Cited by 49CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringVirus-based gene therapy researchCAR-T cell therapy research

Precise CRISPR-Cas-mediated gene repair with minimal off-target and unintended on-target mutations in human hematopoietic stem cells

Open access
Tran, Ngoc Tung, Danner, Eric, Li, Xun, Graf, Robin, Lebedin, Mikhail, de la Rosa, Kathrin, Kühn, Ralf, Rajewsky, Klaus +1 more·2022·Science Advances

Abstract

While CRISPR-Cas9 is key for the development of gene therapy, its potential off-target mutations are still a major concern. Here, we establish a “spacer-nick” gene correction approach that combines the Cas9 D10A nickase with a pair of PAM-out sgRNAs at a distance of 200 to 350 bp. In combination with adeno-associated virus (AAV) serotype 6 template delivery, our approach led to efficient HDR in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs including long-term HSCs) and T cells, with minimal NHEJ-mediated on-target mutations. Using spacer-nick, we developed an approach to repair disease-causing mutations occurring in the HBB , ELANE , IL7R , and PRF1 genes. We achieved gene correction efficiencies of 20 to 50% with minimal NHEJ-mediated on-target mutations. On the basis of in-depth off-target assessment, frequent unintended genetic alterations induced by classical CRISPR-Cas9 were significantly reduced or absent in the HSPCs treated with spacer-nick. Thus, the spacer-nick gene correction approach provides improved safety and suitability for gene therapy.

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 · 10.1126/sciadv.abm9106

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • CRISPR/Cas9 is more favored than ZFNs and TALENs and has revolutionized the biotechnology field.

    “Designing sgRNA is more convenient, programmable and cost-effective than designing DNA binding domains, thus CRISPR/Cas9 is more favored than ZFNs and TALENs and has revolutionized the biotechnology field (Zhang et al., 2021; Tran et al., 2022).”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Tran et al., 2022

    The Introduction (page unavailable) calls CRISPR-Cas9 a powerful gene-editing tool, and Materials and Methods describes designing sgRNAs. Neither passage compares it with ZFNs or TALENs or says it is more favored or has revolutionized biotechnology. Searches for those comparisons and claims found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Designing sgRNA is more convenient, programmable and cost-effective than designing DNA binding domains.

    “Designing sgRNA is more convenient, programmable and cost-effective than designing DNA binding domains, thus CRISPR/Cas9 is more favored than ZFNs and TALENs and has revolutionized the biotechnology field (Zhang et al., 2021; Tran et al., 2022).”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Tran et al., 2022

    The Materials and Methods section describes designing and purchasing sgRNAs, but does not compare their design with DNA-binding domains. Searches for ZFNs, TALENs, and the claimed advantages found no passage in our copy addressing that comparison; page numbers were not provided. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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
Tran, N. T., Danner, E., Li, X., Graf, R., Lebedin, M., de la Rosa, K., Kühn, R., Rajewsky, K., & Chu, V. T.
Affiliations
  • Max Delbrück Center (DE)
  • Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Immune Mechanisms and Human Antibodies, Berlin, Germany.
Corresponding author
  • Tran, Ngoc Tung
  • Danner, Eric
  • Li, Xun
  • Graf, Robin
  • Rajewsky, Klaus
  • Chu, Van Trung
Venue
Science Advances
Published
2022-06-03
Volume
8
Issue
22
Pages
eabm9106-eabm9106
ISSN
2375-2548 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4281741939
Cited by
49
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 1
FWCI
3.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Science Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MDC Repository (Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL168669)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Virus-based gene therapy research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › CAR-T cell therapy research
Keywords
CRISPR/Cas9, Cas9 nickase, off-target mutations, hematopoietic stem cells, hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells, homology-directed repair, non-homologous end joining, gene therapy safety, sickle cell disease, beta-globin, neutrophil elastase, CD127, PRF1, T cells
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, Dependovirus, Hematopoietic Stem Cells, Humans, Mutation, Genetic Therapy, 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