ArticleScientific reports2023
Optimized metrics for orthogonal combinatorial CRISPR screens.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- CRISPR GENome and epigenome engineering improves loss-of-function genetic-screening approaches.Cell reports methods · 2025Article
- Genome-scale exon perturbation screens uncover exons critical for cell fitness.Molecular cell · 2024Article
- Genome organization and botanical diversity.The Plant cell · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR-based gene perturbation enables unbiased investigations of single and combinatorial genotype-to-phenotype associations. In light of efforts to map combinatorial gene dependencies at scale, choosing an efficient and robust CRISPR-associated (Cas) nuclease is of utmost importance. Even though SpCas9 and AsCas12a are widely used for single, combinatorial, and orthogonal screenings, side-by-side comparisons remain sparse. Here, we systematically compared combinatorial SpCas9, AsCas12a, and CHyMErA in hTERT-immortalized retinal pigment epithelial cells and extracted performance-critical parameters for combinatorial and orthogonal CRISPR screens. Our analyses identified SpCas9 to be superior to enhanced and optimized AsCas12a, with CHyMErA being largely inactive in the tested conditions. Since AsCas12a contains RNA processing activity, we used arrayed dual-gRNAs to improve AsCas12a and CHyMErA applications. While this negatively influenced the effect size range of combinatorial AsCas12a applications, it enhanced the performance of CHyMErA. This improved performance, however, was limited to AsCas12a dual-gRNAs, as SpCas9 gRNAs remained largely inactive. To avoid the use of hybrid gRNAs for orthogonal applications, we engineered the multiplex SpCas9-enAsCas12a approach (multiSPAS) that avoids RNA processing for efficient orthogonal gene editing.
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.