ReviewNature protocols2026
Systematic pegRNA design with PRIDICT2.0 and ePRIDICT for efficient prime editing.
Review in Nature protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Machine-learning in optimization of CRISPR technology.Machine learning. Health · 2026Review
- Advances in prime editing: Molecular innovations, Large-fragment engineering, and AI-driven design.Biodesign research · 2026Review
- Hijacking of host PCNA by circovirus replication-associated protein to recruit POLD1 drives viral DNA replication and is inhibited by R428.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Designing genome editing experiments with EditABLE.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Base and Prime Editing for Inherited Retinal Diseases: Delivery Platforms, Safety, Efficacy, and Translational Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Prime editing is a versatile genome editing technology that enables precise genetic modifications without inducing DNA double-strand breaks. Owing to numerous variables in the prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) design, experimentally identifying the most efficient pegRNA for a specific locus and edit is laborious. Therefore, we have developed computational tools to streamline this process. Here we present a comprehensive protocol detailing how to use PRIDICT2.0 and ePRIDICT, machine-learning models that assess the influence of the pegRNA design and chromatin context on prime editing. PRIDICT2.0 is an ensemble of attention-based bidirectional recurrent neural networks that predicts pegRNA efficiencies for replacements, insertions or deletions in different cellular contexts. Compared with other pegRNA design tools, PRIDICT2.0 accommodates larger edits-up to 40 base pairs-across diverse edit types, also allowing the introduction of silent bystander edits that can enhance editing efficiency. ePRIDICT, a gradient-boosting algorithm, further accounts for the local chromatin environments and assesses how the genomic location of the target site affects prime editing rates. Both tools are available at www.pridict.it for individual predictions or can be installed locally for batch processing of multiple edits and target sites. The protocol provides step-by-step instructions on using PRIDICT2.0 and ePRIDICT, covering sequence input, prediction generation and interpretation. Web-based predictions take under a minute, while local installation and batch processing may take up to several hours, depending on the dataset size. By streamlining pegRNA selection and chromatin context analysis, these tools promote the adoption of prime editing in basic and translational research.
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.