ArticleScientific reports2024
Comprehensive analysis of the editing window of C-to-T TALE base editors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the most recent advances in the genome editing field has been the addition of "TALE Base Editors", an innovative platform for cell therapy that relies on the deamination of cytidines within double strand DNA, leading to the formation of an uracil (U) intermediate. These molecular tools are fusions of transcription activator-like effector domains (TALE) for specific DNA sequence binding, split-DddA deaminase halves that will, upon catalytic domain reconstitution, initiate the conversion of a cytosine (C) to a thymine (T), and an uracil glycosylase inhibitor (UGI). We developed a high throughput screening strategy capable to probe key editing parameters in a precisely defined genomic context in cellulo, excluding or minimizing biases arising from different microenvironmental and/or epigenetic contexts. Here we aimed to further explore how target composition and TALEB architecture will impact the editing outcomes. We demonstrated how the nature of the linker between TALE array and split DddAtox head allows us to fine tune the editing window, also controlling possible bystander activity. Furthermore, we showed that both the TALEB architecture and spacer length separating the two TALE DNA binding regions impact the target TC editing dependence by the surrounding bases, leading to more restrictive or permissive editing profiles.
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.