Extraordinary efforts are underway to offer greater versatility and broader applications for CRISPR-directed gene editing. Here, we report the establishment of a system for studying this process in a mammalian cell-free extract prepared from HEK-293 human embryonic kidney cells. A ribonucleoprotein (RNP) particle and a mammalian cell-free extract coupled with a genetic readout are used to generate and identify specific deletions or insertions within a plasmid target. A Cpf1 (Cas12a) RNP induces a double-stranded break, and the cell-free extract provides the appropriate enzymatic activities to direct specific deletion through resection and homology directed repair in the presence of single- and double-stranded donor DNA. This cell-free system establishes a foundation to study the heterogeneous products of gene editing, as well as the relationship between nonhomologous end joining and homology directed repair and related regulatory circuitries simultaneously in a controlled environment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JiangW, MarraffiniLA. CRISPR-Cas: new tools for genetic manipulations from bacterial immunity systems. Annu Rev Microbiol, 2015; 69:209–228. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-micro-091014-104441.
2.
MakarovaKS, WolfYI, AlkhnbashiOS, et al.An updated evolutionary classification of CRISPR-Cas systems. Nat Rev Microbiol, 2015; 13:722–736. DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro3569.
3.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science, 2013; 339:819–823. DOI: 10.1126/science.1231143.
4.
JinekM, ChylinskiK, FonfaraI, et al.A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 2012; 337:816–821. DOI: 10.1126/science.1225829.
5.
HsuP, LanderE, ZhangF, et al.Development and applications of CRISPR-Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell, 2014; 157:1262–1278. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.010.
6.
KimYB, KomorAC, LevyJM, et al.Increasing the genome-targeting scope and precision of base editing with engineered Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusions. Nat Biotechnol, 2017; 35:371–376. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3803.
7.
DavisKM, PattanayakV, ThompsonDB, et al.Small molecule-triggered Cas9 protein with improved genome-editing specificity. Nat Chem Biol, 2015; 11:316–318. DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.1793.
8.
LiangX, PotterJ, KumarS, et al.Rapid and highly efficient mammalian cell engineering via Cas9 protein transfection. J Biotechnol, 2015; 208:44–53. DOI: I0.1016/j.jbiotec.2015.04.024.
9.
LiuC, ZhangL, LiuH, et al.Delivery strategies of the CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing system for therapeutic applications. J Control Release, 2017; 266:17–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2017.09.012.
10.
SternbergSH, ReddingS, JinekM, et al.DNA interrogation by the CRISPR RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Nature, 2014; 507:62–67. DOI: 10.1038/nature13011.
11.
RanFA, CongL, YanWX, et al.In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature, 2015; 520:186–191. DOI: 10.1038/nature14299.
12.
KleinstiverBP, PrewMS, TsaiSQ, et al.Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature, 2015; 523:481–485. DOI: 10.1038/nature14592.
ShenB, ZhangJ, WuH, et al.Generation of gene-modified mice via Cas9/RNA-mediated gene targeting. Cell Res, 2013; 23:720–723. DOI: 10.1038/cr.2013.46.
15.
ShenB, ZhangW, ZhangJ, et al.Efficient genome modification by CRISPR-Cas9 nickase with minimal off-target effects. Nat Methods, 2014; 11:399–402. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.2857.
16.
ZetscheB, GootenbergJS, AbudayyehOO, et al.Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system. Cell, 2015; 163:759–771. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.038.
17.
HarringtonLB, Paez-EspinoD, StaahlBT, et al.A thermostable Cas9 with increased lifetime in human plasma. Nat Commun, 2017; 8:142–4. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01408-4.
18.
GootenbergJS, AbudayyehOO, LeeJW, et al.Nucleic acid detection with CRISPR-Cas13a/C2c2. Science, 2017; 356:438–442. DOI: 10.1126/science.aam9321.
SchunderE, RydzewskiK, GrunowR, et al.First indication for a functional CRISPR/Cas system in Francisella tularensis. Int J Med Microbiol, 2013; 303:51–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2012.11.004.
21.
VestergaardG, GarrettRA, ShahSA. CRISPR adaptive immune systems of Archaea. RNA Biol, 2014; 11:156–167. DOI: 10.4161/rna.27990.
22.
KimHK, SongM, LeeJ, et al.In vivo high-throughput profiling of CRISPR-Cpf1 activity. Nat Meth, 2017; 14:153–159. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4104.
23.
DongD, RenK, QiuX, et al.The crystal structure of Cpf1 in complex with CRISPR RNA. Nature, 2016; 532:522–526. DOI: 10.1038/nature17944.
24.
YamanoT, NishimasuH, ZetscheB, et al.Crystal structure of Cpf1 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell, 2016; 165:949–962. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.04.003.
25.
LiL, NatarajanP, AllenC, et al.CGMP-compliant, clinical scale, non-viral platform for efficient gene editing using CRISPR/Cas9. Cytotherapy, 2014; 16:S3–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2014.01.125
26.
ChylinskiK, Le RhunA, CharpentierE. The tracrRNA and Cas9 families of type II CRISPR-Cas immunity systems. RNA Biol, 2013; 10:726–737. DOI: 10.4161/rna.24321.
27.
LiB, ZhaoW, LuoX, et al.Engineering CRISPR-Cpf1 crRNAs and mRNAs to maximize genome editing efficiency. Nat Biomed Eng, 2017; 1:6–6. DOI: 10.1038/s41551-017-0066.
28.
KimD, KimJ, HurJK, et al.Genome-wide analysis reveals specificities of Cpf1 endonucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:863–868. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3609.
29.
KimY, CheongS-A, LeeJG, et al.Generation of knockout mice by Cpf1-mediated gene targeting. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:808–810. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3614.
30.
ZhangY, LongC, LiH, et al.CRISPR-Cpf1 correction of muscular dystrophy mutations in human cardiomyocytes and mice. Sci Adv, 2017; 3:e160281–4. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1602814.
31.
TóthE, WeinhardtN, BencsuraP, et al.Cpf1 nucleases demonstrate robust activity to induce DNA modification by exploiting homology directed repair pathways in mammalian cells. Biol Direct, 2016; 11:4–6. DOI: 10.1186/s13062-016-0147-0.
32.
DeWittMA, MagisW, BrayNL, et al.Selection-free genome editing of the sickle mutation in human adult hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Sci Transl Med, 2016; 8:360ra13–4. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf9336.
33.
HuangX, WangY, YanW, et al.Production of gene-corrected adult beta globin protein in human erythrocytes differentiated from patient iPSCs after genome editing of the sickle point mutation. Stem Cells, 2015; 33:1470–1479. DOI: 10.1002/stem.1969.
34.
GenoveseP, SchiroliG, EscobarG, et al.Targeted genome editing in human repopulating haematopoietic stem cells. Nature, 2014; 510:235–240. DOI: 10.1038/nature13420.
35.
HendelA, BakRO, ClarkJT, et al.Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR-Cas genome editing in human primary cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:985–989. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3290.
36.
BialkP, Rivera-TorresN, StrouseB, et al.Regulation of gene editing activity directed by single-stranded oligonucleotides and CRISPR/Cas9 systems. PLoS One, 2015; 10:e012930–8. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129308.
37.
Rivera-TorresN, BanasK, BialkP, et al.Insertional mutagenesis by CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein gene editing in cells targeted for point mutation repair directed by short single-stranded DNA oligonucleotides. PLoS One, 2017; 12:e016935–0. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169350.
38.
Parekh-OlmedoH, FerraraL, BrachmanE, et al.Gene therapy progress and prospects: targeted gene repair. Gene Ther, 2005; 12:639–646. DOI: 10.1038/sj.gt.3302511.
Cole-StraussA, GamperH, HollomanWK, et al.Targeted gene repair directed by the chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotide in a mammalian cell-free extract. Nucleic Acids Res, 1999; 27:1323–1330.
41.
GamperHB, ParekhH, RiceMC, et al.The DNA strand of chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotides can direct gene repair/conversion activity in mammalian and plant cell-free extracts. Nucleic Acids Res, 2000; 28:4332–4339.
42.
WoolfTM, GurumurthyCB, BoyceF, et al.To cleave or not to cleave: therapeutic gene editing with and without programmable nucleases. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2017; 16:296–296. DOI: 10.1038/nrd.2017.42.
43.
LiangF, HanM, RomanienkoPJ, et al.Homology-directed repair is a major double-strand break repair pathway in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1998; 95:5172–5177.
44.
DekkerM, BrouwersC, AartsM, et al.Effective oligonucleotide-mediated gene disruption in ES cells lacking the mismatch repair protein MSH3. Gene Ther, 2006; 13:686–694. DOI: 10.1038/sj.gt.3303689.
45.
RichardsonCD, RayGJ, DeWittMA, et al.Enhancing homology-directed genome editing by catalytically active and inactive CRISPR-Cas9 using asymmetric donor DNA. Nat Biotech, 2016; 34:339–344. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3481.
46.
ChuVT, WeberT, WefersB, et al.Increasing the efficiency of homology-directed repair for CRISPR-Cas9-induced precise gene editing in mammalian cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:543–548. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3198.
47.
LinS, StaahlBT, AllaRK, et al.Enhanced homology-directed human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery. Elife, 2014; 3:e0476–6. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.04766.
48.
PaquetD, KwartD, ChenA, et al.Efficient introduction of specific homozygous and heterozygous mutations using CRISPR/Cas9. Nature, 2016; 533:125–129. DOI: 10.1038/nature17664.
49.
LiJJ, KellyTJ. Simian virus 40 DNA replication in vitro: specificity of initiation and evidence for bidirectional replication. Mol Cell Biol, 1985; 5:1238–1246.
50.
BrachmanEE, KmiecEB. Gene repair in mammalian cells is stimulated by the elongation of S phase and transient stalling of replication forks. DNA Repair (Amst), 2005; 4:445–457. DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2004.11.007.
51.
FerraraL, EngstromJU, SchwartzT, et al.Recovery of cell cycle delay following targeted gene repair by oligonucleotides. DNA Repair (Amst), 2007; 6:1529–1535. DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2007.04.007.
52.
EngstromJU, SuzukiT, KmiecEB. Regulation of targeted gene repair by intrinsic cellular processes. BioEssays, 2009; 31:159–168. DOI: 10.1002/bies.200800119.
53.
RadeckeS, RadeckeF, PeterI, et al.Physical incorporation of a single-stranded oligodeoxynucleotide during targeted repair of a human chromosomal locus. J Gene Med, 2006; 8:217–28. DOI: 10.1002/jgm.828.
54.
OlsenPA, RandølM, KraussS. Implications of cell cycle progression on functional sequence correction by short single-stranded DNA oligonucleotides. Gene Ther, 2005; 12:546–51. DOI: 10.1038/sj.gt.3302454.
55.
OlsenPA, RandølM, LunaL, et al.Genomic sequence correction by single-stranded DNA oligonucleotides: role of DNA synthesis and chemical modifications of the oligonucleotide ends. J Gene Med, 2005; 7:1534–1544. DOI: 10.1002/jgm.804.
56.
HuenMSY, LiX, LuL-Y, et al.The involvement of replication in single stranded oligonucleotide-mediated gene repair. Nucleic Acids Res, 2006; 34:6183–6194. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkl852.
57.
BrachmanEE, KmiecEB. The “biased” evolution of targeted gene repair. Curr Opin Mol Ther, 2002; 4:171–176.
58.
FalgowskiK, FalgowskiC, York-VickersC, et al.Strand bias influences the mechanism of gene editing directed by single-stranded DNA oligonucleotides. Nucleic Acids Res, 2011; 39:4783–4794. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkr061.
59.
RiosX, BriggsAW, ChristodoulouD, et al.Stable gene targeting in human cells using single-strand oligonucleotides with modified bases. PLoS One, 2012; 7:e3669–7. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036697.
60.
QuadrosRM, MiuraH, HarmsDW, et al.Easi-CRISPR: a robust method for one-step generation of mice carrying conditional and insertion alleles using long ssDNA donors and CRISPR ribonucleoproteins. Genome Biol, 2017; 18:9–2. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-017-1220-4.
61.
EngstromJU, KmiecEB. DNA Replication, cell cycle progression and the targeted gene repair reaction. Cell Cycle, 2008; 7:1402–1414. DOI: 10.4161/cc.7.10.5826.
62.
SmalleyE, MiuraH, HarmsDW, et al.CRISPR mouse model boom, rat model renaissance. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:893–894. DOI: 10.1038/nbt0916-893.
63.
StaahlBT, BenekareddyM, Coulon-BainierC, et al.Efficient genome editing in the mouse brain by local delivery of engineered Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Biotech, 2017; 35:431–434. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3806.
64.
StoriciF, SnipeJR, ChanGK, et al.Conservative repair of a chromosomal double-strand break by single-strand DNA through two steps of annealing. Mol Cell Biol, 2006; 26:7645–7657. DOI: 10.1128/MCB.00672-06.
65.
BothmerA, PhadkeT, BarreraLA, et al.Characterization of the interplay between DNA repair and CRISPR/Cas9-induced DNA lesions at an endogenous locus. Nat Commun, 2017; 8:1390–5. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms13905.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
