Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42793032›Full record

SynthesisGenes2026

Prime Editing for Precision Genetic Medicine: A Systematic Review of Technologies, Delivery, and Therapeutic Applications.

Douglas M Ruden

Abstract readSystematic ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Genes, 2026. 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

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

1 author.

Douglas M RudenInstitute of Environmental Health Sciences, Charles S. Mott Center for Human Growth and Development, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0070-437X

Funding

Research Experience & Training Coordination CoreP42ES030991 · NIEHS · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Glen Ray Hood · 2022 to 2026
$13.9M
Prenatal Exposures and Child Health Outcomes: A Statewide StudyUG3OD023285 · OD · MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BARONE, CHARLES JAMES, ELLIOTT, MICHAEL R. · 2016 to 2024
$12.9M
Translational Research Support CoreP30ES036084 · NIEHS · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Melissa A Runge-Morris · 2024 to 2026
$5.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES036084NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES030991NIH HHS 1P30ES036084-03P30NIH HHS 5P42ES030991-05P42NIH HHS UG3 OD023285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrime editing has rapidly evolved from a CRISPR-based "search-and-replace" approach for precise sequence modification into a diverse family of genome editing technologies. This systematic review maps the technological evolution of prime editing, with emphasis on editor architecture, guide RNA engineering, delivery, therapeutic applications, computational approaches, and emerging capabilities.

methodsPubMed and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies in which prime editing constituted a substantive experimental, technological, computational, delivery, or therapeutic component. After deduplication and screening, candidate studies underwent manual re-screening against prespecified eligibility criteria. Reviews, corrections, plant and bacterial studies, conventional CRISPR or base editing studies without a substantive prime editing component, and other non-relevant records were excluded. A total of 294 studies were included in the final systematic evidence synthesis. Because of substantial heterogeneity in editor architectures, targets, experimental models, outcomes, and reporting, the literature was synthesized using systematic mapping and qualitative thematic analysis rather than meta-analysis.

resultsThe evidence demonstrates rapid diversification from the original Cas9 nickase-reverse transcriptase-prime editing guide RNA architecture through improvements in pegRNA design, Cas and reverse transcriptase engineering, DNA repair modulation, delivery, computational design, and increasingly complex sequence modification. Therapeutic studies span disease modeling, correction of pathogenic variants, ex vivo applications, and direct in vivo editing; however, high editing efficiency does not necessarily translate into functional or therapeutic rescue. Large-sequence insertion and replacement strategies further extend the capabilities of prime editing, although these approaches remain less mature than small-sequence correction and face substantial challenges in efficiency, fidelity, cargo delivery, and genomic safety.

conclusionsPrime editing has developed into a versatile precision genome editing platform, but the evidence base remains heterogeneous and predominantly preclinical. Translation to genetic medicine will require improvements in reproducibility across targets and cell types, delivery to clinically relevant tissues, product purity, genomic safety, and demonstration of meaningful functional benefit. Emerging large-sequence editing approaches broaden the potential scope of prime editing but should be distinguished from technologies with established experimental and therapeutic evidence.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingGenetic TherapyPrecision MedicineAnimalsGene Transfer TechniquesHumansRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsCRISPRdeliverygene therapygenome editinggenome writingpegRNAprecision genetic medicineprime editingtherapeutic genome editing

Identifiers

PMID42793032
PMCPMC13606464

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.