Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28095454›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Non-Homologous End Joining and Homology Directed DNA Repair Frequency of Double-Stranded Breaks Introduced by Genome Editing Reagents.

Michail Zaboikin, Tatiana Zaboikina, Carl Freter, Narasimhachar Srinivasakumar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. HIV cure strategies: which ones are appropriate for Africa?Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michail ZaboikinDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Tatiana ZaboikinaDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Carl FreterDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Narasimhachar SrinivasakumarDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3951-655X
Saint Louis University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing using transcription-activator like effector nucleases or RNA guided nucleases allows one to precisely engineer desired changes within a given target sequence. The genome editing reagents introduce double stranded breaks (DSBs) at the target site which can then undergo DNA repair by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) or homology directed recombination (HDR) when a template DNA molecule is available. NHEJ repair results in indel mutations at the target site. As PCR amplified products from mutant target regions are likely to exhibit different melting profiles than PCR products amplified from wild type target region, we designed a high resolution melting analysis (HRMA) for rapid identification of efficient genome editing reagents. We also designed TaqMan assays using probes situated across the cut site to discriminate wild type from mutant sequences present after genome editing. The experiments revealed that the sensitivity of the assays to detect NHEJ-mediated DNA repair could be enhanced by selection of transfected cells to reduce the contribution of unmodified genomic DNA from untransfected cells to the DNA melting profile. The presence of donor template DNA lacking the target sequence at the time of genome editing further enhanced the sensitivity of the assays for detection of mutant DNA molecules by excluding the wild-type sequences modified by HDR. A second TaqMan probe that bound to an adjacent site, outside of the primary target cut site, was used to directly determine the contribution of HDR to DNA repair in the presence of the donor template sequence. The TaqMan qPCR assay, designed to measure the contribution of NHEJ and HDR in DNA repair, corroborated the results from HRMA. The data indicated that genome editing reagents can produce DSBs at high efficiency in HEK293T cells but a significant proportion of these are likely masked by reversion to wild type as a result of HDR. Supplying a donor plasmid to provide a template for HDR (that eliminates a PCR amplifiable target) revealed these cryptic DSBs and facilitated the determination of the true efficacy of genome editing reagents. The results indicated that in HEK293T cells, approximately 40% of the DSBs introduced by genome editing, were available for participation in HDR.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedGene EditingGenetic EngineeringHomologous RecombinationDNA End-Joining RepairFactor VIIIGenome, HumanHEK293 CellsHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionTranscription Activator-Like Effector NucleasesFactor VIIITranscription Activator-Like Effector Nucleases

Identifiers

PMID28095454
PMCPMC5241150
OpenAlexW2576881285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.