Changcai Huang1, Guangyu Li1, Jiayu Wu1, Junbo Liang2, Xiaoyue Wang3. 1. State Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Biology, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medicine Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. 2. State Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Biology, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medicine Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. liangjunbo@ibms.pumc.edu.cn. 3. State Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Biology, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medicine Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. wxy@ibms.pumc.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Millions of nucleotide variants are identified through cancer genome sequencing and it is clinically important to identify the pathogenic variants among them. By introducing base substitutions at guide RNA target regions in the genome, CRISPR-Cas9-based base editors provide the possibility for evaluating a large number of variants in their genomic context. However, the variability in editing efficiency and the complexity of outcome mapping are two existing problems for assigning guide RNA effects to variants in base editing screens. RESULTS: To improve the identification of pathogenic variants, we develop a framework to combine base editing screens with sgRNA efficiency and outcome mapping. We apply the method to evaluate more than 9000 variants across all the exons of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Our efficiency-corrected scoring model identifies 910 loss-of-function variants for BRCA1/2, including 151 variants in the noncoding part of the genes such as the 5' untranslated regions. Many of them are identified in cancer patients and are reported as "benign/likely benign" or "variants of uncertain significance" by clinicians. Our data suggest a need to re-evaluate their clinical significance, which may be helpful for risk assessment and treatment of breast and ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that base editing screens with efficiency correction is a powerful strategy to identify pathogenic variants in a high-throughput manner. Applying this strategy to assess variants in both coding and noncoding regions of the genome could have a direct impact on the interpretation of cancer variants.
BACKGROUND: Millions of nucleotide variants are identified through cancer genome sequencing and it is clinically important to identify the pathogenic variants among them. By introducing base substitutions at guide RNA target regions in the genome, CRISPR-Cas9-based base editors provide the possibility for evaluating a large number of variants in their genomic context. However, the variability in editing efficiency and the complexity of outcome mapping are two existing problems for assigning guide RNA effects to variants in base editing screens. RESULTS: To improve the identification of pathogenic variants, we develop a framework to combine base editing screens with sgRNA efficiency and outcome mapping. We apply the method to evaluate more than 9000 variants across all the exons of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Our efficiency-corrected scoring model identifies 910 loss-of-function variants for BRCA1/2, including 151 variants in the noncoding part of the genes such as the 5' untranslated regions. Many of them are identified in cancer patients and are reported as "benign/likely benign" or "variants of uncertain significance" by clinicians. Our data suggest a need to re-evaluate their clinical significance, which may be helpful for risk assessment and treatment of breast and ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that base editing screens with efficiency correction is a powerful strategy to identify pathogenic variants in a high-throughput manner. Applying this strategy to assess variants in both coding and noncoding regions of the genome could have a direct impact on the interpretation of cancer variants.
Authors: Felicity Allen; Luca Crepaldi; Clara Alsinet; Alexander J Strong; Vitalii Kleshchevnikov; Pietro De Angeli; Petra Páleníková; Anton Khodak; Vladimir Kiselev; Michael Kosicki; Andrew R Bassett; Heather Harding; Yaron Galanty; Francisco Muñoz-Martínez; Emmanouil Metzakopian; Stephen P Jackson; Leopold Parts Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 54.908
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
Authors: Melissa J Landrum; Jennifer M Lee; George R Riley; Wonhee Jang; Wendy S Rubinstein; Deanna M Church; Donna R Maglott Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2013-11-14 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Luke W Koblan; Jonathan M Levy; Benjamin W Thuronyi; Wei-Hsi Yeh; Christine Zheng; Gregory A Newby; Christopher Wilson; Mantu Bhaumik; Olga Shubina-Oleinik; Jeffrey R Holt; David R Liu Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Teija M I Bily; Jason Lequyer; Steven Erwood; Joyce Yan; Nitya Gulati; Reid A Brewer; Liangchi Zhou; Laurence Pelletier; Evgueni A Ivakine; Ronald D Cohn Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 68.164