Literature DB >> 32632303

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

Myungjae Song1,2, Hui Kwon Kim1,2,3,4, Sungtae Lee1, Younggwang Kim1,2, Sang-Yeon Seo1,2, Jinman Park1,2, Jae Woo Choi1, Hyewon Jang1,2, Jeong Hong Shin1,2, Seonwoo Min5, Zhejiu Quan6, Ji Hun Kim6, Hoon Chul Kang6, Sungroh Yoon5,7, Hyongbum Henry Kim8,9,10,11,12.   

Abstract

Base editors, including adenine base editors (ABEs)1 and cytosine base editors (CBEs)2,3, are widely used to induce point mutations. However, determining whether a specific nucleotide in its genomic context can be edited requires time-consuming experiments. Furthermore, when the editable window contains multiple target nucleotides, various genotypic products can be generated. To develop computational tools to predict base-editing efficiency and outcome product frequencies, we first evaluated the efficiencies of an ABE and a CBE and the outcome product frequencies at 13,504 and 14,157 target sequences, respectively, in human cells. We found that there were only modest asymmetric correlations between the activities of the base editors and Cas9 at the same targets. Using deep-learning-based computational modeling, we built tools to predict the efficiencies and outcome frequencies of ABE- and CBE-directed editing at any target sequence, with Pearson correlations ranging from 0.50 to 0.95. These tools and results will facilitate modeling and therapeutic correction of genetic diseases by base editing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32632303     DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0573-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Biotechnol        ISSN: 1087-0156            Impact factor:   54.908


  41 in total

1.  Rational design of highly active sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene inactivation.

Authors:  John G Doench; Ella Hartenian; Daniel B Graham; Zuzana Tothova; Mudra Hegde; Ian Smith; Meagan Sullender; Benjamin L Ebert; Ramnik J Xavier; David E Root
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 2.  Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells.

Authors:  Holly A Rees; David R Liu
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Sequence determinants of improved CRISPR sgRNA design.

Authors:  Han Xu; Tengfei Xiao; Chen-Hao Chen; Wei Li; Clifford A Meyer; Qiu Wu; Di Wu; Le Cong; Feng Zhang; Jun S Liu; Myles Brown; X Shirley Liu
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 9.043

4.  Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9.

Authors:  John G Doench; Nicolo Fusi; Meagan Sullender; Mudra Hegde; Emma W Vaimberg; Jennifer Listgarten; Katherine F Donovan; Ian Smith; Zuzana Tothova; Craig Wilen; Robert Orchard; Herbert W Virgin; David E Root
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 54.908

5.  Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage.

Authors:  Nicole M Gaudelli; Alexis C Komor; Holly A Rees; Michael S Packer; Ahmed H Badran; David I Bryson; David R Liu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Unraveling CRISPR-Cas9 genome engineering parameters via a library-on-library approach.

Authors:  Raj Chari; Prashant Mali; Mark Moosburner; George M Church
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 28.547

7.  CRISPRscan: designing highly efficient sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9 targeting in vivo.

Authors:  Miguel A Moreno-Mateos; Charles E Vejnar; Jean-Denis Beaudoin; Juan P Fernandez; Emily K Mis; Mustafa K Khokha; Antonio J Giraldez
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2015-08-31       Impact factor: 28.547

8.  WU-CRISPR: characteristics of functional guide RNAs for the CRISPR/Cas9 system.

Authors:  Nathan Wong; Weijun Liu; Xiaowei Wang
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 13.583

9.  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

10.  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

View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Improvement of base editors and prime editors advances precision genome engineering in plants.

Authors:  Kai Hua; Peijin Han; Jian-Kang Zhu
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 8.340

2.  Application of prime editing to the correction of mutations and phenotypes in adult mice with liver and eye diseases.

Authors:  Hyewon Jang; Dong Hyun Jo; Chang Sik Cho; Jeong Hong Shin; Jung Hwa Seo; Goosang Yu; Ramu Gopalappa; Daesik Kim; Sung-Rae Cho; Jeong Hun Kim; Hyongbum Henry Kim
Journal:  Nat Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-08-26       Impact factor: 29.234

Review 3.  Cas-Based Systems for RNA Editing in Gene Therapy of Monogenic Diseases: In Vitro and in Vivo Application and Translational Potential.

Authors:  Vasiliy V Reshetnikov; Angelina V Chirinskaite; Julia V Sopova; Roman A Ivanov; Elena I Leonova
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2022-06-16

4.  High-throughput functional evaluation of human cancer-associated mutations using base editors.

Authors:  Younggwang Kim; Seungho Lee; Soohyuk Cho; Jinman Park; Dongwoo Chae; Taeyoung Park; John D Minna; Hyongbum Henry Kim
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 68.164

5.  AttCRISPR: a spacetime interpretable model for prediction of sgRNA on-target activity.

Authors:  Li-Ming Xiao; Yun-Qi Wan; Zhen-Ran Jiang
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  BEAR reveals that increased fidelity variants can successfully reduce the mismatch tolerance of adenine but not cytosine base editors.

Authors:  András Tálas; Dorottya A Simon; Péter I Kulcsár; Éva Varga; Sarah L Krausz; Ervin Welker
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 14.919

7.  CRISPR-BETS: a base-editing design tool for generating stop codons.

Authors:  Yuechao Wu; Yao He; Simon Sretenovic; Shishi Liu; Yanhao Cheng; Yangshuo Han; Guanqing Liu; Yu Bao; Qing Fang; Xuelian Zheng; Jianping Zhou; Yiping Qi; Yong Zhang; Tao Zhang
Journal:  Plant Biotechnol J       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 9.803

Review 8.  Current progress and open challenges for applying deep learning across the biosciences.

Authors:  Nicolae Sapoval; Amirali Aghazadeh; Michael G Nute; Dinler A Antunes; Advait Balaji; Richard Baraniuk; C J Barberan; Ruth Dannenfelser; Chen Dun; Mohammadamin Edrisi; R A Leo Elworth; Bryce Kille; Anastasios Kyrillidis; Luay Nakhleh; Cameron R Wolfe; Zhi Yan; Vicky Yao; Todd J Treangen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Docking sites inside Cas9 for adenine base editing diversification and RNA off-target elimination.

Authors:  Shuo Li; Bo Yuan; Jixin Cao; Jingqi Chen; Jinlong Chen; Jiayi Qiu; Xing-Ming Zhao; Xiaolin Wang; Zilong Qiu; Tian-Lin Cheng
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Identification of pathogenic variants in cancer genes using base editing screens with editing efficiency correction.

Authors:  Changcai Huang; Guangyu Li; Jiayu Wu; Junbo Liang; Xiaoyue Wang
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 13.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.