ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2020
CRISPR-sub: Analysis of DNA substitution mutations caused by CRISPR-Cas9 in human cells.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment of CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- CRISPR/Cas9-Based Genome Editing: Understanding Differences in DNA Repair Pathways, Profiles, and Outcomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Development ofFrontiers in genome editing · 2026Article
- CRISPR-GATE: a one-stop repository and guide to computational resources for genome editing experimentation.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Comprehensive benchmarking of genome editing quantification methods for plant applications.iScience · 2025Article
- Tailored antisense oligonucleotides designed to correct aberrant splicing reveal actionable groups of mutations for rare genetic disorders.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2024Article
- Genome editing in macroalgae: advances and challenges.Frontiers in genome editing · 2024Review
- Activity-based CRISPR scanning uncovers allostery in DNA methylation maintenance machinery.eLife · 2023Article
- Synthetic evolution of herbicide resistance using a T7 RNAP-based random DNA base editor.Life science alliance · 2022Article
- Knockout of liver fluke granulin, Ov-grn-1, impedes malignant transformation during chronic infection with Opisthorchis viverrini.PLoS pathogens · 2022Article
- Occurrence and Nature of Off-Target Modifications by CRISPR-Cas Genome Editing in Plants.ACS agricultural science & technology · 2022Review
- PE-Designer and PE-Analyzer: web-based design and analysis tools for CRISPR prime editing.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Atomic-scale insights into allosteric inhibition and evolutional rescue mechanism ofComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CRISPR-Cas9 induces DNA cleavages at desired target sites in a guide RNA-dependent manner; DNA editing occurs through the resulting activity of DNA repair processes including non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), which is dominant in mammalian cells. NHEJ repair frequently causes small insertions and deletions (indels) near DNA cleavage sites but only rarely causes nucleotide substitutions. High-throughput sequencing is the primary means of assessing indel and substitution frequencies in bulk populations of cells in the gene editing field. However, it is difficult to detect bona fide substitutions, which are embedded among experimentally-induced substitution errors, in high-throughput sequencing data. Here, we developed a novel analysis method, named CRISPR-Sub, to statistically detect Cas9-mediated substitutions in high-throughput sequencing data by comparing Mock- and CRISPR-treated samples. We first pinpointed 'hotspot positions' in target sequences at which substitution mutations were quantitatively observed much more often (p > 0.001) in CRISPR- versus Mock-treated samples. We refer to the substitution mutations in defined hotspot positions as 'apparent substitutions' and ultimately calculated 'apparent substitution frequencies' for each target. By examining 51 endogenous target sites in HeLa cells, we found that the average apparent substitution frequency was 0.8% in all queries, that apparent substitutions frequently occur near CRISPR-Cas9 cleavage sites, and that nucleotide conversion showed no meaningful nucleotide preference patterns. Furthermore, we generated NHEJ-inhibited cell lines (
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.