Cited by 200CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseDNA Repair Mechanisms

Highly Parallel Profiling of Cas9 Variant Specificity

Open access
Schmid-Burgk, Jonathan L., Gao, Linyi, Li, David, Gardner, Zachary, Strecker, Jonathan, Lash, Blake, Zhang, Feng·2020·Molecular Cell

Abstract

Determining the off-target cleavage profile of programmable nucleases is an important consideration for any genome editing experiment, and a number of Cas9 variants have been reported that improve specificity. We describe here tagmentation-based tag integration site sequencing (TTISS), an efficient, scalable method for analyzing double-strand breaks (DSBs) that we apply in parallel to eight Cas9 variants across 59 targets. Additionally, we generated thousands of other Cas9 variants and screened for variants with enhanced specificity and activity, identifying LZ3 Cas9, a high specificity variant with a unique +1 insertion profile. This comprehensive comparison reveals a general trade-off between Cas9 activity and specificity and provides information about the frequency of generation of +1 insertions, which has implications for correcting frameshift mutations.

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 · 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.02.023

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Although some Cas9 variants have comparable editing activity and specificity with SpCas9 at a few target sites, high-throughput analysis is still lacking.

    “Although some Cas9 variants have comparable editing activity and specificity with SpCas9 at a few target sites, high-throughput analysis is still lacking.”

    From Machine learning-based prediction models to guide the selection of Cas9 variants for efficient gene editing (2024) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Introduction says earlier off-target methods were relatively low-throughput, and the Results say a systematic comparison of SpCas9 specificity variants had not previously been reported. The Results also report comparable on-target activity for some variants, but not comparable specificity: each tested variant improved specificity relative to SpCas9. Moreover, this paper itself performs a high-throughput comparison across 59 guides, so it does not support the claim that such analysis is still lacking. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In several previous reports, LZ3 Cas9, Sniper Cas9, and HiFi Cas9 had comparable editing activity to SpCas9-WT in human cells or other animal embryos.

    “It worth mentioning that in several previous reports, LZ3 Cas9, Sniper Cas9, and HiFi Cas9 had comparable editing activity to the SpCas9-WT in human cells or other animal embryos.”

    From Machine learning-based prediction models to guide the selection of Cas9 variants for efficient gene editing (2024) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Results report on-target activity comparable to WT SpCas9 for LZ3 Cas9, HiFi Cas9, and Sniper-Cas9. But the paper describes LZ3 as a newly generated variant, so it does not support attributing the finding for all three variants to several previous reports. The cited passages do not establish the animal-embryo setting. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • LZ3 Cas9 did not display a stable 1 bp site-directed insertion pattern.

    “Although LZ3 Cas9 did not display a stable 1 bp site-directed insertion pattern, as shown in previous studies according to the DSB repair results”

    From Machine learning-based prediction models to guide the selection of Cas9 variants for efficient gene editing (2024) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Results report that LZ3 Cas9 had a markedly different +1 insertion-frequency profile from WT SpCas9 across 58 guides, with frequencies influenced by target sequence. The Discussion likewise describes a differential +1 insertion profile, but neither passage establishes that LZ3 lacked a stable 1 bp insertion pattern. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schmid-Burgk, J. L., Gao, L., Li, D., Gardner, Z., Strecker, J., Lash, B., & Zhang, F.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Feng
Venue
Molecular Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
78
Issue
4
Pages
794-800.e8
ISSN
1097-2765 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3011375666
Cited by
197
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 13
FWCI
9.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Edward Mallinckrodt, Jr. Foundation
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 › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
Keywords
Cas9 variants, off-target cleavage, DNA double-strand breaks, genome editing specificity, programmable nucleases
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, CRISPR-Associated Protein 9, RNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas Systems, Humans, Genetic Variation, RNA, Guide, Kinetoplastida, K562 Cells, DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded, HEK293 Cells, CRISPR-Cas Systems

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