ArticleVascular pharmacology2024
Prime editing in mice with an engineered pegRNA.
Article in Vascular pharmacology, 2024. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimised genome editing for precise DNA insertion and substitution using prime editors in zebrafish.eLife · 2026Article
- Emerging applications of gene editing technologies for the development of climate-resilient crops.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Genetic Modification of Mice Using Prime Editing.Current protocols · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR editing involves double-strand breaks in DNA with attending insertions/deletions (indels) that may result in embryonic lethality in mice. The prime editing (PE) platform uses a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) and a Cas9 nickase fused to a modified reverse transcriptase to precisely introduce nucleotide substitutions or small indels without the unintended editing associated with DNA double-strand breaks. Recently, engineered pegRNAs (epegRNAs), with a 3'-extension that shields the primer-binding site of the pegRNA from nucleolytic attack, demonstrated superior activity over conventional pegRNAs in cultured cells. Here, we show the inability of three-component CRISPR or conventional PE to incorporate a nonsynonymous substitution in the Capn2 gene, expected to disrupt a phosphorylation site (S50A) in CAPN2. In contrast, an epegRNA with the same protospacer correctly installed the desired edit in two founder mice, as evidenced by robust genotyping assays for the detection of subtle nucleotide substitutions. Long-read sequencing demonstrated sequence fidelity around the edited site as well as top-ranked distal off-target sites. Western blotting and histological analysis of lipopolysaccharide-treated lung tissue revealed a decrease in phosphorylation of CAPN2 and notable alleviation of inflammation, respectively. These results demonstrate the first successful use of an epegRNA for germline transmission in an animal model and provide a solution to targeting essential developmental genes that otherwise may be challenging to edit.
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.