Cited by 117CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseChromatin Remodeling and Cancer

Protospacer adjacent motif (PAM)-distal sequences engage CRISPR Cas9 DNA target cleavage

Open access
Cencic, Regina, Miura, Hisashi, Malina, Abba, Robert, Francis, Ethier, Sylvain, Schmeing, T. Martin, Dostie, Josée, Pelletier, Jerry·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)-associated enzyme Cas9 is an RNA-guided nuclease that has been widely adapted for genome editing in eukaryotic cells. However, the in vivo target specificity of Cas9 is poorly understood and most studies rely on in silico predictions to define the potential off-target editing spectrum. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing (ChIP-seq), we delineate the genome-wide binding panorama of catalytically inactive Cas9 directed by two different single guide (sg) RNAs targeting the Trp53 locus. Cas9:sgRNA complexes are able to load onto multiple sites with short seed regions adjacent to (5')NGG(3') protospacer adjacent motifs (PAM). Yet among 43 ChIP-seq sites harboring seed regions analyzed for mutational status, we find editing only at the intended on-target locus and one off-target site. In vitro analysis of target site recognition revealed that interactions between the 5' end of the guide and PAM-distal target sequences are necessary to efficiently engage Cas9 nucleolytic activity, providing an explanation for why off-target editing is significantly lower than expected from ChIP-seq data.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0109213

Cites

33 of 33 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?

  • Other publications observed a much lower validation rate for dCas9 ChIP-Seq.

    “However, other publications observed a much lower validation rate (Cencic et al., 2014; Duan et al., 2014; Tsai et al., 2015).”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Cencic et al., 2014

  • Cas9 could associate with genomic loci without exerting its nuclease function, which is a major caveat in Cas9 ChIP-Seq-based off-target detection assays.

    “These studies indicated that Cas9 could associate with genomic loci without exerting its nuclease function, deposing a major caveat in Cas9 ChIP-Seq-based off-target detection assay.”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Cencic et al., 2014

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
Cencic, R., Miura, H., Malina, A., Robert, F., Ethier, S., Schmeing, T. M., Dostie, J., & Pelletier, J.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Institut du cancer Rosalind & Morris Goodman (CA)
Corresponding author
Pelletier, Jerry
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-10-02
Volume
9
Issue
10
Pages
e109213
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970617888
Cited by
117
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship@McGill (McGill) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP106615, 106530_1, 86716_1, 106615)
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 › Chromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Keywords
CRISPR/Cas9, protospacer adjacent motif, off-target editing, target specificity, single guide RNA, Trp53, seed region, genome-wide binding, ChIP-seq, genome editing
MeSH terms
Animals, Base Sequence, Cells, Cultured, Molecular Sequence Data, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid, Chromatin Immunoprecipitation, Mice, DNA Cleavage, Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats

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