ArticleNucleic acids research2018
qEva-CRISPR: a method for quantitative evaluation of CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing in target and off-target sites.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- CRISPR/Cas Technology for the Diagnosis of Animal Infectious Diseases.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Comprehensive benchmarking of genome editing quantification methods for plant applications.iScience · 2025Article
- CRISPR and gene editing technologies for bleeding disorders.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2025Review
- CRISPR/Cas9-induced double-strand breaks in the huntingtin locus lead to CAG repeat contraction through DNA end resection and homology-mediated repair.BMC biology · 2024Article
- Correction of exon 2, exon 2-9 and exons 8-9 duplications in DMD patient myogenic cells by a single CRISPR/Cas9 system.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Antiretrovirals to CCR5 CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing - A paradigm shift chasing an HIV cure.Clinical immunology (Orlando, Fla.) · 2023Review
- LATE-a novel sensitive cell-based assay for the study of CRISPR/Cas9-related long-term adverse treatment effects.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2021Article
- Off-Target Analysis in Gene Editing and Applications for Clinical Translation of CRISPR/Cas9 in HIV-1 Therapy.Frontiers in genome editing · 2021Review
- Atomic-scale insights into allosteric inhibition and evolutional rescue mechanism ofComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021Article
- INDEL detection, the 'Achilles heel' of precise genome editing: a survey of methods for accurate profiling of gene editing induced indels.Nucleic acids research · 2020Review
- Effective identification of CRISPR/Cas9-induced and naturally occurred mutations in rice using a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification-based method.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2020Article
- Review
- Generation of New Isogenic Models of Huntington's Disease Using CRISPR-Cas9 Technology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- A qPCR method for genome editing efficiency determination and single-cell clone screening in human cells.Scientific reports · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing technology based on engineered nucleases has been increasingly applied for targeted modification of genes in a variety of cell types and organisms. However, the methods currently used for evaluating the editing efficiency still suffer from many limitations, including preferential detection of some mutation types, sensitivity to polymorphisms that hamper mismatch detection, lack of multiplex capability, or sensitivity to assay conditions. Here, we describe qEva-CRISPR, a new quantitative method that overcomes these limitations and allows simultaneous (multiplex) analysis of CRISPR/Cas9-induced modifications in a target and the corresponding off-targets or in several different targets. We demonstrate all of the advantages of the qEva-CRISPR method using a number of sgRNAs targeting the TP53, VEGFA, CCR5, EMX1 and HTT genes in different cell lines and under different experimental conditions. Unlike other methods, qEva-CRISPR detects all types of mutations, including point mutations and large deletions, and its sensitivity does not depend on the mutation type. Moreover, this approach allows for successful analysis of targets located in 'difficult' genomic regions. In conclusion, qEva-CRISPR may become a method of choice for unbiased sgRNA screening to evaluate experimental conditions that affect genome editing or to distinguish homology-directed repair from non-homologous end joining.
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.