ArticleNature communications2025
Elucidating the genetic mechanisms governing cytosine base editing outcomes through CRISPRi screens.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- HAMMER: hairpin-based APOBEC3A-mediated mRNA editing reporter.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- HAMMER: Hairpin-based APOBEC3A-mediated mRNA editing reporter.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- RFWD3: A pivotal E3 ubiquitin ligase in DNA damage response, non-neoplastic disorders and multi-system tumorigenesis.Science progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cytosine base editors enable programmable and efficient genome editing using an intermediate featuring a U•G mismatch across from a DNA nick. This intermediate facilitates two major outcomes, C•G to T•A and C•G to G•C point mutations, and it is not currently well-understood which DNA repair factors are involved. Here, we couple reporters for cytosine base editing activity with knockdown of 2015 DNA processing genes to identify genes involved in these two outcomes. Our data suggest that mismatch repair factors facilitate C•G to T•A outcomes, while C•G to G•C outcomes are mediated by RFWD3, an E3 ubiquitin ligase. We also propose that XPF, a 3'-flap endonuclease, and LIG3, a DNA ligase, are involved in repairing the intermediate back to the original C•G base pair. Our results demonstrate that competition and collaboration among different DNA repair pathways shape cytosine base editing outcomes.
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.