Cited by 4,767CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseVirus-based gene therapy research

Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA

Open access
Anzalone, Andrew V., Randolph, Peyton B., Davis, Jessie R., Sousa, Alexander A., Koblan, Luke W., Levy, Jonathan M., Chen, Peter J., Wilson, Christopher +3 more·2019·Nature

Abstract

Most genetic variants that contribute to disease 1 are challenging to correct efficiently and without excess byproducts 2-5. Here we describe prime editing, a versatile and precise genome editing method that directly writes new genetic information into a specified DNA site using a catalytically impaired Cas9 endonuclease fused to an engineered reverse transcriptase, programmed with a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) that both specifies the target site and encodes the desired edit. We performed more than 175 edits in human cells, including targeted insertions, deletions, and all 12 types of point mutation, without requiring double-strand breaks or donor DNA templates. We used prime editing in human cells to correct, efficiently and with few byproducts, the primary genetic causes of sickle cell disease (requiring a transversion in HBB) and Tay-Sachs disease (requiring a deletion in HEXA); to install a protective transversion in PRNP; and to insert various tags and epitopes precisely into target loci. Four human cell lines and primary post-mitotic mouse cortical neurons support prime editing with varying efficiencies. Prime editing shows higher or similar efficiency and fewer byproducts than homology-directed repair, has complementary strengths and weaknesses compared to base editing, and induces much lower off-target editing than Cas9 nuclease at known Cas9 off-target sites. Prime editing substantially expands the scope and capabilities of genome editing, and in principle could correct up to 89% of known genetic variants associated with human diseases.

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/s41586-019-1711-4

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • The first base directly downstream of the scaffold in the pegRNA may never be a C because it can interfere with the 3D structure of the sgRNA backbone and decrease editing efficiencies.

    “the first base directly downstream of the scaffold in the pegRNA may never be a C as this can interfere with the 3D structure of the sgRNA backbone and decrease editing efficiencies.14”

    From Protocol to create isogenic disease models from adult stem cell-derived organoids using next-generation CRISPR tools (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

    In Results > Optimization of pegRNAs, the paper reports that a C immediately after the sgRNA scaffold generally lowered editing efficiency and speculates that it can disrupt guide RNA structure. It recommends avoiding C at that position, but does not say it can never be used. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Contrary to base editing, efficient use of prime editing uses two sgRNAs that require significant optimization, resulting in need to test multiple sgRNA combinations.

    “Contrary to base editing, efficient use of prime editing uses two sgRNAs that require significant optimization for efficient use. This results in the need to test multiple sgRNA combinations to find the most effective combination65,66.”

    From One-step generation of tumor models by base editor multiplexing in adult stem cell-derived organoids (2023) · cites this paper as [65]

    The Results sections ‘Optimization of pegRNAs’ and ‘Prime editor 3 systems (PE3, PE3b)’ describe testing pegRNA designs and alternative nicking locations to improve editing outcomes (page numbers unavailable). But the paper describes PE3 as using a pegRNA plus a separate sgRNA, not two conventional sgRNAs, and PE2 does not require the second guide. It supports optimizing guide choices, but not the claim that efficient prime editing generally requires testing multiple sgRNA combinations. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Alternatives to DNA cleavage-induced editing include base editing, prime editing, and CRISPRi/CRISPRa.

    “Alternatives to DNA cleavage-induced editing include using CRISPR-Cas9 for direct chemical sequence alteration (base editing) 25,26 , providing RNA templates for gene alteration (prime editing) 27,28 , and for transcriptional control (CRISPR interference, CRISPRi; CRISPR activation, CRISPRa) 29,30 (Fig. 3).”

    From The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing (2020) · cites this paper as [28]

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prime editors combine nickase-Cas9 with a reverse transcriptase and enable introduction of all point mutations and small insertions and deletions without double-stranded breaks.

    “Prime editors, combining nickase-Cas9 (nCas9) with a reverse transcriptase, further expand DSBs-free genome engineering, allowing for the introduction of all point mutations and small insertions and deletions.14”
  • Prime editors have significantly increased the target scope of DSB-free genome engineering and can be used when no suitable base editing sgRNA can be designed or when the target mutation is an indel, small insertion or deletion.

    “Prime editors have significantly increased the target scope of DSBs-free genome engineering and can be used in cases where no suitable base editing sgRNA can be designed or if the target mutation is an indel, small insertion or deletion.”

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
Anzalone, A. V., Randolph, P. B., Davis, J. R., Sousa, A. A., Koblan, L. W., Levy, J. M., Chen, P. J., Wilson, C., Newby, G. A., Raguram, A., & Liu, D. R.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Liu, David R.
Venue
Nature
Published
2019-10-21
Volume
576
Issue
7785
Pages
149-157
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2981137429
Cited by
4,767
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 715 · 2025: 778 · 2024: 712 · 2023: 680 · 2022: 698 · 2021: 629 · 2020: 514 · 2019: 37 · 2014: 1
FWCI
155.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (RM1HG009490)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM095450, R35GM118062)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (U01AI142756)
  • 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 › Genetics › Virus-based gene therapy research
Keywords
prime editing, genome editing, Cas9 endonuclease, reverse transcriptase, sickle cell disease, Tay-Sachs disease, HBB mutations, point mutation correction, off-target editing, homology-directed repair, base editing, disease-associated mutations, human cells
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, Cell Line, DNA, Humans, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Genome, Point Mutation, DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded

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