ArticleNature communications2022
Recursive Editing improves homology-directed repair through retargeting of undesired outcomes.
Article in Nature communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- ERCC6L2 ensures repair fidelity for staggered-end DNA double-strand breaks.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Efficient high-precision transgene knock-in by Recombinases (Redα/β)-enhanced DNA integration-CRISPR-Cas9 (RED-CRISPR).Nature communications · 2025Article
- Search-and-remove genome editing allows selection of cells by DNA sequence.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Genome editing with the HDR-enhancing DNA-PKcs inhibitor AZD7648 causes large-scale genomic alterations.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- Removal of TREX1 activity enhances CRISPR-Cas9-mediated homologous recombination.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- Increasing Gene Editing Efficiency via CRISPR/Cas9- or Cas12a-Mediated Knock-In in Primary Human T Cells.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Enrichment strategies to enhance genome editing.Journal of biomedical science · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CRISPR-Cas induced homology-directed repair (HDR) enables the installation of a broad range of precise genomic modifications from an exogenous donor template. However, applications of HDR in human cells are often hampered by poor efficiency, stemming from a preference for error-prone end joining pathways that yield short insertions and deletions. Here, we describe Recursive Editing, an HDR improvement strategy that selectively retargets undesired indel outcomes to create additional opportunities to produce the desired HDR allele. We introduce a software tool, named REtarget, that enables the rational design of Recursive Editing experiments. Using REtarget-designed guide RNAs in single editing reactions, Recursive Editing can simultaneously boost HDR efficiencies and reduce undesired indels. We also harness REtarget to generate databases for particularly effective Recursive Editing sites across the genome, to endogenously tag proteins, and to target pathogenic mutations. Recursive Editing constitutes an easy-to-use approach without potentially deleterious cell manipulations and little added experimental burden.
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.