CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 412

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improving the DNA specificity and applicability of base editing through protein engineering and protein delivery

Rees, Holly A., Komor, Alexis C., Yeh, Wei-Hsi, Caetano-Lopes, Joana, Warman, Matthew, Edge, Albert S. B., Liu, David R.·2017·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/ncomms15790PMC PMC5467206
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We recently developed base editing, a genome-editing approach that enables the programmable conversion of one base pair into another without double-stranded DNA cleavage, excess stochastic insertions and deletions, or dependence on homology-directed repair. The application of base editing is limited by off-target activity and reliance on intracellular DNA delivery. Here we describe two advances that address these limitations. First, we greatly reduce off-target base editing by installing mutations into our third-generation base editor (BE3) to generate a high-fidelity base editor (HF-BE3). Next, we purify and deliver BE3 and HF-BE3 as ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes into mammalian cells, establishing DNA-free base editing. RNP delivery of BE3 confers higher specificity even than plasmid transfection of HF-BE3, while maintaining comparable on-target editing levels. Finally, we apply these advances to deliver BE3 RNPs into both zebrafish embryos and the inner ear of live mice to achieve specific, DNA-free base editing in vivo .

Overview

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/ncomms15790

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Cox, D. B., Platt, R. J. & Zhang, F. Therapeutic genome editing: prospects and challenges. Nat. Med. 21, 121–131 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Komor, A. C., Badran, A. H. & Liu, D. R. CRISPR-based technologies for the manipulation of eukaryotic genomes. Cell 168, 20–36 (2017). · DOI
  3. Hilton, I. B. & Gersbach, C. A. Enabling functional genomics with genome engineering. Genome Res. 25, 1442–1455 (2015). · DOI
  4. Wyman, C. & Kanaar, R. DNA double-strand break repair: all’s well that ends well. Annu. Rev. Genet. 40, 363–383 (2006). · DOI
  5. Bodles-Brakhop, A. M., Heller, R. & Draghia-Akli, R. Electroporation for the delivery of DNA-based vaccines and immunotherapeutics: current clinical developments. Mol. Ther. 17, 585–592 (2009). · DOI
  6. Kay, M. A., Glorioso, J. C. & Naldini, L. Viral vectors for gene therapy: the art of turning infectious agents into vehicles of therapeutics. Nat. Med. 7, 33–40 (2001). · DOI
  7. Midoux, P., Pichon, C., Yaouanc, J. J. & Jaffres, P. A. Chemical vectors for gene delivery: a current review on polymers, peptides and lipids containing histidine or imidazole as nucleic acids carriers. Br. J. Pharmacol. 157, 166–178 (2009). · DOI
  8. Yin, H. et al. Genome editing with Cas9 in adult mice corrects a disease mutation and phenotype. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 551–553 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  9. Hu, J. H., Davis, K. M. & Liu, D. R. Chemical biology approaches to genome editing: understanding, controlling, and delivering programmable nucleases. Cell Chem. Biol. 23, 57–73 (2016). · DOI
  10. Hess, G. T. et al. Directed evolution using dCas9-targeted somatic hypermutation in mammalian cells. Nat. Methods 13, 1036–1042 (2016). · DOI
  11. Ma, Y. et al. Targeted AID-mediated mutagenesis (TAM) enables efficient genomic diversification in mammalian cells. Nat. Methods 13, 1029–1035 (2016). · DOI
  12. Li, J., Sun, Y., Du, J., Zhao, Y. & Xia, L. Generation of targeted point mutations in rice by a modified CRISPR/Cas9 system. Mol Plant 10, 526–529 (2017). · DOI
  13. Koyama, S., Ishii, K. J., Coban, C. & Akira, S. Innate immune response to viral infection. Cytokine 43, 336–341 (2008). · DOI
  14. Guilinger, J. P. et al. Broad specificity profiling of TALENs results in engineered nucleases with improved DNA-cleavage specificity. Nat. Methods 11, 429–435 (2014). · DOI
  15. Singh, R., Kuscu, C., Quinlan, A., Qi, Y. J. & Adli, M. Cas9-chromatin binding information enables more accurate CRISPR off-target prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 677–683. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Liang, X. Q. et al. Rapid and highly efficient mammalian cell engineering via Cas9 protein transfection. J. Biotechnol. 208, 44–53 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Wang, M. et al. Efficient delivery of genome-editing proteins using bioreducible lipid nanoparticles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2868–2873 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Zuris, J. A. et al. Cationic lipid-mediated delivery of proteins enables efficient protein-based genome editing in vitro and in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 73–80 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  19. DeWitt, M. A. et al. Selection-free genome editing of the sickle mutation in human adult hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Sci. Transl. Med. 8, 360ra134 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Kim, K. et al. Highly efficient RNA-guided base editing in mouse embryos. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 435–437 (2017). · DOI
  21. Richardson, C. D., Ray, G. J., DeWitt, M. A., Curie, G. L. & Corn, J. E. Enhancing homology-directed genome editing by catalytically active and inactive CRISPR-Cas9 using asymmetric donor DNA. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 339–344 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Lin, Y. C. et al. Genome dynamics of the human embryonic kidney 293 lineage in response to cell biology manipulations. Nat. Commun. 5, 4767 (2014). · DOI
  23. Davis, K. M., Pattanayak, V., Thompson, D. B., Zuris, J. A. & Liu, D. R. Small molecule-triggered Cas9 protein with improved genome-editing specificity. Nat. Chem. Biol. 11, 316–318 (2015). · DOI
  24. Lin, S., Staahl, B., Alla, R. K. & Doudna, J. A. Enhanced homology-directed human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery. Elife 3, e04766 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Liu, M. & Schatz, D. G. Balancing AID and DNA repair during somatic hypermutation. Trends Immunol. 30, 173–181 (2009). · DOI
  26. Afgan, E. et al. The Galaxy platform for accessible, reproducible and collaborative biomedical analyses: 2016 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W3–W10 (2016). · DOI
  27. Blankenberg, D. et al. Manipulation of FASTQ data with Galaxy. Bioinformatics 26, 1783–1785 (2010). · DOI
  28. Hu, L. X. et al. Diphtheria toxin-induced cell death triggers Wnt-dependent hair cell regeneration in neonatal mice. J. Neurosci. 36, 9479–9489 (2016). · DOI
  29. Meeker, N. D., Hutchinson, S. A., Ho, L. & Trede, N. S. Method for isolation of PCR-ready genomic DNA from zebrafish tissues. Biotechniques 43, 612 614 (2007). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 412

Metadata

Authors
Rees, H. A., Komor, A. C., Yeh, W.-H., Caetano-Lopes, J., Warman, M., Edge, A. S. B., & Liu, D. R.
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-06-06
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2041-1723
DOI
10.1038/ncomms15790
PMC
PMC5467206
Cited by
412
References
14
Language
en
Licence

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