ArticleNature communications2019
Targeting specificity of APOBEC-based cytosine base editor in human iPSCs determined by whole genome sequencing.
Article in Nature communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research progress of base editing and prime editing tools based on the CRISPR/Cas system.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Review
- A compact base editor rescues AATD-associated liver and lung disease in mouse models.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Article
- Precision multiplexed base editing in human cells using Cas12a-derived base editors.Nature communications · 2025Article
- SeqVerify: An accessible analysis tool for cell line genomic integrity, contamination, and gene editing outcomes.Stem cell reports · 2024Article
- Engineering APOBEC3A deaminase for highly accurate and efficient base editing.Nature chemical biology · 2024Article
- CRISPR technologies for genome, epigenome and transcriptome editing.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2024Review
- An engineered baculoviral protein and DNA co-delivery system for CRISPR-based mammalian genome editing.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 Landscape: Current State and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- SeqVerify: An accessible analysis tool for cell line genomic integrity, contamination, and gene editing outcomes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Progress and Prospects of Gene Editing in Pluripotent Stem Cells.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Comparison of TRIBE and STAMP for identifying targets of RNA binding proteins in human andRNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Detect-seq, a chemical labeling and biotin pull-down approach for the unbiased and genome-wide off-target evaluation of programmable cytosine base editors.Nature protocols · 2023Review
- Recent advances in CRISPR-based genome editing technology and its applications in cardiovascular research.Military Medical Research · 2023Review
- High-Efficiency CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Correction of a Homozygous Mutation in Achromatopsia-Patient-Derived iPSCs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Challenges of Gene Editing Therapies for Genodermatoses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Similar deamination activities but different phenotypic outcomes induced by APOBEC3 enzymes in breast epithelial cells.Frontiers in genome editing · 2023Article
- Review
- Current landscape of gene-editing technology in biomedicine: Applications, advantages, challenges, and perspectives.MedComm · 2022Review
- Cytosine base editing systems with minimized off-target effect and molecular size.Nature communications · 2022Article
- The use of new CRISPR tools in cardiovascular research and medicine.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2022Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
DNA base editors have enabled genome editing without generating DNA double strand breaks. The applications of this technology have been reported in a variety of animal and plant systems, however, their editing specificity in human stem cells has not been studied by unbiased genome-wide analysis. Here we investigate the fidelity of cytidine deaminase-mediated base editing in human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by whole genome sequencing after sustained or transient base editor expression. While base-edited iPSC clones without significant off-target modifications are identified, this study also reveals the potential of APOBEC-based base editors in inducing unintended point mutations outside of likely in silico-predicted CRISPR-Cas9 off-targets. The majority of the off-target mutations are C:G->T:A transitions or C:G->G:C transversions enriched for the APOBEC mutagenesis signature. These results demonstrate that cytosine base editor-mediated editing may result in unintended genetic modifications with distinct patterns from that of the conventional CRISPR-Cas nucleases.
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.