ArticlePloS one2022
Comparative analysis of dCas9-VP64 variants and multiplexed guide RNAs mediating CRISPR activation.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced gene editing technologies for oncology mechanisms, applications, and clinical implementation.Cancer gene therapy · 2026Review
- CRISPR-Cas9: Genome Engineering and Future Vaccine Applications.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Advances and clinical potential of epigenome editing.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2026Review
- CRISPR/Cas‑based epigenome editing for osteogenic lineage commitment.Cell and tissue research · 2026Review
- Clinical translation of epigenome editing technologies.Current opinion in biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- CRISPR-based Transcriptional Regulation: Technologies, Applications, and Future Directions.DNA · 2025Article
- Design principle of successful genome editing applications using CRISPR-based toolkits.Journal of applied genetics · 2025Review
- Dystrophin Restorative and Compensatory Gene Addition Therapies for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: Could CRISPRa Provide a Realistic Alternative?Muscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- CRISPR Technology in Disease Management: An Updated Review of Clinical Translation and Therapeutic Potential.Cell proliferation · 2025Article
- Development of compact transcriptional effectors using high-throughput measurements in diverse contexts.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- Cytotoxicity of activator expression in CRISPR-based transcriptional activation systems.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Epigenome Engineering Using dCas Systems for Biomedical Applications and Biotechnology: Current Achievements, Opportunities and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- MIXL1 activation in endoderm differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells.Stem cell reports · 2025Article
- CRISPR/Cas-mediated mRNA knockdown in the embryos of Xenopus tropicalis.Cell & bioscience · 2025Article
- Dynamic properties of transcriptional condensates modulate CRISPRa-mediated gene activation.Nature communications · 2025Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 technology in tumor research and drug development application progress and future prospects.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Regulatory roles of noncoding RNAs in oil palm response to cold stress.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Epigenetic landscape in lysosomal storage disorders: mechanisms and modulation.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Review
- Precision epigenetic editing: Technological advances, enduring challenges, and therapeutic applications.Cell chemical biology · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated transcriptional activation (CRISPRa) is a powerful tool for investigating complex biological phenomena. Although CRISPRa approaches based on the VP64 transcriptional activator have been widely studied in both cultured cells and in animal models and exhibit great versatility for various cell types and developmental stages in vivo, different dCas9-VP64 versions have not been rigorously compared. Here, we compared different dCas9-VP64 constructs in identical contexts, including the cell lines used and the transfection conditions, for their ability to activate endogenous and exogenous genes. Moreover, we investigated the optimal approach for VP64 addition to VP64- and p300-based constructs. We found that MS2-MCP-scaffolded VP64 enhanced basal dCas9-VP64 and dCas9-p300 activity better than did direct VP64 fusion to the N-terminus of dCas9. dCas9-VP64+MCP-VP64 and dCas9-p300+MCP-VP64 were superior to VP64-dCas9-VP64 for all target genes tested. Furthermore, multiplexing gRNA expression with dCas9-VP64+MCP-VP64 or dCas9-p300+MCP-VP64 significantly enhanced endogenous gene activation to a level comparable to CRISPRa-SAM with a single gRNA. Our findings demonstrate improvement of the dCas9-VP64 CRISPRa system and contribute to development of a versatile, efficient CRISPRa platform.
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.