ArticleCellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS2023
Development of a highly efficient prime editor system in mice and rabbits.
Article in Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Development of mitochondrial mutator pigs exhibiting increased mitochondrial DNA mutations and premature aging via prime editing.Science advances · 2026Article
- A primer on prime: A prime editing update from advances to first-in-human trial.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2026Review
- Prime editing: Emerging mechanisms, engineering innovations, and next-generation applications.Biodesign research · 2026Review
- Artificial Insemination as a Possible Convenient Tool to Acquire Genome-Edited Mice via In Vivo Fertilization with Engineered Sperm.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2024Review
- Targeted mutagenesis in mice via an engineered AsCas12f1 system.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The recently developed prime-editing (PE) technique is more precise than previously available techniques and permits base-to-base conversion, replacement, and insertions and deletions in the genome. However, previous reports show that the efficiency of prime editing is insufficient to produce genome-edited animals. In fact, prime-guide RNA (pegRNA) designs have posed a challenge in achieving favorable editing efficiency. Here, we designed prime binding sites (PBS) with a melting temperature (Tm) of 42 °C, leading to optimal performance in cells, and we found that the optimal Tm was affected by the culture temperature. In addition, the ePE3max system was developed by updating the PE architecture to PEmax and expressing engineered pegRNA (epegRNA) based on the original PE3 system. The updated ePE3max system can efficiently induce gene editing in mouse and rabbit embryos. Furthermore, we successfully generated a Hoxd13 (c. 671 G > T) mutation in mice and a Tyr (c. 572 del) mutation in rabbits by ePE3max. Overall, the editing efficiency of modified ePE3max systems is superior to that of the original PE3 system in producing genome-edited animals, which can serve as an effective and versatile genome-editing tool for precise genome modification in animal models.
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.