Prime editing progress.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Erucic Acid, Derived by Lactobacillus Crispatus, Induces Ferroptosis in Cervical Cancer Organoids Through the PPAR-δ Signaling Pathway.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
   Article
2. Genome-wide profiling of prime editor off-target sites in vitro and in vivo using PE-tag.Nature methods · 2023
   Article
3. Strategies and Methods for Improving the Efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 Gene Editing in Plant Molecular Breeding.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
   Review
4. Prime Editor 3 Mediated Beta-Thalassemia Mutations of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  High-efficiency prime editing with optimized, paired pegRNAs in plants.2021
• Comment on
  Genome-wide specificity of prime editors in plants.2021
• Comment on
  CRISPR prime editing with ribonucleoprotein complexes in zebrafish and primary human cells.2022

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as