Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38379727›Full record

ReviewMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids2024

Recent advances in CRISPR-Cas9-based genome insertion technologies.

Xinwen Chen, Jingjing Du, Shaowei Yun, Chaoyou Xue, Yao Yao, Shuquan Rao

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Progresses of transposon research inSynthetic and systems biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xinwen ChenState Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China.
Jingjing DuState Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China.
Shaowei YunState Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China.
Chaoyou XueKey Laboratory of Engineering Biology for Low-Carbon Manufacturing, Tianjin Institute of Industrial Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 32 West 7th Avenue, Tianjin Airport Economic Area, Tianjin 300308, China.
Yao YaoState Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China.
Shuquan RaoState Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNTianjin Institute of Industrial Biotechnology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Programmable genome insertion (or knock-in) is vital for both fundamental and translational research. The continuously expanding number of CRISPR-based genome insertion strategies demonstrates the ongoing development in this field. Common methods for site-specific genome insertion rely on cellular double-strand breaks repair pathways, such as homology-directed repair, non-homologous end-joining, and microhomology-mediated end joining. Recent advancements have further expanded the toolbox of programmable genome insertion techniques, including prime editing, integrase coupled with programmable nuclease, and CRISPR-associated transposon. These tools possess their own capabilities and limitations, promoting tremendous efforts to enhance editing efficiency, broaden targeting scope and improve editing specificity. In this review, we first summarize recent advances in programmable genome insertion techniques. We then elaborate on the cons and pros of each technique to assist researchers in making informed choices when using these tools. Finally, we identify opportunities for future improvements and applications in basic research and therapeutics.

Indexed as

cell and gene therapyCRISPR-associated transposonDSB-dependent knock-inMT: RNA/DNA editingprime editingprogrammable genome insertion

Identifiers

PMID38379727
PMCPMC10878794
OpenAlexW4391535924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.