Literature DB >> 32292501

Advances in CRISPR/Cas-based Gene Therapy in Human Genetic Diseases.

Shao-Shuai Wu1, Qing-Cui Li1, Chang-Qing Yin1, Wen Xue2,3, Chun-Qing Song1.   

Abstract

CRISPR/Cas genome editing is a simple, cost effective, and highly specific technique for introducing genetic variations. In mammalian cells, CRISPR/Cas can facilitate non-homologous end joining, homology- directed repair, and single-base exchanges. Cas9/Cas12a nuclease, dCas9 transcriptional regulators, base editors, PRIME editors and RNA editing tools are widely used in basic research. Currently, a variety of CRISPR/Cas-based therapeutics are being investigated in clinical trials. Among many new findings that have advanced the field, we highlight a few recent advances that are relevant to CRISPR/Cas-based gene therapies for monogenic human genetic diseases. © The author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRISPR/Cas; Gene editing; Gene therapy; Genetic disease; Human disease

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32292501      PMCID: PMC7150498          DOI: 10.7150/thno.43360

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Theranostics        ISSN: 1838-7640            Impact factor:   11.556


Introduction

The past 20 years have witnessed great progress in genome editing techniques, including meganucleases, zinc finger nucleases (ZFN), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) and CRISPR-associated (Cas) nuclease system. These tools hold great potential for treating human disease, especially genetic diseases beyond the reach of traditional approaches 1. The CRISPR/Cas system has rapidly become the most popular genome editing platform due to its simplicity and adaptability 2-5. The CRISPR/Cas system was originally discovered as a prokaryotic adaptive immunity system used to recognize and cleave invading nucleic acids 6-8. Based on this prokaryotic system, scientists have engineered a series of CRISPR/Cas tools for genome editing in mammalian cells, with the list of CRISPR/Cas systems in use continuing to expand. The most commonly used Cas nuclease comes from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9), and belongs to the type II CRISPR system. SpCas9 was the first to be reprogrammed for genome editing in mammalian cells. For specific nucleotide sequence recognition, engineered SpCas9 relies on the guidance of a single-guide RNA (sgRNA). Typically, sgRNA is composed of a scaffold sequence that is bound by the Cas protein, and a custom-designed ∼20 nucleotide spacer that defines the genomic target to be modified. Following hybridization of the spacer to a target genomic sequence that is positioned next to a protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), the target DNA is cleaved, leading to a double-strand break (DSB) 7-9. The Cas-mediated DSB is subsequently repaired by cellular DNA repair machinery via homology- directed repair (HDR) or the non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway. NHEJ can be used to produce insertions and deletions (indels) that disrupt or inactivate the target gene, while HDR can be used for precise nucleotide sequence modifications, such as point mutation correction 10-12 (Figure ). To date, CRISPR/Cas-based techniques have been applied in various cell types and organisms. For therapeutic genome editing to treat monogenic diseases, CRISPR has the potential to be used directly in patients (in vivo) or in human cells (in vitro). In this review, we focus on CRISPR strategies used to treat human monogenic diseases, and discuss the challenges associated with these approaches.

Recent advances in CRISPR/Cas technology

Shortly after SpCas9 was applied in mammalian cells, other Cas9 proteins have been studied and developed as genome editing tools. For example, smaller Cas9 proteins derived from Staphylococcus aureus called SaCas9 13 and Neisseria meningitidis called Nme2Cas9 14 exhibit gene editing efficiency comparable to that of SpCas9. These smaller Cas9s are more amenable for in vivo delivery than the large SpCas9 (~4.3 kb). CRISPR/Cas9 technological advances have also enabled various applications of nuclease-deficient Cas9s, which can bind a specific region of the genome without creating DSBs. For example, catalytically inactive dead Cas9 (dCas9) can be fused with various transcription regulatory domains to create CRISPR activators (CRISPRa) or inhibitors (CRISPRi) that activate or silence the expression of a target gene 15 (Figure ). dCas9 can also be used as a visualization tool. Chen and colleagues have used dCas9 fused to enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) to visualize repetitive DNA sequences using one sgRNA, or nonrepetitive loci using multiple sgRNAs 16-18. In addition, David R. Liu's group has fused D10A Cas9 nickase with either cytidine or adenine deaminase to generate cytidine base editors (CBEs) and adenine base editors (ABEs), respectively. CBEs and ABEs generate transitions between A•T and C•G base pairs without causing high levels of double-stranded DNA cleavage in the target genomic region. Importantly, the Liu's group has extended base editing to utilize H840A Cas9 nickase fused with reverse transcriptase to create prime editors (PEs), which can achieve all possible base-to-base conversions (12 in total), as well as targeted insertions and deletions without DSBs or donor DNA templates 19 (Figure ). In addition to DNA editing, Feng Zhang's lab has reported that an RNA-targeting CRISPR system based on Cas13 can target and cleave specific strands of RNA, and subsequently developed strategies called REPAIR (RNA Editing for Programmable A to I Replacement) and RESCUE (RNA Editing for Specific C to U Exchange) to edit RNA 20, 21. Thus, RNA editing with CRISPR can efficiently modulate target genes at the transcript level in a transient and PAM independent manner. This approach could provide a controllable approach for disease treatment.

Applications of CRISPR in genetic diseases

To date, CRISPR/Cas systems have been used to investigate target genes in genome modification 22, splicing 23, transcription 24 and epigenetic regulation 25, and have been applied in a research setting to investigate and treat genetic diseases 26, infectious diseases 27, cancers 28, and immunological diseases 29, 30. Among the exciting advances, translational use of CRISPR/Cas in monogenic human genetic diseases has the potential to provide long-term therapy after a single treatment. In this section, we summarize the recent applications of the CRISPR/Cas system in the generation of disease models and in the treatment of genetic diseases in vitro and in vivo.

Disease modeling using CRISPR/Cas

The generation of disease models is necessary for understanding disease mechanisms and developing new therapeutic strategies. CRISPR/Cas has been widely used for creating disease-related cellular models, such as DMD 31, aniridia-related keratopathy (ARK) 32, brittle bone 33, X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy (X-ALD) 34, and Alzheimer's disease 35. Moreover, researchers have created a series of mouse models using CRISPR/Cas that recapitulate DMD 36, atherosclerosis 37, obesity and diabetes 38, RTHα 39, and Alzheimer's disease 40 (Table ). One example is the development of a mouse model for ryanodine receptor type I-related myopathies (RYR1 RM), which harbors a patient- relevant point mutation (T4706M) engineered into one allele, and a 16-base pair frameshift deletion engineered into the second allele of the RYR1 gene. Subsequent experiments demonstrated that this mouse model of RYR1 RM is a powerful tool for understanding the pathogenesis of recessive RYR1 RM, and for preclinical testing of therapeutic efficacy 41. CRISPR/Cas has also been used to generate disease models in large animals, including sheep 42, rabbit 43, pig 44, and monkey 45. For example, a monkey model was developed to study Parkinson's disease by introducing a PINK1 deletion and revealed a requirement for functional PINK1 in the developing primate brain 45. CRISPR/Cas technology offers a flexible and user-friendly means of developing disease models to explore the genetic causes of diseases and evaluate therapeutic strategies.

Disease correction using CRISPR/Cas in model organisms and clinical trials

Monogenic diseases affect a large population of patients. In the ClinVar database, more than 75,000 pathogenic genetic variants have been identified 19, 46. Here we summarize recent therapeutic applications of CRISPR/Cas in model organisms and in clinical trials (Table ).

Hemoglobinopathies

Inherited blood disorders are good candidates for gene therapies because gene therapy can modify the causative gene in autologous hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and correct the hematopoietic system. β-thalassemia and sickle cell disease are two genetic blood diseases. β-thalassemia is due to various mutations including small insertions, single point mutations or deletions in β-globin gene, resulting in loss or reduced β-globin synthesis 47. Sickle cell disease is caused by a Glu->Val mutation in β-globin subunit of hemoglobin 48, 49, leading to abnormal hemoglobin S. Re-expressing the paralogous γ-globin genes is a universal strategy to ameliorate both β-globin disorders. The Bauer group applied CRISPR/Cas-based cleavage of the GATA1 binding site of the erythroid enhancer. This approach decreases erythroid expression of the γ-globin repressor BCL11A and in turn increases γ-globin expression. This strategy is therapeutically practicable to produce durable fetal hemoglobin induction 50-52 (Table ). To date, three clinical trials aiming to treat patients with β-thalassemia and severe sickle cell disease by transfusion of CRIPSR/Cas9 edited CD34+ human HSCs (CTX001) have been initiated by CRISPR Therapeutics in 2018 and Allife Medical Science and Technology Co., Ltd in 2019 (Table ).

Inherited eye disease

Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA) is a rare genetic eye disease manifesting severe vision loss at birth or infancy. LCA10 caused by mutations in the CEP290 gene is a severe retinal dystrophy. CEP290 gene (~7.5 kb) is too large to be packaged into a single AAV. To overcome this limitation, Editas Medicine developed EDIT-101, a candidate genome editing therapeutic, to correct the CEP290 splicing defect in human cells and in humanized CEP290 mice by subretinal delivery. This approach uses SaCas9 to remove the aberrant splice donor generated by the IVS26 mutation. In the human CEP290 IVS26 knock-in mouse model, over 94% of the treated eyes achieved therapeutic target editing level (10%) when the dose of AAV was not less than 1 × 1012 vg/ml 53. Allergan and Editas Medicine have initiated a clinical trial of EDIT-101 for the treatment of LCA10 (Table ). Autosomal dominant cone-rod dystrophy (CORD6) is induced by a gain-of-function GUCY2D mutation. CRISPR/Cas components delivered by AAV specifically disrupt the early coding sequence of GUCY2D in the photoreceptors of mice and macaques by NHEJ. This study was the first to successfully perform somatic gene editing in primates using AAV-delivered CRISPR/Cas (up to 13% editing efficiency of GUCY2D mutant gene in macaque photoreceptor), and demonstrated the potential of CRISPR/Cas to cure inherited retinal diseases 54.

Muscular genetic disease

DMD, caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene, is the most common form of progressive muscular dystrophy, and is characterized by muscle weakness, loss of ambulation, and premature death. Several groups have used NHEJ to bypass a premature stop codon in exon 23 and restore the expression of dystrophin in neonatal and adult mice after local or systemic delivery of CRISPR/Cas components by AAV 55-57. Similarly, CRISPR/Cas- induced NHEJ has been used to treat DMD in a DMD dog model after AAV-mediated systemic delivery of CRISPR gene editing components. 3 to 90% of dystrophin was recovered at 8 weeks after systemic delivery in skeletal muscle, the editing efficiency was dependent on muscle type and the muscle histology was improved in treated dogs 58. In addition, ABE was delivered locally by intramuscular injection of a trans-splicing AAV to cure DMD in a mouse model 59. These studies highlight the potential application of gene editing for the correction of DMD in patients. Congenital muscular dystrophy type 1A (MDC1A), one of neuromuscular disorders, usually appears at birth or infancy. It is mainly featured by hypotonia, myasthenia and amyotrophy. MDC1A is caused by loss-of-function mutations in LAMA2, which encodes for laminin-α2. To compensate for the loss of laminin-α2, Ronald D. Cohn and his colleagues used CRISPRa to upregulate LAMA1, which encodes laminin-α1 and is a structurally similar protein to laminin-α2. Upregulation of LAMA1 ameliorates muscle wasting and paralysis in the MDC1A mouse model and provides a novel mutation-independent approach for disease correction 60.

Genetic liver disease

Hereditary tyrosinemia type I (HTI) patients with loss of function FAH mutations accumulate toxic metabolites that cause liver damage. CRISPR/Cas- mediated HDR has been used to correct FAHt in the HTI mouse model by hydrodynamic injection of plasmids encoding CRISPR/Cas components or by combined delivery of AAV carrying HDR template and sgRNA and of nanoparticles with Cas9 mRNA 61, 62. VanLith et al. transplanted edited hepatocytes with corrected FAH into recipient FAH-knockout mice and cured HTI mice 63. Song et al. have used ABE in an adult mouse model of HTI to correct a FAH point mutation 64. In addition to correcting FAH, several groups have knocked out hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPD), which acts in the second step of tyrosine catabolism and is an upstream enzyme of FAH, to prevent toxic metabolite accumulation and treat HTI metabolic disease 65. Patients with alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) develop liver disease due to a toxic gain-of- function mutant allele, as well as progressive lung disease due to the loss of AAT antiprotease function. CRISPR/Cas-mediated NHEJ has been used to disrupt mutant AAT to reduce the pathologic liver phenotype 66, while HDR has been used to correct an AAT point mutation 67.

Congenital genetic lung disease

Congenital genetic lung diseases include cystic fibrosis and inherited surfactant protein (SP) syndromes 68. Monogenic lung diseases caused by mutations in SP genes of the pulmonary epithelium show perinatal lethal respiratory failure death or chronic diffuse lung disease with few therapeutic options. Using a CRISPR fluorescent reporter system, scientists precisely timed intra-amniotic delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 components into a prenatal mouse model with the human SP gene SFTPC mutation to inactivate mutant SFTPC gene through NHEJ. Prenatal gene editing in SFTPC mutant mice rescued lung pathophysiology, improved lung development, and increased survival rate to 22.8%. For intra- amniotic delivery, the amniotic cavity of embryonic day 16 mouse fetus, in which fetal breathing movements are optimal for fetal lung editing, was injected. After prenatal CRISPR delivery, embryonic day 19 fetus achieved up to 32% SFTPC wild-type airway and alveolar epithelial cells in SFTPC mice, rescued lung pathophysiology by immunohistology, improved lung development by reducing the synthesis of mis trafficked SFTPC mutant proprotein, and increased survival rate to 22.8% 69. Cystic fibrosis is another life-threatening monogenic lung disease caused by mutations in CFTR gene 70. Researchers applied CRISPR to precisely corrected CFTR carrying homozygous F508 deletion (F508del) in exon 10 in the induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) separated from cystic fibrosis patients 71 and the overall correction efficiency is up to 90% using piggyBac transposase as selection marker. Xu group applied the electroporation of CRISPR/Cas RNP and achieved more than 20% correction rate in patient-derived iPSC cell line with F508del mutation 72. As expected, CRISPR-induced genetic correction leads to the recovery of CFTR function in airway epithelial cells or proximal lung organoids derived from iPSC.

Genetic deafness

At least half of all cases of profound congenital deafness are caused by genetic mutations and genetically inherited. Approximately 120 deafness- associated genes have been identified, but few treatments are available to slow or reverse genetic deafness 73. Recently, David R. Liu's group employed cationic lipid-mediated in vivo delivery of Cas9-guide RNA complexes to disrupt the dominant deafness-associated allele in the humanized transmembrane channel-like 1 (Tmc1) Beethoven (Bth) mouse model and ameliorated the hearing loss in these animals 74. David P. Corey's group screened 14 Cas9/sgRNA combinations and identified that SaCas9-KKH/gRNA could specially and safely recognize mutant Tmc1 but not wildtype allele in vitro and in vivo, which provides a strategy to efficiently and selectively disrupt the dominant single nucleotide mutation rather than the wild-type alleles 75.

Overcoming limitations of CRISPR/Cas-based gene therapy

Extensive work is being done with CRISPR/Cas in disease research and recent reviews had summarized the advantages of CRISPR/Cas 76, 77. The safety and efficacy of CRISPR/Cas9-based gene therapies need to be evaluated and refined before these therapies are applied in patients 78. One of the common limitations for CRISPR/Cas is that not all the mutation locus harbors the PAM motif, which the target recognition relies on. Besides, the challenges for using CRISPR/Cas as gene therapy include editing at off-target genomic sites, delivery vehicle, immunogenicity, and DNA damage response.

Off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas

Despite significant advances in understanding the CRISPR/Cas9 system, concerns remain regarding off-target effects. Indeed, several groups found a tradeoff between activity and specificity of CRISPR/ Cas9, identifying off-target DNA cleavage by genome wide deep sequencing technique 79-81. Moreover, CBEs and ABEs cause transcriptome-wide off-target RNA editing 82, 83. Thus, unwanted off targets are concerns for the application of CRISPR. However, off-target effects can be reduced with sgRNA selection and optimization. Also, verification of in vivo off-targets (VIVO) can be used for defining and quantifying off-target editing of nucleases in whole organisms 84. The recently developed anti-CRISPR proteins could conditionally control the activity of the CRISPR system 85-88, which may show the potential in reducing off-target effects. The development of more sensitive methods is necessary for detecting off-target editing at both genome and transcriptome levels.

In vivo delivery of CRISPR/Cas

AAV is the most widely used in vivo delivery of CRISPR/Cas. However, AAV has a limited packaging capacity, hindering all-in-one delivery of CRISPR/ Cas components, in particular larger Cas-derived base editor and prime editor. This has led to continued development of smaller Cas9 orthologues like SaCas9 13. For instance, saCas9 or NmeCas9 and sgRNA have been combined into a single AAV vector for inducing indels to correct disease. For disease correction by HDR or base editors, dual AAV or split AAV vectors can be used to circumvent packaging size limitations 89, 90. A disadvantage of such an approach is the requirement of uptake and expression of both AAV vectors into the same cell at roughly the same time to ensure intracellular Cas9:sgRNA complex formation. CRISPR/Cas components can also be delivered by non-viral methods, for instance, Cas9 mRNA and sgRNA can be delivered to mouse liver by nanoparticles 62. But the external and internal barriers for nanoparticles entering the cell and nucleus must be considered. Currently, nanoparticles carrying CRISPR/Cas components are largely applied to mice and delivered into liver. Because the liver contains fenestrated capillary endothelia. Further improvement of nanoparticle-based CRISPR/Cas components delivery systems is needed for other target tissues.

Immune response stimulated by CRISPR/Cas

The application of CRISPR/Cas systems raises concerns over immunogenicity of the bacterially- derived Cas9 protein 91. In a recent study, Charlesworth et al. demonstrated that anti-Cas9 responses are present in healthy human adults 92. In 34 human blood samples, anti-Cas9 IgG antibodies were detected against SaCas9 (79% of samples), and against SpCas9 (65% of samples). The immunogenicity of SpCas9 in healthy humans has been reported by Michael's group. Specifically, they found that high prevalence of effector T cells towards SpCas9 exist prior to the delivery of SpCas9 93. This issue will need to be addressed in the clinical applications of CRISPR/Cas.

DNA damage response activated by CRISPR/Cas

In CRISPR/Cas gene editing via NHEJ and HDR, DSBs are generated at the target sites. DBS- based repair activates a p53-dependent DNA damage response and induces transient cell cycle arrest, leading to a decrease in efficiency of template- mediated precision genome editing 94. In human pluripotent stem cells, p53-deficient cells are more susceptible to CRISPR-mediated modification 95. These findings suggest that, during clinical trials, CRISPR-engineered cells or organs in patients should be monitored for p53 function. To avoid DSB triggered p53-mediated response, base editors (ABE and CBE) and prime editors can be applied for precision gene editing-mediated target gene correction.

Conclusion and perspectives of using CRISPR/Cas in the clinic

CRISPR/Cas has already shown great potential in generating disease models and correcting monogenic disease mutations. The CRISPR disease models can accelerate the discovery and development of drug targets. In addition to the widely used type II CRISPR/Cas systems, continued discovery and development of CRISPR systems from prokaryotic species has generated new technologies. For example, DN1S-SpCas9 fusion protein blocks local NHEJ events and increases HDR frequency 96. Moreover, Cas13a-based RNA-targeting tools enable RNA changes that are temporally and spatially controllable, and will broaden and facilitate the application of RNA therapy in human diseases. Before the application of CRISPR for human disease correction, efforts are needed to optimize and maximize the editing efficiency as well as minimize off-targets and develop novel tools to specifically deliver the CRISPR components to the target tissue for gene editing 97, 98. As CRISPR/Cas-based gene therapy enters clinical trials (Table ), this technology holds great potential for treating genetic diseases particularly for the present incurable ones and enhancing cell therapies.
Table 1

Animal diseases models generated by CRISPR listed in this review.

Corresponding human diseaseTargeted geneSubsrateStragegyAuthor, year, (Refs)
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD)DMDHuman rhabdomyosarcoma cell lineNHEJ-mediated exon removalShimo et al, 2018,(31)
Aniridia-related keratopathy (ARK)PAX6Human limbal epithelial cellsNHEJ-mediated mutationRoux et al, 2018, (32)
Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI)COL1A1Human MCRIi001-A iPSCs lineNHEJ-mediated a single base insertionFar et al, 2019, (33)
X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy (X-ALD)ABCD1 & ABCD2 Murine BV-2 immortalized cell lineNHEJ-mediated gene deletionRaas et al, 2019, (34)
Alzheimer's diseaseAPPS & PSEN1M1Human and Mouse IPS Cell lineHDR-mediated mutationPaquet et al, 2016, (35)
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD)DMDMouseNHEJ-mediated exon removalEgorova et al, 2019, (36)
AtherosclerosisLDLRMouse liverNHEJ-mediated gene deletionJarrett et al, 2018, (37)
Obesity (ob/ob) and diabetes (db/db)LEP & LEPRMouseNHEJ-mediated gene deletionRoh et al, 2018, (38)
Resistance to thyroid hormone due to THRA mutation (RTHα)THRAMouseHDR-mediated mutationMarkossian et al, 2017, (39)
Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD)MAPTMouseNHEJ-mediated exon removalTan et al, 2018, (40)
Ryanodine receptor type I (RYR1)-related myopathies (RYR1 RM)RYR1 Mouse muscleHDR-mediated mutationBrennan et al, 2019, (41)
Cystic fibrosis (CF)CFTRSheepNHEJ-mediated gene deletionFan et al, 2018, (42)
Diabetes mellitus (DM)PAX4RabbitNHEJ-mediated gene deletionXu et al, 2018, (43)
Huntington's disease (HD)HTTPigHDR-mediated exon fragments insertionYan et al, 2018, (44)
Autosomal recessive juvenile parkinsonismPINK1MonkeyNHEJ-mediated gene deletionYang et al, 2019, (45)
Table 2

Preclinical CRISPR Therapy in disease models listed in this review.

Diseases Target (Gene accession number)Animal model or substrateDelivery SystemStrategyOutcomeAuthor, year, (Refs)
β-thalassemiaHBB (NC_000011.10)CD34+ HSPCs of β-thalassemia patientsRNP; electroporationNHEJ-mediated mRNA splicing93.0% indel frequency (SpCas9)Xu et al, 2019 (50)
HemoglobinopathiesBCL11A erythroidenhancer (NC_000002.12)CD34+ HSPCs from sickle cell disease patientRNP; electroporationNHEJ-mediated enhancer disruption54.6% reduction of BCL11A expressionWu et al, 2019, (52)
Leber congenital amaurosis type 10CEP290 (NC_000012.12 )HuCEP290 IVS26 KI mouse eyeAAV; subretinal injectionNHEJ-mediated aberrant splicing~ 60% editing rates in miceMaeder et al, 2019, (53)
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD)Dmd (NC_000086.7)mdx mice muscleAAV; intramuscular injection (IM), retro- orbital injection (RO) and intraperitoneal injection (IP)NHEJ-mediated mutant exon 23 skipping~52% of WT (IP) , ~71% of WT (RO), and ~70% of WT (IM) Dystrophin protein levelsLong et al, 2016, (55)
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD)Dmd (NC_000086.7)mdx mice muscleAAV; intramuscular injectionNHEJ-mediated mutant exon 23 skipping~2% of all alleles from the whole muscle lysateNelson et al, 2016, (56)
Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD)Dmd (NC_000086.7)mdx mice muscleAAV; intraperitoneal injectionNHEJ-mediated mutant exon 23 skipping24-47% of total Dmd mRNA in cells including exon23 deletionTabebordbar et al, 2016, (57)
Congenital muscular dystrophy type 1A (MDC1A)Lama1 (NC_000083.6 )dy2j/dy2j mouseAAV; intramuscular or tail vein injectionCRISPR activator mediated gene upregulation3.6-fold upregulation of Lama1Kemaladewi et al, 2019, (60)
Hereditary tyrosinemia type I (HTI)FAH(NC_000073.6)FAHmut/mut mouse liverAAV combined with lipid nanoparticles; intravenous injectionHDR-mediated point mutation correction~0.8% initial correction rate in total liver DNA; more than 6% FAH+ hepatocytesYin et al, 2016, (62)
Hereditary tyrosinemia type I (HTI)FAH(NC_000073.6)FAHmut/mut mouse hepatocytesAAV; transplantationHDR-mediated point mutation correction2.6% alleles were corretedVanLith et al, 2019, (63)
Hereditary tyrosinaemiatype I (HTI)FAH(NC_000073.6)FAHmut/mut mouse liverplasmids; hydrodynamic tail-vein injectionAdenine base editor mediated point mutation correction~0.3% initial correction rate in liver, ~4% FAH+ hepatocytesSong et al, 2019, (64)
α1-antitrypsin deficiency (AATD)AAT(NC_000078.6 )PiZ mouse liverAAV; intravenous injectionNHEJ-mediated mutant AAT disruption~30% idel frequencyBjursell et al, 2018, (66)
α1-antitrypsin deficiency (AATD)AAT(NC_000078.6 )PiZ mouse liverAAV; intravenous injectionHdR-mediated point mutation correction~2% correction rate in liverSong et al, 2018, (67)
Perinatal Lethal Respiratory FailureSFTPC ( NC_000080.6)SFTPCI73T; R26mTmG/+ mouse fetus lungadeno virus; intra-amniotic deliveryNHEJ-mediated mutant SFTPC disruption~20% editing in the lung epithelium of fetusesAlapati et al, 2019, (69)
Genetic DeafnessTmc1 (NC_000085.6)Beethoven (Bth)mouse earAAV; Inner-ear injectionsNHEJ-mediated mutant Tmc allele disruption2.2% indel frequencies at 55 days after injection; 24% decrease in Bth mRNAGyörgy et al, 2019, (75)
Table 3

CRISPR clinical trials for inherited diseases listed in this review.

DiseaseStudy titleStrategyStudy phaseStudy typeParticipants (No., Age)CompanyNCT Number Website
Transfusion- Dependent β-thalassemia A Safety and Efficacy Study Evaluating CTX001 in Subjects With Transfusion-Dependent β-ThalassemiaCTX001Phase 1Phase 2Interventional45 patients, ≥18 and ≤35 years of ageVertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated & CRISPR TherapeuticsNCT03655678https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03655678
Sickle Cell DiseaseA Safety and Efficacy Study Evaluating CTX001 in Subjects With Severe Sickle Cell DiseaseCTX001Phase 1Phase 2Interventional45 patients, ≥18 and ≤35 years of ageVertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated & CRISPR TherapeuticsNCT03745287https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03745287
β-thalassemiaiHSCs With the Gene Correction of HBB Intervent Subjests With β-thalassemia MutationsHBB HSC-01Early Phase 1Interventional12 patients, ≥ 2 and ≤ 60 years of ageAllife Medical Science & Technology Co., Ltd.NCT03728322https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03728322
Leber congenital amaurosis LCA10Single Ascending Dose Study in Participants With LCA10AGN-151587Phase 1Phase 2Interventional18 patients, ≥ 3 YearsAllergan & Editas Medicine, Inc.NCT03872479https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03872479

Data from https://clinicaltrials.gov/

  98 in total

Review 1.  Gene Therapy.

Authors:  Katherine A High; Maria G Roncarolo
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  CRISPR/Cas9 Editing of the Mouse Thra Gene Produces Models with Variable Resistance to Thyroid Hormone.

Authors:  Suzy Markossian; Romain Guyot; Sabine Richard; Marie Teixeira; Nadine Aguilera; Mathilde Bouchet; Michelina Plateroti; Wenyue Guan; Karine Gauthier; Denise Aubert; Frédéric Flamant
Journal:  Thyroid       Date:  2018-01-02       Impact factor: 6.568

Review 3.  CRISPRi and CRISPRa Screens in Mammalian Cells for Precision Biology and Medicine.

Authors:  Martin Kampmann
Journal:  ACS Chem Biol       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 5.100

Review 4.  The mechanism of double-strand DNA break repair by the nonhomologous DNA end-joining pathway.

Authors:  Michael R Lieber
Journal:  Annu Rev Biochem       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 23.643

5.  Efficient introduction of specific homozygous and heterozygous mutations using CRISPR/Cas9.

Authors:  Dominik Paquet; Dylan Kwart; Antonia Chen; Andrew Sproul; Samson Jacob; Shaun Teo; Kimberly Moore Olsen; Andrew Gregg; Scott Noggle; Marc Tessier-Lavigne
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Development of a gene-editing approach to restore vision loss in Leber congenital amaurosis type 10.

Authors:  Morgan L Maeder; Michael Stefanidakis; Christopher J Wilson; Reshica Baral; Luis Alberto Barrera; George S Bounoutas; David Bumcrot; Hoson Chao; Dawn M Ciulla; Jennifer A DaSilva; Abhishek Dass; Vidya Dhanapal; Tim J Fennell; Ari E Friedland; Georgia Giannoukos; Sebastian W Gloskowski; Alexandra Glucksmann; Gregory M Gotta; Hariharan Jayaram; Scott J Haskett; Bei Hopkins; Joy E Horng; Shivangi Joshi; Eugenio Marco; Rina Mepani; Deepak Reyon; Terence Ta; Diana G Tabbaa; Steven J Samuelsson; Shen Shen; Maxwell N Skor; Pam Stetkiewicz; Tongyao Wang; Clifford Yudkoff; Vic E Myer; Charles F Albright; Haiyan Jiang
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 53.440

7.  Ex Vivo Hepatocyte Reprograming Promotes Homology-Directed DNA Repair to Correct Metabolic Disease in Mice After Transplantation.

Authors:  Caitlin J VanLith; Rebekah M Guthman; Clara T Nicolas; Kari L Allen; Yuanhang Liu; Jennifer A Chilton; Zachariah P Tritz; Scott L Nyberg; Robert A Kaiser; Joseph B Lillegard; Raymond D Hickey
Journal:  Hepatol Commun       Date:  2019-02-15

8.  Multifunctional CRISPR-Cas9 with engineered immunosilenced human T cell epitopes.

Authors:  Shayesteh R Ferdosi; Radwa Ewaisha; Farzaneh Moghadam; Sri Krishna; Jin G Park; Mo R Ebrahimkhani; Samira Kiani; Karen S Anderson
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Reprogramming metabolic pathways in vivo with CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing to treat hereditary tyrosinaemia.

Authors:  Francis P Pankowicz; Mercedes Barzi; Xavier Legras; Leroy Hubert; Tian Mi; Julie A Tomolonis; Milan Ravishankar; Qin Sun; Diane Yang; Malgorzata Borowiak; Pavel Sumazin; Sarah H Elsea; Beatrice Bissig-Choisat; Karl-Dimiter Bissig
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Adenine base editing in an adult mouse model of tyrosinaemia.

Authors:  Chun-Qing Song; Tingting Jiang; Michelle Richter; Luke H Rhym; Luke W Koblan; Maria Paz Zafra; Emma M Schatoff; Jordan L Doman; Yueying Cao; Lukas E Dow; Lihua Julie Zhu; Daniel G Anderson; David R Liu; Hao Yin; Wen Xue
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 25.671

View more
  18 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  CRISPR-Cas9-Based Technology and Its Relevance to Gene Editing in Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Mujeeb Ur Rahman; Muhammad Bilal; Junaid Ali Shah; Ajeet Kaushik; Pierre-Louis Teissedre; Małgorzata Kujawska
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 6.525

3.  Rational Engineering of CRISPR-Cas9 Nuclease to Attenuate Position-Dependent Off-Target Effects.

Authors:  Zhicheng Zuo; Kesavan Babu; Chhandosee Ganguly; Ashwini Zolekar; Sydney Newsom; Rakhi Rajan; Yu-Chieh Wang; Jin Liu
Journal:  CRISPR J       Date:  2022-04

Review 4.  CRISPR/Cas9: Principle, Applications, and Delivery through Extracellular Vesicles.

Authors:  Katarzyna Horodecka; Markus Düchler
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 5.  CRISPR-Based Genome Editing as a New Therapeutic Tool in Retinal Diseases.

Authors:  Seyed Ahmad Rasoulinejad; Faezeh Maroufi
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 2.695

6.  RNAi-mediated control of CRISPR functions.

Authors:  Xinbo Huang; Zhicong Chen; Yuchen Liu
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2020-05-17       Impact factor: 11.556

Review 7.  Development of Diagnostic Tests for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Ngan N T Nguyen; Colleen McCarthy; Darlin Lantigua; Gulden Camci-Unal
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-05

Review 8.  Strategies in the delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.

Authors:  Song Zhang; Jiangtao Shen; Dali Li; Yiyun Cheng
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 11.556

9.  An ultrasensitive hybridization chain reaction-amplified CRISPR-Cas12a aptasensor for extracellular vesicle surface protein quantification.

Authors:  Shan Xing; Zedong Lu; Qi Huang; Huilan Li; Yu Wang; Yanzhen Lai; Yi He; Min Deng; Wanli Liu
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 11.556

10.  Precise and efficient silencing of mutant KrasG12D by CRISPR-CasRx controls pancreatic cancer progression.

Authors:  Wang Jiang; Hao Li; Xiyu Liu; Jianping Zhang; Wuhu Zhang; Tianjiao Li; Liang Liu; Xianjun Yu
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 11.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.