Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29383448›Full record

ArticleMolecular genetics and genomics : MGG2018

A comparison of CRISPR/Cas9 and siRNA-mediated ALDH2 gene silencing in human cell lines.

Fei Wang, Tao Guo, Hongmei Jiang, Ruobi Li, Ting Wang, Ni Zeng, Guanghui Dong, Xiaowen Zeng, Daochuan Li, Yongmei Xiao and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Connexin 43 Hemichannels Regulate Osteoblast to Osteocyte Differentiation.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fei WangA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Tao GuoA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Hongmei JiangA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Ruobi LiA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Ting WangA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Ni ZengA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Guanghui DongA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Xiaowen ZengA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Daochuan LiA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Yongmei XiaoA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Qiansheng HuA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Wen ChenA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Xiumei XingA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China. xingxm3@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Qing WangA Key Laboratory of Guangzhou Environmental Pollution and Risk Assessment, Department of Toxicology, Faculty of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China. wangq27@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

the National Natural Science Foundations of China 81273098the National Natural Science Foundations of China 81402715the National Natural Science Foundations of China 81673140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene knockdown and knockout using RNAi and CRISPR/Cas9 allow for efficient evaluation of gene function, but it is unclear how the choice of technology can influence the results. To compare the phenotypes obtained using siRNA and CRISPR/Cas9 technologies, aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (ALDH2) was selected as an example. In this study, we constructed one HepG2 cell line with a homozygous mutation in the fifth exon of ALDH2 (ALDH2-KO1 cell) using the eukaryotic CRISPR/Cas9 expression system followed by the limited dilution method and one HepG2 cell line with different mutations in the ALDH2 gene (ALDH2-KO2 cell) using the lentivirus CRISPR/Cas9 system. Additionally, one ALDH2-knockdown (KD) HepG2 cell line was created using siRNA. The reproducibility of these methods was further verified in the HEK293FT cell line. We found that the mRNA expression level of ALDH2 was significantly decreased and the protein expression level of ALDH2 was completely abolished in the ALDH2-KO cell lines, but not in ALDH2-KD cells. Furthermore, the functional activity of ALDH2 was also markedly disrupted in the two ALDH2-KO cell lines compared with ALDH2-KD and wild-type cells. The lack of ALDH2 expression mediated by CRIPSR/Cas9 resulted in a more dramatic increase in the cellular susceptibility to chemical-induced reactive oxygen species generation, cytotoxicity, apoptosis, and inflammation, especially at low concentrations compared with ALDH2-KD and WT cells. Therefore, we consider the gene knockout cell line created by CRISPR/Cas9 to be a more useful tool for identifying the function of a gene.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsAldehyde Dehydrogenase, MitochondrialGene Expression RegulationGene SilencingHEK293 CellsHep G2 CellsHomozygoteHumansMutationPhenotypeReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Small InterferingAldehyde Dehydrogenase, MitochondrialALDH2 protein, humanRNA, Small InterferingALDH2CRISPR/Cas9Gene knockoutHepG2

Identifiers

PMID29383448
OpenAlexW2785944607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.