ArticleChemical science2021
Element coding based accurate evaluation of CRISPR/Cas9 initial cleavage.
Article in Chemical science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isotope-encoded tetrahedral DNA for multiple SARS-CoV-2 variant diagnosis.Chemical science · 2023Article
- Standard-free single magnetic bead evaluation: a stable nanoplatform for prostate disease differentiation.Chemical science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a powerful gene editing tool, the kinetic mechanism of CRISPR/Cas9 has been the focus for its further application. Initial cleavage events as the first domino followed by nuclease end trimming significantly affect the final on-target rate. Here we propose EC-CRISPR, element coding CRISPR, an accurate evaluation platform for initial cleavage that directly characterizes the cleavage efficiency and breaking sites. We benchmarked the influence of 19 single mismatch and 3 multiple mismatch positions of DNA-sgRNA on initial cleavage, as well as various reaction conditions. Results from EC-CRISPR demonstrate that the PAM-distal single mismatch is relatively acceptable compared to the proximal one. And multiple mismatches will not only affect the cleavage efficiency, but also generate more non-site #3 cleavage. Through in-depth research of kinetic behavior, we uncovered an abnormally higher non-#3 proportion at the initial stage of cleavage by using EC-CRISPR. Together, our results provided insights into cleavage efficiency and breaking sites, demonstrating that EC-CRISPR as a novel quantitative platform for initial cleavage enables accurate comparison of efficiencies and specificities among multiple CRISPR/Cas enzymes.
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.