Conventional CRISPR approaches for precision genome editing rely on the introduction of DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) and activation of homology-directed repair (HDR), which is inherently genotoxic and inefficient in somatic cells. The development of base editing (BE) systems that edit a target base without requiring generation of DSB or HDR offers an alternative. Here, we describe a novel BE system called Pin-pointTM that recruits a DNA base-modifying enzyme through an RNA aptamer within the gRNA molecule. Pin-point is capable of efficiently modifying base pairs in the human genome with precision and low on-target indel formation. This system can potentially be applied for correcting pathogenic mutations, installing premature stop codons in pathological genes, and introducing other types of genetic changes for basic research and therapeutic development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
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.
2.
RanFA, HsuPD, WrightJ, et al.Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc, 2013; 8:2281–2308. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2013.143.
3.
ChoSW, KimS, KimJM, et al.Targeted genome engineering in human cells with the Cas9 RNA-guided endonuclease. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:230. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2507.
4.
Corrigan-CurayJ, O'ReillyM, KohnDB, et al.Genome editing technologies: defining a path to clinic. Mol Ther, 2015; 23:796–806. DOI: 10.1038/mt.2015.54.
KomorAC, KimYB, PackerMS, et al.Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature, 2016; 533:420–424. DOI: 10.1038/nature17946.
7.
CoxDB, GootenbergJS, AbudayyehOO, et al.RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13. Science, 2017; 358:1019–1027. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaq0180.
8.
YehW-H, ChiangH, ReesHA, et al.In vivo base editing of post-mitotic sensory cells. Nat Commun, 2018; 9:2184. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04580-3.
9.
ZongY, WangY, LiC, et al.Precise base editing in rice, wheat and maize with a Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusion. Nat Biotechnol, 2017; 35:438. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3811.
10.
NishidaK, ArazoeT, YachieN, et al.Targeted nucleotide editing using hybrid prokaryotic and vertebrate adaptive immune systems. Science, 2016; 353:aaf8729. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaf8729.
11.
ZalatanJG, LeeME, AlmeidaR, et al.Engineering complex synthetic transcriptional programs with CRISPR RNA scaffolds. Cell, 2015; 160:339–350. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.052,
12.
KonermannS, BrighamMD, TrevinoAE, et al.Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR-Cas9 complex. Nature, 2015; 517:583–588. DOI: 10.1038/nature14136.
QinP, ParlakM, KuscuC, et al.Live cell imaging of low-and non-repetitive chromosome loci using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Commun, 2017; 8:14725. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms14725.
15.
HessGT, FrésardL, HanK, et al.Directed evolution using dCas9-targeted somatic hypermutation in mammalian cells. Nat Methods, 2016; 13:1036. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4038.
16.
LiuLD, HuangM, DaiP, et al.Intrinsic nucleotide preference of diversifying base editors guides antibody ex vivo affinity maturation. Cell Rep, 2018; 25:884–892.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.09.090.
17.
KluesnerMG, NedveckDA, LahrWS, et al.EditR: a method to quantify base editing from Sanger sequencing. CRISPR J, 2018; 1:239–250. DOI: 10.1089/crispr.2018.0014.
18.
GoldsteinBP. Resistance to rifampicin: a review. J Antibiot (Tokyo), 2014; 67:625–630. DOI: 10.1038/ja.2014.107.
19.
XuM, ZhouYN, GoldsteinBP, et al.Cross-resistance of Escherichia coli RNA polymerases conferring rifampin resistance to different antibiotics. J Bacteriol, 2005; 187:2783–2792. DOI: 10.1128/JB.187.8.2783-2792.2005.
20.
Petersen-MahrtSK, HarrisRS, NeubergerMS. AID mutates E. coli suggesting a DNA deamination mechanism for antibody diversification. Nature, 2002; 418:99–104. DOI: 10.1038/nature00862.
21.
KrokanHE, BjøråsM. Base excision repair. Cold Spring Harbor Perspect Biol, 2013; 5:a012583. DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a012583.
22.
JacobsAL, SchärP. DNA glycosylases: in DNA repair and beyond. Chromosoma, 2012; 121:1–20. DOI: 10.1007/s00412-011-0347-4.
23.
MolCD, ArvaiAS, SandersonRJ, et al.Crystal structure of human uracil-DNA glycosylase in complex with a protein inhibitor: protein mimicry of DNA. Cell, 1995; 82:701–708. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90467-0.
24.
KoblanLW, DomanJL, WilsonC, et al.Improving cytidine and adenine base editors by expression optimization and ancestral reconstruction. Nat Biotechnol, 2018; 36:843. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4172.
25.
ArbabM, ShenMW, MokB, et al.Determinants of base editing outcomes from target library analysis and machine learning. Cell, 2020; 182:463–480.e30. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.037.
26.
SaraconiG, SeveriF, SalaC, et al.The RNA editing enzyme APOBEC1 induces somatic mutations and a compatible mutational signature is present in esophageal adenocarcinomas. Genome Biol, 2014; 15:417. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-014-0417-z.
27.
KomorAC, ZhaoKT, PackerMS, et al.Improved base excision repair inhibition and bacteriophage Mu Gam protein yields C:G-to-T:A base editors with higher efficiency and product purity. Sci Adv, 2017; 3:eaao4774. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao4774.
28.
KuscuC, ArslanS, SinghR, et al.Genome-wide analysis reveals characteristics of off-target sites bound by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nat Biotechnol, 2014; 32:677. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2916.
29.
TsaiSQ, ZhengZ, NguyenNT, et al.GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas nucleases. Nat Biotechnol, 2014; 33:187. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3117.
30.
ReesHA, LiuDR. Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells. Nat Rev Genet, 2018; 19:770–788. DOI: 10.1038/s41576-018-0059-1.
31.
LiuZ, LuZ, YangG, et al.Efficient generation of mouse models of human diseases via ABE- and BE-mediated base editing. Nat Commun, 2018; 9:2338. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04768-7.
32.
GrünewaldJ, ZhouR, LareauCA, et al.A dual-deaminase CRISPR base editor enables concurrent adenine and cytosine editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2020; 38:861–864. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0535-y.
33.
ZhangX, ZhuB, ChenL, et al.Dual base editor catalyzes both cytosine and adenine base conversions in human cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2020; 38:856–860. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0527-y.
34.
DomanJL, RaguramA, NewbyGA, et al.Evaluation and minimization of Cas9-independent off-target DNA editing by cytosine base editors. Nat Biotechnol, 2020; 38:620–628. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0414-6.
35.
YuY, LeeteTC, BornDA, et al.Cytosine base editors with minimized unguided DNA and RNA off-target events and high on-target activity. Nat Commun, 2020; 11:2052. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15887-5.
36.
KuscuC, ParlakM, TufanT, et al.CRISPR-STOP: gene silencing through base-editing-induced nonsense mutations. Nat Methods, 2017; 14:710. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4327.
37.
BillonP, BryantEE, JosephSA, et al.CRISPR-mediated base editing enables efficient disruption of eukaryotic genes through induction of STOP codons. Mol Cell, 2017; 67:1068–1079.e4. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.08.008.
38.
PardollDM. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer, 2012; 12:252. DOI: 10.1038/nrc3239.
39.
MaederML, StefanidakisM, WilsonCJ, et al.Development of a gene-editing approach to restore vision loss in Leber congenital amaurosis type 10. Nat Med, 2019; 25:229–233. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-018-0327-9.
40.
MaH, Marti-GutierrezN, ParkS-W, et al.Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos. Nature, 2017; 548:413–419. DOI: 10.1038/nature23305.
41.
DeverDP, BakRO, ReinischA, et al.CRISPR/Cas9 β-globin gene targeting in human haematopoietic stem cells. Nature, 2016; 539:384–389. DOI: 10.1038/nature20134.
42.
GrünewaldJ, ZhouR, GarciaSP, et al.Transcriptome-wide off-target RNA editing induced by CRISPR-guided DNA base editors. Nature, 2019; 569:433. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1161-z.
43.
LiuXS, WuH, JiX, et al.Editing DNA methylation in the mammalian genome. Cell, 2016; 167:233–247.e7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.056.
44.
AnzaloneAV, RandolphPB, DavisJR, et al.Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature, 2019; 576:149–157. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4.
45.
LeeS, DingN, SunY, et al.Single C-to-T substitution using engineered APOBEC3G-nCas9 base editors with minimum genome- and transcriptome-wide off-target effects. Sci Adv, 2020; 6:eaba1773. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aba1773.
46.
GaudelliNM, KomorAC, ReesHA, et al.Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature, 2017; 551:464–471. DOI: 10.1038/nature24644.
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.
