Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40161775›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025

Genome-Wide CRISPR Screening Identifies Cellular Factors Controlling Nonviral Genome Editing Efficiency.

Shivani Saxena, Meha Kabra, Amr Abdeen, Divya Sinha, Min Zhu, Ruosen Xie, Giovanni Hanstad, Maria A Fernandez Zepeda, David M Gamm, Bikash R Pattnaik and 2 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Meha Kabra
Amr Abdeen
Divya Sinha
Min Zhu
Ruosen Xie
Giovanni Hanstad
Maria A Fernandez Zepeda
David M Gamm
Bikash R PattnaikORCID 0000-0002-5385-358X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After administering genome editors, their efficiency is limited by a multi-step process involving cellular uptake, trafficking, and nuclear import of the vector and its payload. These processes vary widely across cell types and differ depending on the nature and structure of the vector, whether it is a lipid nanoparticle or a different synthetic material. We developed a novel genome-wide CRISPR screening strategy to better understand these limitations within human cells to identify genes modulating cellular uptake, payload delivery, and gene editing efficiency. Our screen interrogates the cellular processes controlling genome editing by Cas-based nuclease and base editing strategies in human cells. We designed a genome-wide screen targeting 19,114 genes in HEK293 cells, and we identified six genes whose knockout increased nonviral editing efficiency in human cells by up to five-fold. Further validation through arrayed knockouts of the top hits from our screen boosted the editing efficiency from 5% to 50% when Cas9 was delivered via lipid-based nanoparticles. By designing the guides to target the screen library cassette, we could accurately track the library sgRNA identity and the editing outcome on the same amplicon via short-read sequencing, enabling the identification of rare outcomes via 'computationally' sorting edited from unedited cells within a heterogenous pool of >200M cells. In patient-derived human retinal pigment epithelium cells derived from pluripotent stem cells, BET1L, GJB2, and MS4A13 gene knockouts increased targeted genome editing by over five-fold. We anticipate that this high-throughput screening approach will facilitate the systematic engineering of novel nonviral genome editing delivery methods, where the identified novel gene hits can be further used to increase editing efficiency for other therapeutically relevant cell types.

Identifiers

PMID40161775
PMCPMC11952466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.