ArticleMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids2018
Efficient Delivery and Nuclear Uptake Is Not Sufficient to Detect Gene Editing in CD34+ Cells Directed by a Ribonucleoprotein Complex.
Article in Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fire Burn and Cauldron Bubble: What Is in Your Genome Editing Brew?Biochemistry · 2023Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 Landscape: Current State and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Knock-In Approach to Insert the GFPMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Application of CRISPR/Cas Genomic Editing Tools for HIV Therapy: Toward Precise Modifications and Multilevel Protection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Review
- Imaging Unique DNA Sequences in Individual Cells Using a CRISPR-Cas9-Based, Split Luciferase Biosensor.Frontiers in genome editing · 2022Article
- Protocol for assessment of the efficiency of CRISPR/Cas RNP delivery to different types of target cells.PloS one · 2021Article
- Strategies in the delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing.Theranostics · 2021Review
- Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived Nanoblades loaded with Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins.Nature communications · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
CD34+ cells are prime targets for therapeutic strategies for gene editing, because modified progenitor cells have the capacity to differentiate through an erythropoietic lineage. Although experimental advances have been reported, the associated experimental protocols have largely been less than clear or robust. As such, we evaluated the relationships among cellular delivery; nuclear uptake, often viewed as the benchmark metric of successful gene editing; and single base repair. We took a combinatorial approach using single-stranded oligonucleotide and a CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein to convert wild-type HBB into the sickle cell genotype by evaluating conditions for two common delivery strategies of gene editing tools into CD34+ cells. Confocal microscopy data show that the CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein tends to accumulate at the outer membrane of the CD34+ cell nucleus when the Neon Transfection System is employed, while the ribonucleoproteins do pass into the cell nucleus when nucleofection is used. Despite the high efficiency of cellular transformation, and the traditional view of success in efficient nuclear uptake, neither delivery methodology enabled gene editing activity. Our results indicate that more stringent criteria must be established to facilitate the clinical translation and scientific robustness of gene editing for sickle cell disease.
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.