ArticleNature cell biology2024
C-to-G editing generates double-strand breaks causing deletion, transversion and translocation.
Article in Nature cell biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- A self-iterative orthogonal base-editing platform enables multiplex N-to-N diversification and genome-scale functional screening in Escherichia coli.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Precise dual-gene knockout of MSTN and SOCS2 via cytidine base editing enhances muscling and growth in goats.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Article
- Targeted DNA ADP-ribosylation triggers templated repair in bacteria and base mutagenesis in eukaryotes.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Distinct repair outcomes from single and convergent replication fork collapse.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2026Article
- Simultaneous orthogonal cell engineering by a single CRISPR-Cas9 polyfunctional editor.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Deep Prior Framework: integrating functional specificity with general plausibility for targeted protein evolution.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Epigenetic editing: from concept to clinic.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2026Review
- Single-cell multiplex approaches deeply map ON-target CRISPR-genotoxicity and reveal its mitigation by palbociclib and long-term engraftment.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Harnessing the potential of gene editing technology for CAR-T cell therapy of solid tumors.Inflammation and regeneration · 2025Review
- Genome editing with the HDR-enhancing DNA-PKcs inhibitor AZD7648 causes large-scale genomic alterations.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- The editable landscape of the yeast genome reveals hotspots of structural variant formation.Science advances · 2025Article
- Multiplex base editing of BCL11A regulatory elements to treat sickle cell disease.Cell reports. Medicine · 2025Article
- Programmable epigenome editing by transient delivery of CRISPR epigenome editor ribonucleoproteins.Nature communications · 2025Article
- ONE-STEP tagging: a versatile method for rapid site-specific integration by simultaneous reagent delivery.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Elucidating the genetic mechanisms governing cytosine base editing outcomes through CRISPRi screens.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Targeted deaminase-free T-to-G and C-to-K base editing in rice by fused human uracil DNA glycosylase variants.Plant biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Patterns of spontaneous and induced genomic alterations inApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Rewriting the script: gene therapy and genome editing for von Willebrand Disease.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Adenine base editors induce off-target structure variations in mouse embryos and primary human T cells.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Molecular mechanisms of DNA lesion and repair during antibody somatic hypermutation.Science China. Life sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
30 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Base editors (BEs) introduce base substitutions without double-strand DNA cleavage. Besides precise substitutions, BEs generate low-frequency 'stochastic' byproducts through unclear mechanisms. Here, we performed in-depth outcome profiling and genetic dissection, revealing that C-to-G BEs (CGBEs) generate substantial amounts of intermediate double-strand breaks (DSBs), which are at the centre of several byproducts. Imperfect DSB end-joining leads to small deletions via end-resection, templated insertions or aberrant transversions during end fill-in. Chromosomal translocations were detected between the editing target and off-targets of Cas9/deaminase origin. Genetic screenings of DNA repair factors disclosed a central role of abasic site processing in DSB formation. Shielding of abasic sites by the suicide enzyme HMCES reduced CGBE-initiated DSBs, providing an effective way to minimize DSB-triggered events without affecting substitutions. This work demonstrates that CGBEs can initiate deleterious intermediate DSBs and therefore require careful consideration for therapeutic applications, and that HMCES-aided CGBEs hold promise as safer tools.
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.