara; Zenpei Shimatani; Akihiko Kondo
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  One-step generation of mice carrying mutations in multiple genes by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering.

Authors:  Haoyi Wang; Hui Yang; Chikdu S Shivalila; Meelad M Dawlaty; Albert W Cheng; Feng Zhang; Rudolf Jaenisch
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 41.582

9.  CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes.

Authors:  Puping Liang; Yanwen Xu; Xiya Zhang; Chenhui Ding; Rui Huang; Zhen Zhang; Jie Lv; Xiaowei Xie; Yuxi Chen; Yujing Li; Ying Sun; Yaofu Bai; Zhou Songyang; Wenbin Ma; Canquan Zhou; Junjiu Huang
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 14.870

10.  Increasing the genome-targeting scope and precision of base editing with engineered Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusions.

Authors:  Y Bill Kim; Alexis C Komor; Jonathan M Levy; Michael S Packer; Kevin T Zhao; David R Liu
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 54.908

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  Single-nucleotide editing: From principle, optimization to application.

Authors:  Jinling Tang; Trevor Lee; Tao Sun
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2019-09-15       Impact factor: 4.878

2.  Enabling large-scale genome editing at repetitive elements by reducing DNA nicking.

Authors:  Cory J Smith; Oscar Castanon; Khaled Said; Verena Volf; Parastoo Khoshakhlagh; Amanda Hornick; Raphael Ferreira; Chun-Ting Wu; Marc Güell; Shilpa Garg; Alex H M Ng; Hannu Myllykallio; George M Church
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  Amelioration of an Inherited Metabolic Liver Disease through Creation of a De Novo Start Codon by Cytidine Base Editing.

Authors:  Lei Yang; Liren Wang; Yanan Huo; Xi Chen; Shuming Yin; Yaqiang Hu; Xiaohui Zhang; Rui Zheng; Hongquan Geng; Honghui Han; Xueyun Ma; Meizhen Liu; Haibo Li; Weishi Yu; Mingyao Liu; Jun Wang; Dali Li
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 11.454

4.  Precision genome editing using cytosine and adenine base editors in mammalian cells.

Authors:  Tony P Huang; Gregory A Newby; David R Liu
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 5.  Exploiting DNA Endonucleases to Advance Mechanisms of DNA Repair.

Authors:  Marlo K Thompson; Robert W Sobol; Aishwarya Prakash
Journal:  Biology (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-14

6.  Correction of β-thalassemia mutant by base editor in human embryos.

Authors:  Puping Liang; Chenhui Ding; Hongwei Sun; Xiaowei Xie; Yanwen Xu; Xiya Zhang; Ying Sun; Yuanyan Xiong; Wenbin Ma; Yongxiang Liu; Yali Wang; Jianpei Fang; Dan Liu; Zhou Songyang; Canquan Zhou; Junjiu Huang
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2017-09-23       Impact factor: 14.870

7.  Increasing targeting scope of adenosine base editors in mouse and rat embryos through fusion of TadA deaminase with Cas9 variants.

Authors:  Lei Yang; Xiaohui Zhang; Liren Wang; Shuming Yin; Biyun Zhu; Ling Xie; Qiuhui Duan; Huiqiong Hu; Rui Zheng; Yu Wei; Liangyue Peng; Honghui Han; Jiqin Zhang; Wenjuan Qiu; Hongquan Geng; Stefan Siwko; Xueli Zhang; Mingyao Liu; Dali Li
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 14.870

Review 8.  Human germline genome editing.

Authors:  Rebecca A Lea; Kathy K Niakan
Journal:  Nat Cell Biol       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 28.824

9.  Targeting fidelity of adenine and cytosine base editors in mouse embryos.

Authors:  Hye Kyung Lee; Michaela Willi; Shannon M Miller; Sojung Kim; Chengyu Liu; David R Liu; Lothar Hennighausen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Correction of the Marfan Syndrome Pathogenic FBN1 Mutation by Base Editing in Human Cells and Heterozygous Embryos.

Authors:  Yanting Zeng; Jianan Li; Guanglei Li; Shisheng Huang; Wenxia Yu; Yu Zhang; Dunjin Chen; Jia Chen; Jianqiao Liu; Xingxu Huang
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 11.454

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.