Ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) are frequently applied for therapeutic gene editing as well as fundamental research because the method is fast, viral free, and shows fewest off target effects. We evaluated various parameters to genetically engineer human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) using Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 (spCas9) RNPs, and achieve gene editing efficiencies up to 80%. We find that guide RNA (gRNA) design is critical to achieve high gene editing efficiencies. However, finding effective gRNAs for HSPCs can be challenging, while the contribution of numerous in silico models is unclear. By screening more than 120 gRNAs, our data demonstrate that in silico gRNA prediction models are ineffective. In this study, we established a time- and cost-efficient in vitro transcribed gRNA screening model in K562 cells that predicts effective gRNAs for HSPCs. RNP based screening thus outperforms in silico modeling and we report that gene editing is equally efficient in distinct CD34+ HSPC subpopulations. Furthermore, no effects on cell proliferation, differentiation, or in vitro hematopoietic lineage commitment were observed. Finally, no upregulation of p21 expression was found, suggesting unperturbed HSPC homeostasis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
PorteusMH, BaltimoreD. Chimeric nucleases stimulate gene targeting in human cells. Science, 2003; 300(5620):763; doi: 10.1126/science.1078395.
2.
MillerJC, HolmesMC, WangJ, et al.An improved zinc-finger nuclease architecture for highly specific genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2007; 25(7):778–785; doi: 10.1038/nbt1319.
3.
BochJ, ScholzeH, SchornackS, et al.Breaking the code of DNA binding specificity of TAL-type III effectors. Science, 2009; 326(5959):1509–1512; doi: 10.1126/science.1178811.
4.
ZhangF, CongL, LodatoS, et al.Programmable sequence-specific transcriptional regulation of mammalian genome using designer TAL effectors. Nat Biotechnol, 2011; 29(2):149–153; doi: 10.1038/nbt.1775.
5.
JinekM, ChylinskiK, FonfaraI, et al.A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 2012; 337(6096):816–821. doi: 10.1126/science.1225829.
6.
RanFA, HsuPD, LinCY, et al.Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell, 2013; 154(6):1380–1389; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.08.021.
7.
MakarovaK, EugeneVK. Annotation and classification of CRISPR-Cas systems. Cris Methods Protoc, 2015; 1311:47–75; doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2687-9.
8.
HuJH, MillerSM, GeurtsMH, et al.Evolved Cas9 variants with broad PAM compatibility and high DNA specificity. Nature, 2018; 556(7699):57–63; doi: 10.1038/nature26155.
9.
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(8):1216–1224; doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0137-0.
10.
MaederM, LinderS, CascioV, et al.CRISPR RNA-guided activation of endogenous human genes. Nat Methods, 2013; 10(10):977–979; doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2598.CRISPR.
11.
AnzaloneAV, RandolphPB, DavisJR, et al.Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature, 2019; 576(7785):149–157; doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4.
12.
RichterMF, ZhaoKT, EtonE, et al.Phage-assisted evolution of an adenine base editor with improved Cas domain compatibility and activity. Nat Biotechnol, 2020; 38(7):883–891; doi: 10.1038/s41587-020-0453-z.
13.
RanFA, HsuPD, WrightJ, et al.Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc, 2013; 8(11):2281–2308; doi: 10.1038/nprot.2013.143.
14.
BakRO, DeverDP, PorteusMH. CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. Nat Protoc, 2018; 13(2):358–376; doi: 10.1038/nprot.2017.143.
15.
HendelA, BakRO, ClarkJT, et al.Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR-Cas genome editing in human primary cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33(9):985–989; doi: 10.1038/nbt.3290.
16.
StaahlBT, BenekareddyM, Coulon-BainierC, et al.Efficient genome editing in the mouse brain by local delivery of engineered Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Biotechnol, 2017; 35(5):431–434; doi: 10.1038/nbt.3806.
17.
WuY, ZengJ, RoscoeBP, et al.Highly efficient therapeutic gene editing of human hematopoietic stem cells. Nat Med, 2019; 25(5):776–783; doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0401-y.
18.
D'AstolfoDS, PaglieroRJ, PrasA, et al.Efficient intracellular delivery of native proteins. Cell, 2015; 161(3):674–690; doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.03.028.
19.
GundryMC, BrunettiL, LinA, et al.Highly efficient genome editing of murine and human hematopoietic progenitor cells by CRISPR/Cas9. Cell Rep, 2016; 17(5):1453–1461; doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.09.092.
20.
ChicaybamL, SodreAL, CurzioBA, et al.An efficient low cost method for gene transfer to T lymphocytes. PLoS One, 2013; 8(3):e60298; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060298.
21.
WienertB, ShinJ, ZelinE, et al.In vitro-transcribed guide RNAs trigger an innate immune response via the RIG-I pathway. PLoS Biol, 2018; 16(7):e2005840; doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005840.
22.
MullallyG, van AelstK, NaqviMM, et al.5’ modifications to CRISPR-Cas9 gRNA can change the dynamics and size of R-loops and inhibit DNA cleavage. Nucleic Acids Res, 2020; 48(12):6811–6823; doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa477.
ConcordetJP, HaeusslerM. CRISPOR: Intuitive guide selection for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing experiments and screens. Nucleic Acids Res, 2018; 46(W1):W242–W245; doi: 10.1093/nar/gky354.
25.
IhryRJ, WorringerKA, SalickMR, et al.p53 inhibits CRISPR–Cas9 engineering in human pluripotent stem cells. Nat Med, 2018; 24(7):939–946; doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0050-6.
26.
HaapaniemiE, BotlaS, PerssonJ, et al.CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing induces a p53- mediated DNA damage response. Nat Med, 2018; 24(7):927–930; doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z.
27.
SchiroliG, ContiA, FerrariS, et al.Precise gene editing preserves hematopoietic stem cell function following transient p53-mediated DNA damage response. Cell Stem Cell, 2018; 24(7):927–930; doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2019.02.019.
28.
WalterD, LierA, GeiselhartA, et al.Exit from dormancy provokes DNA-damage-induced attrition in haematopoietic stem cells. Nature, 2015; 520(7548):549–552; doi: 10.1038/nature14131.
29.
BiechonskiS, YassinM, MilyavskyM. DNA-damage response in hematopoietic stem cells: An evolutionary trade-off between blood regeneration and leukemia suppression. Carcinogenesis, 2017; 38(4):367–377; doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgx002.
30.
DoenchJG, FusiN, SullenderM, et al.Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34(2):184–191; doi: 10.1038/nbt.3437.
31.
Moreno-MateosMA, VejnarCE, BeaudoinJD, et al.CRISPRscan: Designing highly efficient sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9 targeting in vivo. Nat Methods, 2015; 12(10):982–988; doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3543.
32.
XuH, XiaoT, ChenCH, et al.Sequence determinants of improved CRISPR sgRNA design. Genome Res, 2015; 25(8):1147–1157; doi: 10.1101/gr.191452.115.
33.
WongN, LiuW, WangX. WU-CRISPR: Characteristics of functional guide RNAs for the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Genome Biol, 2015; 16:218; doi: 10.1186/s13059-015-0784-0.
34.
RahmanMK, RahmanMS. CRISPRpred: A flexible and efficient tool for sgRNAs on-target activity prediction in CRISPR/Cas9 systems. PLoS One, 2017; 12(8):e0181943; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181943.
35.
ChariR, YeoNC, ChavezA, et al.sgRNA scorer 2.0: A species-independent model to predict CRISPR/Cas9 activity. ACS Synth Biol, 2017; 6(5):902–904; doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.6b00343.
36.
ChuaiG, MaH, YanJ, et al.DeepCRISPR: Optimized CRISPR guide RNA design by deep learning. Genome Biol, 2018; 19(1):80; doi: 10.1186/s13059-018-1459-4.
37.
WangD, ZhangC, WangB, et al.Optimized CRISPR guide RNA design for two high-fidelity Cas9 variants by deep learning. Nat Commun, 2019; 10(1):1–14; doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-12281-8.
38.
BrinkmanEK, ChenT, AmendolaM, et al.Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res, 2014; 42(22):e168; doi: 10.1093/nar/gku936.
39.
HeshusiusS, HeideveldE, BurgerP, et al.Large-scale in vitro production of red blood cells from human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Blood Adv, 2019; 3(21):3337–3350; doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000689.
40.
TingPY, ParkerAE, LeeJS, et al.Guide swap enables genome-scale pooled CRISPR–Cas9 screening in human primary cells. Nat Methods, 2018; 15(11):941–946; doi: 10.1038/s41592-018-0149-1.
41.
LiuT, YanZ, LiuY, et al.CRISPR-Cas9-mediated silencing of CD44 in human highly metastatic osteosarcoma cells. Cell Physiol Biochem, 2018; 46(3):1218–1230; doi: 10.1159/000489072.
42.
VerhagenHJMP, van GilsN, MartiañezT, et al.IGFBP7 induces differentiation and loss of survival of human acute myeloid leukemia stem cells without affecting normal hematopoiesis. Cell Rep, 2018; 25(11):3021–3035.e53035e5; doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.11.062.
43.
VerhagenHJMP, De LeeuwDC, RoemerMGM, et al.IGFBP7 induces apoptosis of acute myeloid leukemia cells and synergizes with chemotherapy in suppression of leukemia cell survival. Cell Death Dis, 2014; 5:e1300; doi: 10.1038/cddis.2014.268.
44.
ZurisJA, ThompsonDB, ShuY, et al.Cationic lipid-mediated delivery of proteins enables efficient protein-based genome editing in vitro and in vivo. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33(1):73–80; doi: 10.1038/nbt.3081.
45.
MandalPK, FerreiraLMR, CollinsR, et al.Efficient ablation of genes in human hematopoietic stem and effector cells using CRISPR/Cas9. Cell Stem Cell, 2014; 15(5):643–652; doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2014.10.004.
46.
DavidsonEA, Van BlarcomT, LevyM, et al.Emulsion based selection of T7 promoters of varying activity. Pacific Symp Biocomput, 2010; 433–443; doi: 10.1142/9789814295291_0045.
47.
BonnetD, DickJE. Human acute myeloid leukemia is organized as a hierarchy that origniates from a primitive hematopoietic cells. Nat Med, 1997; 3(7):730–737; doi: 10.1038/nm0798-822.
48.
LansdorpPM, SutherlandHJ, EavesCJ. Selective expression of CD45 isoforms on functional subpopulations of CD34+ hemopoietic cells from human bone marrow. J Exp Med, 1990; 172(1):363–366; doi: 10.1084/jem.172.1.363.
49.
BaumCM, WeissmanIL, TsukamotoAS, et al.Isolation of a candidate human hematopoietic stem-cell population. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1992; 89(7):2804–2808; doi: 10.1073/pnas.89.7.2804.
50.
FrangoulH, AltshulerD, CappelliniMD, et al.CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for sickle cell disease and β-Thalassemia. N Engl J Med, 2021; 384(3):252–260; doi: 10.1056/nejmoa2031054.
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.
