DearEditor,The CRISPR-mediated genome editing tools,including nucleases,base editors(ABE/CBE),transposases/recombinases,and prime editor(PE),have been extensively applied in basic and clinical researches,although the ...DearEditor,The CRISPR-mediated genome editing tools,including nucleases,base editors(ABE/CBE),transposases/recombinases,and prime editor(PE),have been extensively applied in basic and clinical researches,although the off-target effect remains a major concern(Anzalone et al.,2020).Recently,various methods have been developed to assess the specificity and accuracy of different tools(Zhang et al.,2021),yet each method is designed for limited editing systems,and none of them can simultaneously detect off-target sites in vivo and in vitro.A versatile method for profiling genome-wide off-target effects of various tools remains lacking.展开更多
More than 32,000 pathogenic single nucleotide polymorphisms(SNPs)have been identified in the human genome(Gaudelli et al.,2017).Genetically modified mice with pathogenic SNPs are good models for studies of disease pat...More than 32,000 pathogenic single nucleotide polymorphisms(SNPs)have been identified in the human genome(Gaudelli et al.,2017).Genetically modified mice with pathogenic SNPs are good models for studies of disease pathogenesis and the development of new therapeutics.Accordingly,an efficient,high-throughput method for the generation of mouse models with SNPs is needed.展开更多
Dear Editor, Many human genetic diseases are caused by pathogenic single nucleotide mutations. Animal models are often used to study these diseases where the pathogenic point mutations are created and/or corrected thr...Dear Editor, Many human genetic diseases are caused by pathogenic single nucleotide mutations. Animal models are often used to study these diseases where the pathogenic point mutations are created and/or corrected through gene editing (e.g., the CRISPP-JCas9 system) (Komor et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2017). CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing depends on DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), which can be of low efficiency and lead to indels and off-target cleavage (Kim et al., 2016). We and others have shown that base editors (BEs) may represent an attractive alternative for disease mouse model generation (Liang et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2017). Compared to CRISPR/ Cas9, cytidine base editors (CBEs) can generate C·G to T·A mutations in mouse zygotes without activating DSB repair pathways (Liang et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2017; Komor et al., 2016). In addition, CBEs showed much lower off-targets than CRISPR]Cas9 (Kim et al., 2017), making the editing process potentially safer and more controllable. Recently, adenine base editors (ABEs) that were developed from the tRNA- specific adenosine deaminase (TADA) of Escherichia coli were also reported (Gaudelli et al., 2017). As a RNA-guided programmable adenine deaminase, ABE can catalyze the conversion of A to I. Following DNA replication, base I is replaced by G, resulting in A·T to G·C conversion (Gaudelli et al., 2017; Hu et al., 2018). The development of ABEs has clearly expanded the editing capacity and application of BEs. Here, we tested whether ABEs could effectively generate disease mouse models, and found high efficiency by ABEs in producing edited mouse zygotes and mice with single-nucleotide substitutions.展开更多
基金supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China to G.Z.L.(National Science and Technology Major Project,grant nos.2018YFA0109100,2019YFA0802203)National Natural Science Foundation of China to G.z.L.(Grant Nos.31922015,31870808,91753129)+1 种基金Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province to G.Z.L.(Grant No.2018B030306044)Guangdong Special Support Program to P.L.(2019BT02Y276).
文摘DearEditor,The CRISPR-mediated genome editing tools,including nucleases,base editors(ABE/CBE),transposases/recombinases,and prime editor(PE),have been extensively applied in basic and clinical researches,although the off-target effect remains a major concern(Anzalone et al.,2020).Recently,various methods have been developed to assess the specificity and accuracy of different tools(Zhang et al.,2021),yet each method is designed for limited editing systems,and none of them can simultaneously detect off-target sites in vivo and in vitro.A versatile method for profiling genome-wide off-target effects of various tools remains lacking.
基金supported by the National Key R&D Program of China(2017YFC1001901,2017YFA0102801 and 2017YFC1001603)the National Natural Science Foundation of China(91640119,31671540,81330055 and 31601196)+3 种基金the Guangdong Special Support Program(2019BT02Y276)the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province(2016A030310206 and 2014A030312011)the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province(2015B020228002)the Guangzhou Science and Technology Project(201707010085 and 201803010020)。
文摘More than 32,000 pathogenic single nucleotide polymorphisms(SNPs)have been identified in the human genome(Gaudelli et al.,2017).Genetically modified mice with pathogenic SNPs are good models for studies of disease pathogenesis and the development of new therapeutics.Accordingly,an efficient,high-throughput method for the generation of mouse models with SNPs is needed.
文摘Dear Editor, Many human genetic diseases are caused by pathogenic single nucleotide mutations. Animal models are often used to study these diseases where the pathogenic point mutations are created and/or corrected through gene editing (e.g., the CRISPP-JCas9 system) (Komor et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2017). CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing depends on DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), which can be of low efficiency and lead to indels and off-target cleavage (Kim et al., 2016). We and others have shown that base editors (BEs) may represent an attractive alternative for disease mouse model generation (Liang et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2017). Compared to CRISPR/ Cas9, cytidine base editors (CBEs) can generate C·G to T·A mutations in mouse zygotes without activating DSB repair pathways (Liang et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2017; Komor et al., 2016). In addition, CBEs showed much lower off-targets than CRISPR]Cas9 (Kim et al., 2017), making the editing process potentially safer and more controllable. Recently, adenine base editors (ABEs) that were developed from the tRNA- specific adenosine deaminase (TADA) of Escherichia coli were also reported (Gaudelli et al., 2017). As a RNA-guided programmable adenine deaminase, ABE can catalyze the conversion of A to I. Following DNA replication, base I is replaced by G, resulting in A·T to G·C conversion (Gaudelli et al., 2017; Hu et al., 2018). The development of ABEs has clearly expanded the editing capacity and application of BEs. Here, we tested whether ABEs could effectively generate disease mouse models, and found high efficiency by ABEs in producing edited mouse zygotes and mice with single-nucleotide substitutions.