Cited by 19CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseVirus-based gene therapy research

Evasion of Pre-Existing Immunity to Cas9: A Prerequisite for Successful Genome Editing In Vivo?

Open access
Wignakumar, Thirushan, Fairchild, Paul J.·2019·Current Transplantation Reports

Abstract

CRISPR-Cas9-mediated genome editing holds promise for the future correction of congenital defects in vivo, providing potentially curative interventions for numerous intractable diseases. Nevertheless, the bacterial origin of the Cas9 endonuclease raises the spectre of pre-existing immunity that threatens to undermine the success of this powerful technology, necessitating a careful assessment of the potential risks involved. Given that genome editing commonly exploits the specificity of Cas9 endonucleases from species of bacteria that are a common cause of infection in humans, the recent discovery of neutralising antibodies in the sera of healthy individuals is consistent with pre-existing immunity. Furthermore, the demonstration of T cell responses to Cas9 epitopes suggests that cells and tissues successfully targeted for correction of congenital mutations may be rendered vulnerable to cytotoxic T cell lysis, potentially confounding any future benefits to human health. Although the full impact of pre-existing immunity to Cas9 on the success of in vivo genome editing has yet to be fully determined, it is timely to discuss ways of evading destructive immunity to ensure that its future potential is fully realised.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40472-019-00237-2

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 19

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. The authors perform genome editing of patient-derived iPSCs to correct the causative mutation of dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. The capacity for differentiation of the gene-corrected cells into cell types such as keratinocytes, mesenchymal and haematopoietic stem cells that might be used for treatment of the disease suggests a paradigm for genome editing in the future that may circumvent pre-existing immunity to Cas9. · DOI

Authors
Wignakumar, T., & Fairchild, P. J.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Fairchild, Paul J.
Venue
Current Transplantation Reports
Published
2019-03-19
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
127-133
ISSN
2196-3029 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2923130410
Cited by
19
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Current Transplantation Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Oxford
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA regulation and disease
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Virus-based gene therapy research
Keywords
CRISPR/Cas9, pre-existing immunity, Cas9 endonuclease, in vivo gene editing, neutralizing antibodies, T cell response, immune evasion, cytotoxic T lymphocytes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review