Literature DB >> 29855762

Unexpected mutations were expected and unrelated to CRISPR-Cas9 activity.

Lluis Montoliu1, C Bruce A Whitelaw2.   

Abstract

The scientific journal Nature Methods have just retracted a publication that reported numerous unexpected mutations after a CRISPR-Cas9 experiment based on collecting whole genome sequencing information from one control and two experimental genome edited mice. In the intervening 10 months since publication the data presented have been strongly contested and criticized by the scientific and biotech communities, through publications, open science channels and social networks. The criticism focused on the animal used as control, which was derived from the same mouse strain as the experimental individuals but from an unrelated sub-colony, hence control and experimental mice were genetically divergent. The most plausible explanation for the vast majority of the reported unexpected mutations were the expected underlying genetic polymorphisms that normally accumulate in two different colonies of the same mouse strain which occur as a result of spontaneous mutations and genetic drift. Therefore, the reported mutations were most likely not related to CRISPR-Cas9 activity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRISPR; Cas9; Gene therapy; Genome editing applications; Off target mutations; Safety

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29855762     DOI: 10.1007/s11248-018-0081-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transgenic Res        ISSN: 0962-8819            Impact factor:   2.788


  16 in total

1.  Genetic polymorphisms among C57BL/6 mouse inbred strains.

Authors:  Esther Zurita; Mónica Chagoyen; Marta Cantero; Rosario Alonso; Anna González-Neira; Alejandro López-Jiménez; José Antonio López-Moreno; Carlisle P Landel; Javier Benítez; Florencio Pazos; Lluís Montoliu
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 2.788

2.  Response to "Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo".

Authors:  Reynald M Lescarbeau; Bradley Murray; Thomas M Barnes; Nessan Bermingham
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 28.547

3.  Response to "Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo".

Authors:  Lauryl M J Nutter; Jason D Heaney; K C Kent Lloyd; Stephen A Murray; John R Seavitt; William C Skarnes; Lydia Teboul; Steve D M Brown; Mark Moore
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 28.547

4.  Response to "Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo".

Authors:  Christopher J Wilson; Tim Fennell; Anne Bothmer; Morgan L Maeder; Deepak Reyon; Cecilia Cotta-Ramusino; Cecilia A Fernandez; Eugenio Marco; Luis A Barrera; Hariharan Jayaram; Charles F Albright; Gerald F Cox; George M Church; Vic E Myer
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 28.547

5.  Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo.

Authors:  Kellie A Schaefer; Wen-Hsuan Wu; Diana F Colgan; Stephen H Tsang; Alexander G Bassuk; Vinit B Mahajan
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 28.547

Review 6.  Quiet mutations in inbred strains of mice.

Authors:  James C Stevens; Gareth T Banks; Michael F W Festing; Elizabeth M C Fisher
Journal:  Trends Mol Med       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 11.951

7.  Response to "Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo".

Authors:  Caleb A Lareau; Kendell Clement; Jonathan Y Hsu; Vikram Pattanayak; J Keith Joung; Martin J Aryee; Luca Pinello
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 28.547

8.  Off-target mutations are rare in Cas9-modified mice.

Authors:  Vivek Iyer; Bin Shen; Wensheng Zhang; Alex Hodgkins; Thomas Keane; Xingxu Huang; William C Skarnes
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 28.547

9.  Functional validation of mouse tyrosinase non-coding regulatory DNA elements by CRISPR-Cas9-mediated mutagenesis.

Authors:  Davide Seruggia; Almudena Fernández; Marta Cantero; Pawel Pelczar; Lluis Montoliu
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2015-04-20       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  No unexpected CRISPR-Cas9 off-target activity revealed by trio sequencing of gene-edited mice.

Authors:  Vivek Iyer; Katharina Boroviak; Mark Thomas; Brendan Doe; Laura Riva; Edward Ryder; David J Adams
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 5.917

View more
  3 in total

1.  CRISPR/Cas9 engineering of albino cystinuria Type A mice.

Authors:  Thomas M Beckermann; Richard C Welch; Felisha M Williams; Douglas P Mortlock; Feng Sha; Talat A Ikizler; Lauren E Woodard; Matthew H Wilson
Journal:  Genesis       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 2.487

Review 2.  Importing genetically altered animals: ensuring quality.

Authors:  M-C Birling; M D Fray; P Kasparek; J Kopkanova; M Massimi; R Matteoni; L Montoliu; L M J Nutter; M Raspa; J Rozman; E J Ryder; F Scavizzi; V Voikar; S Wells; G Pavlovic; L Teboul
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2021-09-18       Impact factor: 2.957

3.  CRISPR in livestock: From editing to printing.

Authors:  A Menchaca; P C Dos Santos-Neto; A P Mulet; M Crispo
Journal:  Theriogenology       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 2.740

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.