CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prime Editing: Genome Editing for Rare Genetic Diseases Without Double-Strand Breaks or Donor DNA

Matsoukas, Ianis G.·2020·Frontiers in Genetics
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2020.00528PMC PMC7296174
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.3389/fgene.2020.00528

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Structure and function of prime editor. The conventional CRISPR DNA editor (A). CRISPR relies on the ability of CRISPR gRNAs to target the Cas9 endonuclease to precise genomic locations, where Cas9 introduces DSBs. Base editors do not digest the double strand, but instead they chemically alter single bases with deaminase enzymes such as TadA (B, DNA base editor) and ADAR (C, RNA base editor). Prime editor (D) involves a longer-than-usual gRNA, known as pegRNA, and a fusion protein consisting of Cas9 H840A nickase fused to a modified RT enzyme. The Cas9 element of the prime editor digest the genomic DNA and the RT element polymerises DNA onto the nicked strand based on the pegRNA sequence (E). Adapted from Anzalone et al. (2019) and Matsoukas (2018a).
Figure 1 Structure and function of prime editor. The conventional CRISPR DNA editor (A). CRISPR relies on the ability of CRISPR gRNAs to target the Cas9 endonuclease to precise genomic locations, where Cas9 introduces DSBs. Base editors do not digest the double strand, but instead they chemically alter single bases with deaminase enzymes such as TadA (B, DNA base editor) and ADAR (C, RNA base editor). Prime editor (D) involves a longer-than-usual gRNA, known as pegRNA, and a fusion protein consisting of Cas9 H840A nickase fused to a modified RT enzyme. The Cas9 element of the prime editor digest the genomic DNA and the RT element polymerises DNA onto the nicked strand based on the pegRNA sequence (E). Adapted from Anzalone et al. (2019) and Matsoukas (2018a).CC BY · PubMed Central

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

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Anzalone, 2019, Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA, Nature, 576, 149, 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Asante, 2015, A naturally occurring variant of the human prion protein completely prevents prion disease, Nature, 522, 478, 10.1038/nature14510 · DOI
  3. Bollen, 2018, How to create state-of-the-art genetic model systems: strategies for optimal CRISPR-mediated genome editing, Nucleic Acids Res, 46, 6435, 10.1093/nar/gky571 · DOI
  4. Charpentier, 2013, Rewriting a genome, Nature, 495, 50, 10.1038/495050a · DOI
  5. Cong, 2013, Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems, Science, 339, 819, 10.1126/science.1231143 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Cox, 2017, RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13, Science, 358, 1019, 10.1126/science.aaq0180 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Cox, 2015, Therapeutic genome editing: Prospects and challenges, Nat. Med, 21, 121, 10.1038/nm.3793 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Davis, 2013, DNA double strand break repair via non-homologous end-joining, Transl. Cancer Res, 2, 130, 10.3978/j.issn.2218-676X.2013.04.02 · DOI
  9. Gehrke, 2018, An apobec3a-cas9 base editor with minimized bystander and off-target activities, Nat. Biotechnol, 36, 77, 10.1038/nbt.4199 · DOI
  10. Hilton, 2015, Enabling functional genomics with genome engineering, Genome Res, 25, 1442, 10.1101/gr.190124.115 · DOI
  11. Hsu, 2014, Development and applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for genome engineering, Cell, 157, 1262, 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.010 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Jinek, 2013, RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells, Elife, 2, e00471, 10.7554/eLife.00471 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Kamens, 2015, The addgene repository: an international nonprofit plasmid and data resource, Nucleic Acids Res, 43, D1152, 10.1093/nar/gku893 · DOI
  14. Kim, 2019, Adenine base editors catalyze cytosine conversions in human cells, Nat. Biotechnol, 37, 1145, 10.1038/s41587-019-0254-4 · DOI
  15. Kim, 2017, Increasing the genome-targeting scope and precision of base editing with engineered Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusions, Nat. Biotechnol, 35, 371, 10.1038/nbt.3803 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Komor, 2017, Improved base excision repair inhibition and bacteriophage Mu Gam protein yields C:G-to-T: a base editors with higher efficiency and product purity, Sci. Adv., 3, eaao4774, 10.1126/sciadv.aao4774 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Kügler, 2003, Human synapsin 1 gene promoter confers highly neuron-specific long-term transgene expression from an adenoviral vector in the adult rat brain depending on the transduced area, Gene Ther, 10, 337, 10.1038/sj.gt.3301905 · DOI
  18. Li, 2008, Homologous recombination in DNA repair and DNA damage tolerance, Cell Res, 18, 99, 10.1038/cr.2008.1 · DOI
  19. Li, 2018, Base editing with a Cpf1-cytidine deaminase fusion, Nat. Biotechnol, 36, 324, 10.1038/nbt.4102 · DOI
  20. Lukacs, 2012, CFTR: folding, misfolding and correcting the ΔF508 conformational defect, Trends Mol. Med, 18, 81, 10.1016/j.molmed.2011.10.003 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Mali, 2013, RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9, Science, 339, 823, 10.1126/science.1232033 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Matsoukas, Commentary: programmable base editing of A·T to G·C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage, Front. Genet, 9, 21, 10.3389/fgene.2018.00021 · DOI
  23. Matsoukas, Commentary: RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13, Front. Genet, 9, 134, 10.3389/fgene.2018.00134 · DOI
  24. McGinniss, 2002, Eight novel mutations in the HEXA gene, Genet. Med, 4, 158, 10.1097/00125817-200205000-00010 · DOI
  25. Molla, 2019, CRISPR/Cas-mediated base editing: technical considerations and practical applications, Trends Biotechnol, 37, 1121, 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.03.008 · DOI
  26. Rees, 2018, Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells, Nat. Rev. Genet, 19, 770, 10.1038/s41576-018-0059-1 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Savic, 2018, Covalent linkage of the DNA repair template to the CRISPR-Cas9 nuclease enhances homology-directed repair, Elife, 7, e33761, 10.7554/eLife.33761 · DOI
  28. Sharon, 2018, Functional genetic variants revealed by massively parallel precise genome editing, Cell, 175, 544, 10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.057 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Song, 2017, Optimizing the DNA donor template for homology-directed repair of double-strand breaks, Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids, 7, 53, 10.1016/j.omtn.2017.02.006 · DOI
  30. Sternberg, 2015, Expanding the biologist's toolkit with CRISPR-Cas9, Mol. Cell, 58, 568, 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.02.032 · DOI
  31. Wang, 2018, Efficient base editing in methylated regions with a human apobec3a-cas9 fusion, Nat. Biotechnol, 36, 946, 10.1038/nbt.4198 · DOI
  32. Yang, 2019, Development and application of base editors, Cris. J, 2, 91, 10.1089/crispr.2019.0001 · DOI
  33. Yang, 2014, CRISPR/Cas9-directed genome editing of cultured cells, Curr. Protoc. Mol. Biol, 107, 31.1.1, 10.1002/0471142727.mb3101s107 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Matsoukas, I. G.
Venue
Frontiers in Genetics
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2020-06-09
Volume
11
ISSN
1664-8021
DOI
10.3389/fgene.2020.00528
PMC
PMC7296174
Cited by
65
References
6
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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