Cited by 4,184CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseDNA Repair Mechanisms

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

Open access
Gaudelli, Nicole M., Komor, Alexis C., Rees, Holly A., Packer, Michael S., Badran, Ahmed H., Bryson, David I., Liu, David R.·2017·Nature

Abstract

The spontaneous deamination of cytosine is a major source of transitions from C•G to T•A base pairs, which account for half of known pathogenic point mutations in humans. The ability to efficiently convert targeted A•T base pairs to G•C could therefore advance the study and treatment of genetic diseases. The deamination of adenine yields inosine, which is treated as guanine by polymerases, but no enzymes are known to deaminate adenine in DNA. Here we describe adenine base editors (ABEs) that mediate the conversion of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA. We evolved a transfer RNA adenosine deaminase to operate on DNA when fused to a catalytically impaired CRISPR-Cas9 mutant. Extensive directed evolution and protein engineering resulted in seventh-generation ABEs that convert targeted A•T base pairs efficiently to G•C (approximately 50% efficiency in human cells) with high product purity (typically at least 99.9%) and low rates of indels (typically no more than 0.1%). ABEs introduce point mutations more efficiently and cleanly, and with less off-target genome modification, than a current Cas9 nuclease-based method, and can install disease-correcting or disease-suppressing mutations in human cells. Together with previous base editors, ABEs enable the direct, programmable introduction of all four transition mutations without double-stranded DNA cleavage.

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 · 10.1038/nature24644

Cites

46 of 46 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?

  • ABE generally does not induce double-strand breaks (<1%) and is therefore a favorable alternative to Cas9 for single and multiplex gene knockouts.

    “Adenine base editor (ABE), first described in 2017, generally does not induce DSBs (<1%) and is therefore a favorable alternative to Cas9 for single and multiplex gene knockouts.12,14”

    From Adenine base editor for knockout of proteins: A practical guide from design to analysis with updated MultiEditRbatch (2026) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Results (Characterization of Late-Stage ABEs; page unavailable) report <0.1% indels with ABE7.10 at five tested loci and describe base editing without introducing double-strand breaks. They do not establish a measured <1% double-strand-break rate or evaluate ABE as an alternative to Cas9 for single or multiplex gene knockouts; the comparison with Cas9 concerns point mutations. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Transition mutations occur significantly more often in human disease than transversion mutations (62% transition vs 38% transversion).

    “Yet, these mutations occur significantly more often in human disease than transversion mutations (62% transition vs 38% transversion29,63).”

    From One-step generation of tumor models by base editor multiplexing in adult stem cell-derived organoids (2023) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Abstract (page not provided) says C•G-to-T•A transitions alone account for approximately half of known human pathogenic point mutations, supporting the general prominence of transitions in disease. It does not give the claimed 62% versus 38% breakdown or a statistical comparison with transversions. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CBE converts cytosine to thymine.

    “CBE converts cytosine to thymine”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Gaudelli et al., 2017

  • ABE catalyzes editing from adenine to guanine.

    “ABE catalyzes the editing from adenine to guanine”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Gaudelli et al., 2017

  • Base editors couple Cas9 nickases with nucleotide deaminases to achieve single nucleotide conversion without introducing DSBs.

    “Base editors are one such tool, which couple Cas9 nickases with nucleotide deaminases to achieve single nucleotide conversion without introducing DSBs.”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Gaudelli et al., 2017

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
Gaudelli, N. M., Komor, A. C., Rees, H. A., Packer, M. S., Badran, A. H., Bryson, D. I., & Liu, D. R.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Liu, David R.
Venue
Nature
Published
2017-11-01
Volume
551
Issue
7681
Pages
464-471
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2766599608
Cited by
4,184
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 460 · 2025: 501 · 2024: 521 · 2023: 599 · 2022: 557 · 2021: 489 · 2020: 474 · 2019: 332 · 2018: 237 · 2017: 8 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
117.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (RM1HG009490)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM008313, F32GM106621, R35GM118062, F32GM112366)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB022376)
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
adenine base editors, base editing, cytosine deamination, CRISPR/Cas9, directed evolution, protein engineering, transition mutations, point mutations, single nucleotide polymorphisms
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, Adenosine Deaminase, DNA, Humans, Models, Molecular, Genome, Human, Base Pairing, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Cell Line, Tumor, DNA Cleavage, HEK293 Cells, CRISPR-Associated Proteins

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