ArticleNucleic acids research2023
Engineering of cytosine base editors with DNA damage minimization and editing scope diversification.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Engineered targeted enhancement of translation in mammalian cell.BMC biology · 2026Article
- Prime Editing, CRISPR-Cas9, and NanoCas Genome Editing for Cancer Treatment.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Advances in CRISPR Base Editing: From Molecular Evolution to Therapeutic Applications in Genomic Medicine.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Overcoming Immune Barriers in Allogeneic CAR-NK Therapy: From Multiplex Gene Editing to AI-Driven Precision Design.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Adenine base editors induce off-target structure variations in mouse embryos and primary human T cells.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Base Editors-Mediated Gene Therapy in Hematopoietic Stem Cells for Hematologic Diseases.Stem cell reviews and reports · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cytosine base editors (CBEs), which enable precise C-to-T substitutions, have been restricted by potential safety risks, including DNA off-target edits, RNA off-target edits and additional genotoxicity such as DNA damages induced by double-strand breaks (DSBs). Though DNA and RNA off-target edits have been ameliorated via various strategies, evaluation and minimization of DSB-associated DNA damage risks for most CBEs remain to be resolved. Here we demonstrate that YE1, an engineered CBE variant with minimized DNA and RNA off-target edits, could induce prominent DSB-associated DNA damage risks, manifested as γH2AX accumulation in human cells. We then perform deaminase engineering for two deaminases lamprey LjCDA1 and human APOBEC3A, and generate divergent CBE variants with eliminated DSB-associated DNA damage risks, in addition to minimized DNA/RNA off-target edits. Furthermore, the editing scopes and sequence preferences of APOBEC3A-derived CBEs could be further diversified by internal fusion strategy. Taken together, this study provides updated evaluation platform for DSB-associated DNA damage risks of CBEs and further generates a series of safer toolkits with diversified editing signatures to expand their applications.
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.