ArticleScientific reports2020
Rapid, precise quantification of large DNA excisions and inversions by ddPCR.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Arrayed dual-gRNA CRISPR screening platform forMolecular therapy. Advances · 2026Article
- Monitoring biological effects of somatic cell genome editing.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Haplotype editing with CRISPR-Cas9 as a therapeutic approach for dominant-negative missense mutations in NEFL.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2026Article
- Unveiling the cut-and-repair cycle of designer nucleases in human stem and T cells via CLEAR-time dPCR.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Characterization of the role of spatial proximity of DNA double-strand breaks in the formation of CRISPR-Cas9-induced large structural variations.Genome research · 2025Article
- Haplotype editing with CRISPR/Cas9 as a therapeutic approach for dominant-negative missense mutations inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Temporal restriction of Cas9 expression improves CRISPR-mediated deletion efficacy and fidelity.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2024Article
- Quantitative analysis of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated provirus deletion in blue egg layer chicken PGCs by digital PCR.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Detection of CCR5Δ32 Mutant Alleles in Heterogeneous Cell Mixtures Using Droplet Digital PCR.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Review
- Enhancing CRISPR deletion via pharmacological delay of DNA-PKcs.Genome research · 2021Article
- Allele-Specific Gene Editing Rescues Pathology in a Human Model of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease Type 2E.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The excision of genomic sequences using paired CRISPR-Cas nucleases is a powerful tool to study gene function, create disease models and holds promise for therapeutic gene editing. However, our understanding of the factors that favor efficient excision is limited by the lack of a rapid, accurate measurement of DNA excision outcomes that is free of amplification bias. Here, we introduce ddXR (droplet digital PCR eXcision Reporter), a method that enables the accurate and sensitive detection of excisions and inversions independent of length. The method can be completed in a few hours without the need for next-generation sequencing. The ddXR method uncovered unexpectedly high rates of large (> 20 kb) excisions and inversions, while also revealing a surprisingly low dependence on linear distance, up to 170 kb. We further modified the method to measure precise repair of excision junctions and allele-specific excision, with important implications for disease modeling and therapeutic gene editing.
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.