The RNA-guided Cas9 nuclease from Streptococcus pyogenes has become an important gene-editing tool. However, its intrinsic off-target activity is a major challenge for biomedical applications. Distinct from some reported engineering strategies that specifically target a single domain, we rationally introduced multiple amino acid substitutions across multiple domains in the enzyme to create potential high-fidelity variants, considering the Cas9 specificity is synergistically determined by various domains. We also exploited our previously derived atomic model of activated Cas9 complex structure for guiding new modifications. This approach has led to the identification of the HSC1.2 Cas9 variant with enhanced specificity for DNA cleavage. While the enhanced specificity associated with the HSC1.2 variant appeared to be position-dependent in the in vitro cleavage assays, the frequency of off-target DNA editing with this Cas9 variant is much less than that of the wild-type Cas9 in human cells. The potential mechanisms causing the observed position-dependent effect were investigated through molecular dynamics simulation. Our discoveries establish a solid foundation for leveraging structural and dynamic information to develop Cas9-like enzymes with high specificity in gene editing.
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.
GasiunasG, BarrangouR, HorvathP, et al.Cas9-crRNA ribonucleoprotein complex mediates specific DNA cleavage for adaptive immunity in bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2012; 109:E2579–2586. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1208507109.
4.
JiangW, BikardD, CoxD, et al.RNA-guided editing of bacterial genomes using CRISPR-Cas systems. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:233–239. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2508.
5.
MaliP, YangLH, EsveltKM, et al.RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science, 2013; 339:823–826. DOI: 10.1126/science.1232033.
6.
AndersC, NiewoehnerO, DuerstA, et al.Structural basis of PAM-dependent target DNA recognition by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nature, 2014; 513:569–573. DOI: 10.1038/nature13579.
7.
NishimasuH, RanFA, HsuPD, et al.Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell, 2014; 156:935–949. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.02.001.
8.
JiangFG, TaylorDW, ChenJS, et al.Structures of a CRISPR-Cas9 R-loop complex primed for DNA cleavage. Science, 2016; 351:867–871. DOI: 10.1126/science.aad8282.
9.
WuSS, LiQC, YinCQ, et al.Advances in CRISPR/Cas-based gene therapy in human genetic diseases. Theranostics, 2020; 10:4374–4382. DOI: 10.7150/thno.43360.
10.
FuY, FodenJA, KhayterC, et al.High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:822–826. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2623.
11.
TsaiSQ, JoungJK. Defining and improving the genome-wide specificities of CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases. Nat Rev Genet, 2016; 17:300–312. DOI: 10.1038/nrg.2016.28.
12.
SlaymakerIM, GaoL, ZetscheB, et al.Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science, 2016; 351:84–88. DOI: 10.1126/science.aad5227.
13.
KleinstiverBP, PattanayakV, PrewMS, et al.High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature, 2016; 529:490–495. DOI: 10.1038/nature16526.
BabuK, AmraniN, JiangW, et al.Bridge helix of Cas9 modulates target DNA cleavage and mismatch tolerance. Biochemistry, 2019; 58:1905–1917. DOI: 10.1021/acs.biochem.8b01241.
16.
BratovicM, FonfaraI, ChylinskiK, et al.Bridge helix arginines play a critical role in Cas9 sensitivity to mismatches. Nat Chem Biol, 2020; 16:587–595. DOI: 10.1038/s41589-020-0490-4.
17.
CasiniA, OlivieriM, PetrisG, et al.A highly specific SpCas9 variant is identified by in vivo screening in yeast. Nat Biotechnol, 2018; 36:265–271. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4066.
18.
HuJH, MillerSM, GeurtsMH, et al.Evolved Cas9 variants with broad PAM compatibility and high DNA specificity. Nature, 2018; 556:57–63. DOI: 10.1038/nature26155.
19.
LeeJK, JeongE, LeeJ, et al.Directed evolution of CRISPR-Cas9 to increase its specificity. Nat Commun, 2018; 9:3048. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05477-x.
20.
VakulskasCA, DeverDP, RettigGR, et al.A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Nat Med, 2018; 24:1216–1224. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-018-0137-0.
21.
ZuoZ, LiuJ. Allosteric regulation of CRISPR-Cas9 for DNA-targeting and cleavage. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 2020; 62:166–174. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2020.01.013.
22.
KimD, LukK, WolfeSA, et al.Evaluating and enhancing target specificity of gene-editing nucleases and deaminases. Annu Rev Biochem, 2019; 88:191–220. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-013118-111730.
23.
TaylorDW. The final cut: Cas9 editing. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 2019; 26:669–670. DOI: 10.1038/s41594-019-0267-1.
24.
ZhuX, ClarkeR, PuppalaAK, et al.Cryo-EM structures reveal coordinated domain motions that govern DNA cleavage by Cas9. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 2019; 26:679–685. DOI: 10.1038/s41594-019-0258-2.
25.
ZuoZ, ZolekarA, BabuK, et al.Structural and functional insights into the bona fide catalytic state of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 HNH nuclease domain. Elife, 2019; 8. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.46500.
26.
ZuoZ, LiuJ. Structure and dynamics of Cas9 HNH domain catalytic state. Sci Rep, 2017; 7:17271. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-17578-6.
27.
GibsonDG, YoungL, ChuangRY, et al.Enzymatic assembly of DNA molecules up to several hundred kilobases. Nat Methods, 2009; 6:343–345. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1318.
28.
BeckertB, MasquidaB. Synthesis of RNA by in vitro transcription. Methods Mol Biol, 2011; 703:29–41. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-59745-248-9_3.
29.
SchneiderCA, RasbandWS, EliceiriKW. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods, 2012; 9:671–675. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.2089.
30.
ShalemO, SanjanaNE, HartenianE, et al.Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science, 2014; 343:84–87. DOI: 10.1126/science.1247005.
31.
TangPZ, DingB, PengL, et al.TEG-seq: an ion torrent-adapted NGS workflow for in cellulo mapping of CRISPR specificity. Biotechniques, 2018; 65:259–267. DOI: 10.2144/btn-2018-0105.
32.
EswarN, WebbB, Marti-RenomMA, et al.Comparative protein structure modeling using Modeller. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics, 2006; Chapter 5:Unit-5 6. DOI: 10.1002/0471250953.bi0506s15.
33.
Salomon-FerrerR, CaseDA, WalkerRC. An overview of the Amber biomolecular simulation package. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Mol Sci, 2013; 3:198–210. DOI: 10.1002/wcms.1121.
34.
LiaoQ, PabisA, StrodelB, et al.Extending the nonbonded cationic dummy model to account for ion-induced dipole interactions. J Phys Chem Lett, 2017; 8:5408–5414. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02358.
35.
ZuoZ, LiuJ. Assessing the performance of the nonbonded Mg(2+) models in a two-metal-dependent ribonuclease. J Chem Inf Model, 2019; 59:399–408. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00627.
36.
TianC, KasavajhalaK, BelfonKAA, et al.ff19SB: amino-acid-specific protein backbone parameters trained against quantum mechanics energy surfaces in solution. J Chem Theory Comput, 2020; 16:528–552. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00591.
37.
CasiniA, OlivieriM, PetrisG, et al.A highly specific SpCas9 variant is identified by in vivo screening in yeast. Nat Biotechnol, 2018; 36:265–271. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4066.
38.
DagdasYS, ChenJS, SternbergSH, et al.A conformational checkpoint between DNA binding and cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9. Sci Adv, 2017; 3:eaao0027. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao0027.
39.
PalermoG. Structure and dynamics of the CRISPR-Cas9 catalytic complex. J Chem Inf Model, 2019; 59:2394–2406. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00988.
40.
DavisL, MaizelsN. Homology-directed repair of DNA nicks via pathways distinct from canonical double-strand break repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2014; 111:E924–932. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1400236111.
41.
YangW. Nucleases: diversity of structure, function and mechanism. Q Rev Biophys, 2011; 44:1–93. DOI: 10.1017/S0033583510000181.
42.
BiertumpfelC, YangW, SuckD. Crystal structure of T4 endonuclease VII resolving a Holliday junction. Nature, 2007; 449:616–620. DOI: 10.1038/nature06152.
43.
GongSZ, YuHH, JohnsonKA, et al.DNA unwinding is the primary determinant of CRISPR-Cas9 activity. Cell Rep, 2018; 22:359–371. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.12.041.
44.
SternbergSH, LaFranceB, KaplanM, et al.Conformational control of DNA target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9. Nature, 2015; 527:110–113. DOI: 10.1038/nature15544.
45.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science, 2013; 339:819–823. DOI: 10.1126/science.1231143.
46.
LiuX, HommaA, SayadiJ, et al.Sequence features associated with the cleavage efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 system. Sci Rep, 2016; 6:19675. DOI: 10.1038/srep19675.
47.
LiuMS, GongS, YuHH, et al.Engineered CRISPR/Cas9 enzymes improve discrimination by slowing DNA cleavage to allow release of off-target DNA. Nat Commun, 2020; 11:3576. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-17411-1.
48.
PalermoG, RicciCG, FernandoA, et al.Protospacer adjacent motif-induced allostery activates CRISPR-Cas9. J Am Chem Soc, 2017; 139:16028–16031. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b05313.
49.
ZhengL, ShiJ, MuY. Dynamics changes of CRISPR-Cas9 systems induced by high fidelity mutations. Phys Chem Chem Phys, 2018; 20:27439–27448. DOI: 10.1039/c8cp04226h.
50.
RoseJC, PoppNA, RichardsonCD, et al.Suppression of unwanted CRISPR-Cas9 editing by co-administration of catalytically inactivating truncated guide RNAs. Nat Commun, 2020; 11:2697. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-16542-9.
51.
CoelhoMA, De BraekeleerE, FirthM, et al.CRISPR GUARD protects off-target sites from Cas9 nuclease activity using short guide RNAs. Nat Commun, 2020; 11:4132. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-17952-5.
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.
