Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34315458›Full record

ArticleBMC biotechnology2021

Analysis of conventional and alternative CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing to enhance a single-base pair knock-in mutation.

Carina Edmondson, Qi Zhou, Xuan Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carina EdmondsonDepartment of Biochemistry, University of California, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA.
Qi ZhouDepartment of Biochemistry, University of California, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA.
Xuan LiuDepartment of Biochemistry, University of California, Riverside, CA, 92521, USA. xuan.liu@ucr.edu.
University of California, Riverside · US

Funding

Regulation of p53 by TAFII250R01CA075180 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI LIU, XUAN · 2002 to 2020
$4.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA075180
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of CRISPR/Cas9 technologies in generating single-base pair knock-in mutations has recently exploded in the number of methods available. However, with the growing expansion of new technologies, it can be difficult to determine the best method for genome editing.

resultsIn this study, we evaluated a number of CRISPR/Cas9 approaches for deriving cell lines with knock-in base pair edits to create a phosphorylation mutation and provide a breakdown of editing efficiencies and suggestions for improvement. Overall, our studies suggest that using pre-formed ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes is a reliable editing method to generate homozygous single-base pair mutations. We also show that antibiotic selection coupled homologous recombination is an efficient tool for generating highly specific heterozygous mutations.

conclusionThe methods and/or combination of methods outlined in this study can be used to help other researchers with similar goals in single-base pair genome editing.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsMutationBase PairingCRISPR-Associated Protein 9Gene EditingGene Knock-In TechniquesHumansPhosphorylationRibonucleoproteinsTumor Suppressor Protein p53CRISPR-Associated Protein 9RibonucleoproteinsTP53 protein, humanTumor Suppressor Protein p53Base editing efficiencyCRISPR/Cas9Knock-in mutation

Identifiers

PMID34315458
PMCPMC8317408
OpenAlexW3184626715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.