ReviewAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2024
Precise Gene Knock-In Tools with Minimized Risk of DSBs: A Trend for Gene Manipulation.
Review in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Derived Organoid-Based CRISPR Screens in Cancer Research: Applications, Advances, and Challenges.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- Structure-based recasting of a mammalian DNA transpososome as an obligate heterodimer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- VersatileProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Enhancing Specificity, Precision, Accessibility, Flexibility, and Safety to Overcome Traditional CRISPR/Cas Editing Challenges and Shape Future Innovations.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Precise Gene Knock-In Tools with Minimized Risk of DSBs: A Trend for Gene Manipulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene knock-in refers to the insertion of exogenous functional genes into a target genome to achieve continuous expression. Currently, most knock-in tools are based on site-directed nucleases, which can induce double-strand breaks (DSBs) at the target, following which the designed donors carrying functional genes can be inserted via the endogenous gene repair pathway. The size of donor genes is limited by the characteristics of gene repair, and the DSBs induce risks like genotoxicity. New generation tools, such as prime editing, transposase, and integrase, can insert larger gene fragments while minimizing or eliminating the risk of DSBs, opening new avenues in the development of animal models and gene therapy. However, the elimination of off-target events and the production of delivery carriers with precise requirements remain challenging, restricting the application of the current knock-in treatments to mainly in vitro settings. Here, a comprehensive review of the knock-in tools that do not/minimally rely on DSBs and use other mechanisms is provided. Moreover, the challenges and recent advances of in vivo knock-in treatments in terms of the therapeutic process is discussed. Collectively, the new generation of DSBs-minimizing and large-fragment knock-in tools has revolutionized the field of gene editing, from basic research to clinical treatment.
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.