Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31739790›Full record

ArticleBMC biology2019

Concurrent genome and epigenome editing by CRISPR-mediated sequence replacement.

Jes Alexander, Gregory M Findlay, Martin Kircher, Jay Shendure

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jes AlexanderDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Gregory M FindlayDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Martin KircherDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jay ShendureDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. shendure@uw.edu.
University of Washington · USBrotman Baty Institute · US

Funding

Interpreting Genetic Variants of Uncertain SignificanceDP1HG007811 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SHENDURE, JAY ASHOK · 2013 to 2017
$3.8M
Genome editing to determine functional consequences of thousands of potentially pathogenic variantsF30CA213728 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FINDLAY, GREGORY · 2017 to 2020
$130k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNCI NIH HHS F30 CA213728NHGRI NIH HHS DP1 HG007811
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent advances in genome editing have facilitated the direct manipulation of not only the genome, but also the epigenome. Genome editing is typically performed by introducing a single CRISPR/Cas9-mediated double-strand break (DSB), followed by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ)- or homology-directed repair-mediated repair. Epigenome editing, and in particular methylation of CpG dinucleotides, can be performed using catalytically inactive Cas9 (dCas9) fused to a methyltransferase domain. However, for investigations of the role of methylation in gene silencing, studies based on dCas9-methyltransferase have limited resolution and are potentially confounded by the effects of binding of the fusion protein. As an alternative strategy for epigenome editing, we tested CRISPR/Cas9 dual cutting of the genome in the presence of in vitro methylated exogenous DNA, with the aim of driving replacement of the DNA sequence intervening the dual cuts via NHEJ.

resultsIn a proof of concept at the HPRT1 promoter, successful replacement events with heavily methylated alleles of a CpG island resulted in functional silencing of the HPRT1 gene. Although still limited in efficiency, our study demonstrates concurrent epigenome and genome editing in a single event.

conclusionsThis study opens the door to investigations of the functional consequences of methylation patterns at single CpG dinucleotide resolution. Our results furthermore support the conclusion that promoter methylation is sufficient to functionally silence gene expression.

Indexed as

AnimalsBase SequenceCRISPR-Cas SystemsCtenophoraEpigenomeGene EditingGenomeCRISPR/Cas9DNA methylationEpigenome editingGene silencingGenome editingHPRT1

Identifiers

PMID31739790
PMCPMC6862751
OpenAlexW2987733442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.