ArticleNature communications2020
Design of efficacious somatic cell genome editing strategies for recessive and polygenic diseases.
Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- CRISPR/Cas system as a novel therapeutic strategy to combat multi-drug-resistant bacteria.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- Article
- Insulated piggyBac and FRT vectors for engineering transgenic homozygous and heterozygous eHAP cells.Biology open · 2025Article
- When synthetic biology meets medicine.Life medicine · 2024Review
- The relationship between speculation and translation in Bioethics: methods and methodologies.Monash bioethics review · 2023Article
- Trichostatin A for Efficient CRISPR-Cas9 Gene Editing of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells.The CRISPR journal · 2023Article
- Gene Modulation with CRISPR-based Tools in Human iPSC-Cardiomyocytes.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2023Review
- Review
- CRISPR/Cas: Advances, Limitations, and Applications for Precision Cancer Research.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Compound heterozygous recessive or polygenic diseases could be addressed through gene correction of multiple alleles. However, targeting of multiple alleles using genome editors could lead to mixed genotypes and adverse events that amplify during tissue morphogenesis. Here we demonstrate that Cas9-ribonucleoprotein-based genome editors can correct two distinct mutant alleles within a single human cell precisely. Gene-corrected cells in an induced pluripotent stem cell model of Pompe disease expressed the corrected transcript from both corrected alleles, leading to enzymatic cross-correction of diseased cells. Using a quantitative in silico model for the in vivo delivery of genome editors into the developing human infant liver, we identify progenitor targeting, delivery efficiencies, and suppression of imprecise editing outcomes at the on-target site as key design parameters that control the efficacy of various therapeutic strategies. This work establishes that precise gene editing to correct multiple distinct gene variants could be highly efficacious if designed appropriately.
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.