Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41142378›Full record

ReviewMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids2025

Prime editing in mammals: From promise to practicalities.

Imogen R Brooks, Carina Graham, Aidin Kazemizadeh, Joanna Jacków-Malinowska

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Prime Editing: An Overview.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Imogen R BrooksSt. John's Institute of Dermatology & KHP Centre for Translational Medicine, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Carina GrahamSt. John's Institute of Dermatology & KHP Centre for Translational Medicine, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Aidin KazemizadehSt. John's Institute of Dermatology & KHP Centre for Translational Medicine, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Joanna Jacków-MalinowskaSt. John's Institute of Dermatology & KHP Centre for Translational Medicine, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prime editing (PE) is a recent advancement in CRISPR-Cas9 technology that involves the fusion of a reverse transcriptase (RT) to a Cas9 nickase (nCas9). This fusion protein is complexed with a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA), which includes both a spacer sequence for Cas9 targeting and a template used by the RT to install desired edits into the genome. This system can generate small-scale insertions, deletions, and substitutions while elegantly bypassing double-stranded break formation, reducing the risk of unwanted indels and off-target editing. However, there is high variability in editing reported by different studies using different methodologies and disease models. In this review, we systematically examine how PE performs in different models and how different approaches improve or hinder PE efficiency. Furthermore, as assessing DNA editing efficiency is a time-consuming process, we discuss reporter assays used to detect editing events and select for edited cells. Finally, we examine the detected downstream effects of PE and investigate potential explanations for variability between models. Taken together, this review provides a valuable insight for researchers as to how PE may perform in their chosen cellular and animal models and how to effectively analyze and troubleshoot their PE experiments.

Indexed as

gene editinggeneticsgenome engineeringhigh-throughput sequencingMT: RNA/DNA Editingoff-target effectsprime editing

Identifiers

PMID41142378
PMCPMC12550301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.