ArticleeLife2021
Rapid genome editing by CRISPR-Cas9-POLD3 fusion.
Article in eLife, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovery and engineering of retrons for precise genome editing.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Parallel Activation and Interference CRISPR (PAIR) with Sequencing Uncovers DNA Repair Networks Guiding Precision Cell Engineering.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Precision T cell correction platform for inborn errors of immunity.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Article
- Engineering tripartite gene editing machinery for highly efficient non-viral targeted genome integration.Nature communications · 2025Article
- POLD3 as Controller of Replicative DNA Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Article
- CRISPR-Cas9 Direct Fusions for Improved Genome Editing via Enhanced Homologous Recombination.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Strategies for precise gene edits in mammalian cells.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2023Review
- Proximal binding of dCas9 at a DNA double strand break stimulates homology-directed repair as a local inhibitor of classical non-homologous end joining.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- CRISPR-based genome editing through the lens of DNA repair.Molecular cell · 2022Review
- Hematopoietic stem and progenitors cells gene editing: Beyond blood disorders.Frontiers in genome editing · 2022Review
- Examination of the Cell Cycle Dependence of Cytosine and Adenine Base Editors.Frontiers in genome editing · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Precision CRISPR gene editing relies on the cellular homology-directed DNA repair (HDR) to introduce custom DNA sequences to target sites. The HDR editing efficiency varies between cell types and genomic sites, and the sources of this variation are incompletely understood. Here, we have studied the effect of 450 DNA repair protein-Cas9 fusions on CRISPR genome editing outcomes. We find the majority of fusions to improve precision genome editing only modestly in a locus- and cell-type specific manner. We identify Cas9-POLD3 fusion that enhances editing by speeding up the initiation of DNA repair. We conclude that while DNA repair protein fusions to Cas9 can improve HDR CRISPR editing, most need to be optimized to the cell type and genomic site, highlighting the diversity of factors contributing to locus-specific genome editing outcomes.
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.