Literature DB >> 30405244

Predictable and precise template-free CRISPR editing of pathogenic variants.

Max W Shen1,2, Mandana Arbab3,4,5, Jonathan Y Hsu6,7, Daniel Worstell8, Sannie J Culbertson8, Olga Krabbe8,9, Christopher A Cassa8,10, David R Liu11,12,13, David K Gifford14,15,16,17, Richard I Sherwood18,19.   

Abstract

Following Cas9 cleavage, DNA repair without a donor template is generally considered stochastic, heterogeneous and impractical beyond gene disruption. Here, we show that template-free Cas9 editing is predictable and capable of precise repair to a predicted genotype, enabling correction of disease-associated mutations in humans. We constructed a library of 2,000 Cas9 guide RNAs paired with DNA target sites and trained inDelphi, a machine learning model that predicts genotypes and frequencies of 1- to 60-base-pair deletions and 1-base-pair insertions with high accuracy (r = 0.87) in five human and mouse cell lines. inDelphi predicts that 5-11% of Cas9 guide RNAs targeting the human genome are 'precise-50', yielding a single genotype comprising greater than or equal to 50% of all major editing products. We experimentally confirmed precise-50 insertions and deletions in 195 human disease-relevant alleles, including correction in primary patient-derived fibroblasts of pathogenic alleles to wild-type genotype for Hermansky-Pudlak syndrome and Menkes disease. This study establishes an approach for precise, template-free genome editing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30405244      PMCID: PMC6517069          DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0686-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  29 in total

Review 1.  Refining strategies to translate genome editing to the clinic.

Authors:  Tatjana I Cornu; Claudio Mussolino; Toni Cathomen
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 53.440

2.  Microhomology-based choice of Cas9 nuclease target sites.

Authors:  Sangsu Bae; Jiyeon Kweon; Heon Seok Kim; Jin-Soo Kim
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 28.547

Review 3.  Repair Pathway Choices and Consequences at the Double-Strand Break.

Authors:  Raphael Ceccaldi; Beatrice Rondinelli; Alan D D'Andrea
Journal:  Trends Cell Biol       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 20.808

4.  DNA double strand break repair via non-homologous end-joining.

Authors:  Anthony J Davis; David J Chen
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.241

5.  Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems.

Authors:  Le Cong; F Ann Ran; David Cox; Shuailiang Lin; Robert Barretto; Naomi Habib; Patrick D Hsu; Xuebing Wu; Wenyan Jiang; Luciano A Marraffini; Feng Zhang
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Broadening the targeting range of Staphylococcus aureus CRISPR-Cas9 by modifying PAM recognition.

Authors:  Benjamin P Kleinstiver; Michelle S Prew; Shengdar Q Tsai; Nhu T Nguyen; Ved V Topkar; Zongli Zheng; J Keith Joung
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 54.908

7.  Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements.

Authors:  Michael Kosicki; Kärt Tomberg; Allan Bradley
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 54.908

8.  ClinVar: public archive of interpretations of clinically relevant variants.

Authors:  Melissa J Landrum; Jennifer M Lee; Mark Benson; Garth Brown; Chen Chao; Shanmuga Chitipiralla; Baoshan Gu; Jennifer Hart; Douglas Hoffman; Jeffrey Hoover; Wonhee Jang; Kenneth Katz; Michael Ovetsky; George Riley; Amanjeev Sethi; Ray Tully; Ricardo Villamarin-Salomon; Wendy Rubinstein; Donna R Maglott
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 16.971

9.  Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage.

Authors:  Alexis C Komor; Yongjoo B Kim; Michael S Packer; John A Zuris; David R Liu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  CRISPR/Cas9 targeting events cause complex deletions and insertions at 17 sites in the mouse genome.

Authors:  Ha Youn Shin; Chaochen Wang; Hye Kyung Lee; Kyung Hyun Yoo; Xianke Zeng; Tyler Kuhns; Chul Min Yang; Teresa Mohr; Chengyu Liu; Lothar Hennighausen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 14.919

View more
  160 in total

1.  Precise, predictable multi-nucleotide deletions in rice and wheat using APOBEC-Cas9.

Authors:  Shengxing Wang; Yuan Zong; Qiupeng Lin; Huawei Zhang; Zhuangzhuang Chai; Dandan Zhang; Kunling Chen; Jin-Long Qiu; Caixia Gao
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Is microfluidics the "assembly line" for CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing?

Authors:  Fatemeh Ahmadi; Angela B V Quach; Steve C C Shih
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 2.800

3.  Sequence-specific prediction of the efficiencies of adenine and cytosine base editors.

Authors:  Myungjae Song; Hui Kwon Kim; Sungtae Lee; Younggwang Kim; Sang-Yeon Seo; Jinman Park; Jae Woo Choi; Hyewon Jang; Jeong Hong Shin; Seonwoo Min; Zhejiu Quan; Ji Hun Kim; Hoon Chul Kang; Sungroh Yoon; Hyongbum Henry Kim
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  The technical risks of human gene editing.

Authors:  Benjamin Davies
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Life-Long AAV-Mediated CRISPR Genome Editing in Dystrophic Heart Improves Cardiomyopathy without Causing Serious Lesions in mdx Mice.

Authors:  Li Xu; Yeh Siang Lau; Yandi Gao; Haiwen Li; Renzhi Han
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 11.454

Review 6.  Design and analysis of CRISPR-Cas experiments.

Authors:  Ruth E Hanna; John G Doench
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 7.  The molecular basis and disease relevance of non-homologous DNA end joining.

Authors:  Bailin Zhao; Eli Rothenberg; Dale A Ramsden; Michael R Lieber
Journal:  Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 94.444

8.  ORANGE: A CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing toolbox for epitope tagging of endogenous proteins in neurons.

Authors:  Jelmer Willems; Arthur P H de Jong; Nicky Scheefhals; Eline Mertens; Lisa A E Catsburg; Rogier B Poorthuis; Fred de Winter; Joost Verhaagen; Frank J Meye; Harold D MacGillavry
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 8.029

9.  Generalizable sgRNA design for improved CRISPR/Cas9 editing efficiency.

Authors:  Kasidet Hiranniramol; Yuhao Chen; Weijun Liu; Xiaowei Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 10.  CRISPR-Based Therapeutic Genome Editing: Strategies and In Vivo Delivery by AAV Vectors.

Authors:  Dan Wang; Feng Zhang; Guangping Gao
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 41.582

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.