Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35682671›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Improving Homology-Directed Repair in Genome Editing Experiments by Influencing the Cell Cycle.

Svetlana A Smirnikhina, Milyausha I Zaynitdinova, Vasilina A Sergeeva, Alexander V Lavrov

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. CRISPR Gene Tagging for Illuminating Endogenous Protein Dynamics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. TheInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Genome engineering with Cas9 and AAV repair templates, successes and pitfalls.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. RevolutionizingFrontiers in genome editing · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Efficient Editing of the CXCR4 Locus Using Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein Complexes Stabilized with Polyglutamic Acid.Doklady biological sciences : proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Biological sciences sections · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Selecting for CRISPR-Edited Knock-In Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Svetlana A SmirnikhinaResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Laboratory of Genome Editing, 115478 Moscow, Russia.
Milyausha I ZaynitdinovaResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Laboratory of Genome Editing, 115478 Moscow, Russia.
Vasilina A SergeevaResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Laboratory of Genome Editing, 115478 Moscow, Russia.
Alexander V LavrovResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Laboratory of Genome Editing, 115478 Moscow, Russia.
Research Centre for Medical Genetics · RU

Funding

Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation none
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome editing is currently widely used in biomedical research; however, the use of this method in the clinic is still limited because of its low efficiency and possible side effects. Moreover, the correction of mutations that cause diseases in humans seems to be extremely important and promising. Numerous attempts to improve the efficiency of homology-directed repair-mediated correction of mutations in mammalian cells have focused on influencing the cell cycle. Homology-directed repair is known to occur only in the late S and G2 phases of the cell cycle, so researchers are looking for safe ways to enrich the cell culture with cells in these phases of the cell cycle. This review surveys the main approaches to influencing the cell cycle in genome editing experiments (predominantly using Cas9), for example, the use of cell cycle synchronizers, mitogens, substances that affect cyclin-dependent kinases, hypothermia, inhibition of p53, etc. Despite the fact that all these approaches have a reversible effect on the cell cycle, it is necessary to use them with caution, since cells during the arrest of the cell cycle can accumulate mutations, which can potentially lead to their malignant transformation.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingAnimalsCell CycleCell DivisionHumansMammalsRecombinational DNA Repaircell cycleCRISPR-Cas9HDRmitogensp53

Identifiers

PMID35682671
PMCPMC9181127
OpenAlexW4281611386

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.