ArticleGene2018
Evaluating different DNA binding domains to modulate L1 ORF2p-driven site-specific retrotransposition events in human cells.
Article in Gene, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted insertion of large genetic payloads using cas directed LINE-1 reverse transcriptase.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Scanning Mutagenesis of Human Retrotransposon LINE-1 Identifies Motifs Essential for Function.Genetics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
DNA binding domains (DBDs) have been used with great success to impart targeting capabilities to a variety of proteins creating highly useful genomic tools. We evaluated the ability of five types of DBDs and strategies (AAV Rep proteins, Cre, TAL effectors, zinc finger proteins, and Cas9/gRNA system) to target the L1 ORF2 protein to drive retrotransposition of Alu inserts to specific sequences in the human genome. First, we find that the L1 ORF2 protein tolerates the addition of protein domains both at the amino- and carboxy-terminus. Although in some instances retrotransposition efficiencies slightly diminished, all fusion proteins containing an intact ORF2 were capable of driving retrotransposition. Second, the stability of individual ORF2 fusion proteins varies and difficult to predict. Third, DBDs that require the formation of multimers for target recognition are unlikely to modify targeting of ORF2p-driven insertions. Fourth, the more components needed to assemble into a complex to drive targeted retrotransposition, the less likely the strategy will increase targeted insertions. Fifth, abundance of target sequences present in the genome will likely dictate the effectiveness and efficiency of targeted insertions. Lastly, the cleavage capabilities of Cas9 (or a Cas9 nickase variant) are unable to substitute for the L1 ORF2 endonuclease domain functions, suggestive that the endonuclease domain has alternate functions needed for retrotransposition. From these studies, we conclude that the most critical component for the modification of the human L1 ORF2 protein to drive targeted insertions is the selection of the DBD due to the varying functional requirements and impacts on protein stability.
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.