ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2017
Programmable Genome Editing Tools and their Regulation for Efficient Genome Engineering.
Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 104 citations in OpenAlex.
- Allogeneic NKG2D CAR-T Cell Therapy: A Promising Approach for Treating Solid Tumors.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Characterization of the mitochondrial genomes forIMA fungus · 2025Article
- CRISPR-Cas Systems Associated with Electrolyte-Gated Graphene-Based Transistors: How They Work and How to Combine Them.Biosensors · 2024Review
- An Update on the Application of CRISPR Technology in Clinical Practice.Molecular biotechnology · 2024Review
- In Silico Design of gRNA for CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Gene Knockout.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Fire Burn and Cauldron Bubble: What Is in Your Genome Editing Brew?Biochemistry · 2023Review
- Recent Developments in Gene Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Recent Advances in CRISPR/Cas9 Delivery Approaches for Therapeutic Gene Editing of Stem Cells.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2023Review
- Mobile and Self-Sustained Data Storage in an Extremophile Genomic DNA.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- The mitogenomes ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Variability in genome-engineering source materials: consider your starting point.Synthetic biology (Oxford, England) · 2023Review
- Article
- Novel approach to antiangiogenic factors in age-related macular degeneration therapy.Central-European journal of immunology · 2022Review
- Advances in Editing Silkworms (Insects · 2021Review
- Plant cell cultures as heterologous bio-factories for secondary metabolite production.Plant communications · 2021Review
- TALENs-an indispensable tool in the era of CRISPR: a mini review.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2021Review
- Organellar Introns in Fungi, Algae, and Plants.Cells · 2021Review
- Genome-editing approaches and applications: a brief review on CRISPR technology and its role in cancer.3 Biotech · 2021Review
- Decoupling Growth and Protein Production in CHO Cells: A Targeted Approach.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- The Mitogenomes ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Targeted genome editing has become a powerful genetic tool for studying gene function or for modifying genomes by correcting defective genes or introducing genes. A variety of reagents have been developed in recent years that can generate targeted double-stranded DNA cuts which can be repaired by the error-prone, non-homologous end joining repair system or via the homologous recombination-based double-strand break repair pathway provided a suitable template is available. These genome editing reagents require components for recognizing a specific DNA target site and for DNA-cleavage that generates the double-stranded break. In order to reduce potential toxic effects of genome editing reagents, it might be desirable to control the in vitro or in vivo activity of these reagents by incorporating regulatory switches that can reduce off-target activities and/or allow for these reagents to be turned on or off. This review will outline the various genome editing tools that are currently available and describe the strategies that have so far been employed for regulating these editing reagents. In addition, this review will examine potential regulatory switches/strategies that can be employed in the future in order to provide temporal control for these reagents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.