Evasion of Pre-Existing Immunity to Cas9: A Prerequisite for Successful Genome Editing In Vivo?
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Cas9 is of bacterial origin, and hence, is expected to cause an immune response.
“Cas9 is of bacterial origin, and hence, is expected to cause an immune response [112].”
From Immune responses to gene editing by viral and non-viral delivery vectors used in retinal gene therapy (2022) · cites this paper as [112]
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
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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