Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34825222›Full record

ArticleSTAR protocols2021

Optimized electroporation of CRISPR-Cas9/gRNA ribonucleoprotein complex for selection-free homologous recombination in human pluripotent stem cells.

Huaigeng Xu, Yuto Kita, Uikyu Bang, Peter Gee, Akitsu Hotta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in STAR protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. CRISPR-Cas Systems: A Functional Perspective and Innovations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Patient-derived and gene-edited pluripotent stem cells lackingFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Huaigeng XuDepartment of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Yuto KitaCenter for iPS cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Uikyu BangCenter for iPS cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Peter GeeMaxCyte Inc., Gaithersburg, USA.
Akitsu HottaCenter for iPS cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Kyoto University · JPMaxCyte (United States) · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selection-free, scarless genome editing in human pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) by utilizing ribonucleoprotein (RNP) of CRISPR-Cas9 is a useful tool for a variety of applications. However, the process can be hampered by time-consuming subcloning steps and inefficient delivery of the RNP complex and ssDNA template. Here, we describe the optimized protocol to introduce a single nucleotide change or a loxP site insertion in feeder-free, xeno-free iPSCs by utilizing MaxCyte and 4D-Nucleofector electroporators. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Kagita et al. (2021) and Xu et al. (2019).

Indexed as

Pluripotent Stem CellsRibonucleoproteinsAdultCRISPR-Cas SystemsDNA, Single-StrandedElectroporationFemaleGene EditingHomologous RecombinationHumansMaleRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsDNA, Single-StrandedRibonucleoproteinsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsCell isolationCRISPRGeneticsMolecular BiologyStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID34825222
PMCPMC8605105
OpenAlexW3211497439

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.