Cited by 92CRISPR and Genetic EngineeringRNA regulation and diseaseCAR-T cell therapy research

Biased and unbiased methods for the detection of off-target cleavage by CRISPR/Cas9: An overview

Open access
Martin, Francisco, Sánchez-Hernández, Sabina, Gutiérrez-Guerrero, Alejandra, Pinedo-Gomez, Javier, Benabdellah, Karim·2016·International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Abstract

The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)-associated protein 9 endonuclease (Cas9) derived from bacterial adaptive immune systems is a revolutionary tool used in both basic and applied science. It is a versatile system that enables the genome of different species to be modified by generating double strand breaks (DSBs) at specific locations. However, all of the CRISPR/Cas9 systems can also produce DSBs at off-target sites that differ substantially from on-target sites. The generation of DSBs in locations outside the intended site can produce mutations that need to be carefully monitored, especially when using these tools for therapeutic purposes. However, off-target analyses of the CRISPR/Cas9 system have been very challenging, particularly when performed directly in cells. In this manuscript, we review the different strategies developed to identify off-targets generated by CRISPR/cas9 systems and other specific nucleases (ZFNs, TALENs) in real target cells.

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 · 10.3390/ijms17091507

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • IDLV has low sensitivity and a high false positive rate, probably due to non-specific IDLV integration and PCR amplification.

    “The disadvantages of IDLV include its low sensitivity and high false positive rate, probably due to non-specific IDLV integration and PCR amplification (Martin et al., 2016).”

    From Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing (2023) · cites this paper as Martin et al., 2016

    Section 3.2 (page unavailable) says IDLV capture detects off-target cleavage at a frequency of 1% and that many IDLV insertions occur at non-relevant genomic sites, requiring controls. Section 3.3 (page unavailable) describes GUIDE-seq detecting a lower frequency of 0.1%, supporting a relative sensitivity limitation. The paper does not attribute a high false-positive rate to PCR amplification or quantify such a rate for IDLV. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, F., Sánchez-Hernández, S., Gutiérrez-Guerrero, A., Pinedo-Gomez, J., & Benabdellah, K.
Affiliations
  • Genomic Medicine Department, GENYO—Centre for Genomics and Oncological Research Pfizer-Universidad de Granada-Junta de Andalucía, Avda de la Ilustración 114, 18007 Granada, Spain
  • Universidad de Granada (ES)
Corresponding author
Benabdellah, Karim
Venue
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2016-09-08
Volume
17
Issue
9
Pages
1507
ISSN
1422-0067 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2515083702
Cited by
92
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Molecular Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RISalud Institutional Health Repository of Andalucía (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias ISCIII (PI12/01097, PI15/02015)
  • Consejería de Economía, Innovación, Ciencia y Empleo (P09-CTS-04532, PI-57069, PI-0001/2009)
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › CAR-T cell therapy research
Keywords
CRISPR/Cas9, off-target cleavage, off-target detection, DNA double-strand breaks, genome editing, zinc finger nucleases, TALEN
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, Animals, Humans, Bias, Gene Targeting, 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