Many therapeutic applications of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing rely on delivery using the highly versatile adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector. The smallest type II Cas9 ortholog—Cje1Cas9, derived from Campylobacter jejuni with <1,000 amino acids—is particularly attractive for AAV delivery. However, the complex protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) of Cje1Cas9 (N3VRYAC) greatly restricts the density of recognition sequences in human genome. In this study, we identify two compact CjeCas9 orthologs designated as Cje2Cas9 and Cje3Cas9, whose PAM-interacting residues are different from those of the well-known Cje1Cas9. They can induce efficient genome editing in human cells, and their simpler trinucleotide PAM (N4CYA) requirements expand the scope of targeting. Moreover, Cje3Cas9 efficiently disrupts the Tyr gene in mice after being micro-injected into zygotes with the corresponding sgRNA. It also successfully disrupts the Pcsk9 gene in 8-week-old mouse liver after delivery with an sgRNA using an all-in-one AAV delivery vehicle. The gene-edited mice showed lower cholesterol level than wild-type mice. Notably, the 8e-nCje3–ABE and an sgRNA targeting Pcsk9 were successfully packaged into a single AAV vector for genome editing in adult mouse liver, with editing efficiency up to 12%. Thus, simple PAMs and a compact size enable Cje2/3Cas9 to expand the target scope of CRISPR-Cas9 toolsets, exhibiting considerable potential for therapeutic applications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science (New York, NY). 2013; 339:819–823. DOI: 10.1126/science.1231143.
2.
KnottGJ, DoudnaJA. CRISPR-Cas guides the future of genetic engineering. Science (New York, NY). 2018; 361:866–869. DOI: 10.1126/science.aat5011.
3.
WANGH, WuS, CapecchiMR, JaenischR. A brief review of genome editing technology for generating animal models. Front Agric Sci Eng. 2020; 7:123–128. DOI: 10.15302/j-fase-2019309.
4.
ProudfootC, McfarlaneG, WhitelawB, LillicoS. Livestock breeding for the 21st century: The promise of the editing revolution. Front Agric Sci Eng. 2020; 7:129–135. DOI: 10.15302/j-fase-2019304.
5.
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.
6.
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.
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.
8.
RanFA, CongL, YanWX, et al.In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature. 2015; 520:186–191. DOI: 10.1038/nature14299.
9.
HuZ, WangS, ZhangC, et al.A compact Cas9 ortholog from Staphylococcus auricularis (SauriCas9) expands the DNA targeting scope. PLoS Biol. 2020; 18:e3000686. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000686.
10.
WangD, LiJ, SongCQ, et al.Cas9-mediated allelic exchange repairs compound heterozygous recessive mutations in mice. Nat Biotechnol. 2018; 36:839–842. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4219.
11.
YehWH, Shubina-OleinikO, LevyJM, et al.In vivo base editing restores sensory transduction and transiently improves auditory function in a mouse model of recessive deafness. Sci Transl Med. 2020; 12. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aay9101.
12.
ChenY, ZhiS, LiuW, et al.Development of highly efficient dual-AAV split adenosine base editor for in vivo gene therapy. Small Methods. 2020; 4:2000309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smtd.202000309.
13.
LevyJM, YehWH, PendseN, et al.Cytosine and adenine base editing of the brain, liver, retina, heart and skeletal muscle of mice via adeno-associated viruses. Nat Biomed Eng. 2020; 4:97–110. DOI: 10.1038/s41551-019-0501-5.
14.
VilligerL, Grisch-ChanHM, LindsayH, et al.Treatment of a metabolic liver disease by in vivo genome base editing in adult mice. Nat Med. 2018; 24:1519–1525. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-018-0209-1.
15.
XuL, ZhangC, LiH, et al.Efficient precise in vivo base editing in adult dystrophic mice. Nat Commun. 2021; 12:3719. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-23996-y.
16.
IbraheimR, SongCQ, MirA, et al.All-in-one adeno-associated virus delivery and genome editing by Neisseria meningitidis Cas9 in vivo. Genome Biol. 2018; 19:137. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-018-1515-0.
17.
EdrakiA, MirA, IbraheimR, et al.A compact, high-accuracy Cas9 with a dinucleotide PAM for in vivo genome editing. Mol Cell. 2019; 73:714–726.e714. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.12.003.
18.
AgudeloD, CarterS, VelimirovicM, et al.Versatile and robust genome editing with Streptococcus thermophilus CRISPR1-Cas9. Genome Res. 2020; 30:107–117. DOI: 10.1101/gr.255414.119.
19.
KimE, KooT, ParkSW, et al.In vivo genome editing with a small Cas9 orthologue derived from Campylobacter jejuni. Nat Commun. 2017; 8:14500. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms14500.
20.
LiuZ, ChenS, XieW, et al.Versatile and efficient in vivo genome editing with compact Streptococcus pasteurianus Cas9. Mol Ther. 2022; 30:256–267. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2021.06.013.
21.
YamadaM, WatanabeY, GootenbergJS, et al.Crystal structure of the minimal Cas9 from Campylobacter jejuni reveals the molecular diversity in the CRISPR-Cas9 systems. Mol Cell. 2017; 65:1109–1121.e1103. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.02.007.
22.
FujiiW, IkedaA, SugiuraK, et al.Efficient generation of genome-modified mice using Campylobacter jejuni-derived CRISPR/Cas. Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18. DOI: 10.3390/ijms18112286.
23.
TangL, YangF, HeX, et al.Efficient cleavage resolves PAM preferences of CRISPR-Cas in human cells. Cell Regener. 2019; 8:44–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cr.2019.08.002.
24.
BrinkmanEK, ChenT, AmendolaM, et al.Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014; 42:e168. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gku936.
25.
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.
26.
LeenayRT, MaksimchukKR, SlotkowskiRA, et al.Identifying and visualizing functional PAM diversity across CRISPR-Cas systems. Mol Cell. 2016; 62:137–147. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.02.031.
27.
CradickTJ, QiuP, LeeCM, et al.COSMID: A web-based tool for identifying and validating CRISPR/Cas off-target sites. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2014; 3:e214. DOI: 10.1038/mtna.2014.64.
28.
HuZ, ZhangC, WangS, et al.Discovery and engineering of small SlugCas9 with broad targeting range and high specificity and activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021; 49:4008–4019. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab148.
29.
SunW, YangJ, ChengZ, et al.Structures of Neisseria meningitidis Cas9 complexes in catalytically poised and anti-CRISPR-inhibited states. Mol Cell. 2019; 76:938–952.e935. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.09.025.
30.
MillerSM, WangT, RandolphPB, et al.Continuous evolution of SpCas9 variants compatible with non-G PAMs. Nat Biotechnol. 2020. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0412-8.
31.
LiuZ, ChenS, JiaY, et al.Efficient and high-fidelity base editor with expanded PAM compatibility for cytidine dinucleotide. Sci China Life Sci. 2021; 64:1355–1367. DOI: 10.1007/s11427-020-1775-2.
32.
LiuZ, ShanH, ChenS, et al.Improved base editor for efficient editing in GC contexts in rabbits with an optimized AID-Cas9 fusion. FASEB J. 2019; 33:9210–9219. DOI: 10.1096/fj.201900476RR.
33.
RauchBJ, SilvisMR, HultquistJF, et al.Inhibition of CRISPR-Cas9 with bacteriophage proteins. Cell. 2017; 168:150–158.e110. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.12.009.
34.
MarinoND, Pinilla-RedondoR, CsörgőB, et al.Anti-CRISPR protein applications: Natural brakes for CRISPR-Cas technologies. Nat Methods. 2020; 17:471–479. DOI: 10.1038/s41592-020-0771-6.
35.
YangD, XuJ, ZhuT, et al.Effective gene targeting in rabbits using RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. J Mol Cell Biol. 2014; 6:97–99. DOI: 10.1093/jmcb/mjt047.
36.
LiuZ, ChenM, ChenS, et al.Highly efficient RNA-guided base editing in rabbit. Nat Commun. 2018; 9:2717. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05232-2.
37.
TripathiRK, StrunkKM, GiebelLB, et al.Tyrosinase gene mutations in type I (tyrosinase-deficient) oculocutaneous albinism define two clusters of missense substitutions. Am J Med Genet. 1992; 43:865–871. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.1320430523.
38.
WangX, RaghavanA, ChenT, et al.CRISPR-Cas9 targeting of PCSK9 in human hepatocytes in vivo-brief report. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2016; 36:783–786. DOI: 10.1161/atvbaha.116.307227.
39.
ChadwickAC, WangX, MusunuruK. In vivo base editing of PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) as a therapeutic alternative to genome editing. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2017; 37:1741–1747. DOI: doi:10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.309881.
40.
WangL, XueW, ZhangH, et al.Eliminating base-editor-induced genome-wide and transcriptome-wide off-target mutations. Nat Cell Biol. 2021; 23:552–563. DOI: 10.1038/s41556-021-00671-4.
41.
KimDY, LeeJM, MoonSB, et al.Efficient CRISPR editing with a hypercompact Cas12f1 and engineered guide RNAs delivered by adeno-associated virus. Nat Biotechnol. 2022; 40:94–102. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-021-01009-z.
42.
XuX, ChemparathyA, ZengL, et al.Engineered miniature CRISPR-Cas system for mammalian genome regulation and editing. Mol Cell. 2021; 81:4333–4345.e4334. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2021.08.008.
43.
WuZ, ZhangY, YuH, et al.Programmed genome editing by a miniature CRISPR-Cas12f nuclease. Nat Chem Biol. 2021; 17:1132–1138. DOI: 10.1038/s41589-021-00868-6.
44.
BigelyteG, YoungJK, KarvelisT, et al.Miniature type V-F CRISPR-Cas nucleases enable targeted DNA modification in cells. Nat Commun. 2021; 12:6191. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26469-4.
45.
KarvelisT, DruteikaG, BigelyteG, et al.Transposon-associated TnpB is a programmable RNA-guided DNA endonuclease. Nature. 2021; 599:692–696. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04058-1.
46.
ZhaoD, LiJ, LiS, et al.Glycosylase base editors enable C-to-A and C-to-G base changes. Nat Biotechnol. 2021; 39:35–40. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0592-2.
47.
KurtIC, ZhouR, IyerS, et al.CRISPR C-to-G base editors for inducing targeted DNA transversions in human cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2021; 39:41–46. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0609-x.
48.
ChenL, ParkJE, PaaP, et al.Precise and programmable C:G to G:C base editing in genomic DNA. bioRxiv 2020:2020.2007.2021.213827. DOI: 10.1101/2020.07.21.213827.
49.
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.
50.
SakataRC, IshiguroS, MoriH, et al.Base editors for simultaneous introduction of C-to-T and A-to-G mutations. Nat Biotechnol. 2020; 38:865–869. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0509-0.
51.
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.
52.
XieJ, HuangX, WangX, et al.ACBE, a new base editor for simultaneous C-to-T and A-to-G substitutions in mammalian systems. BMC Biol. 2020; 18:131. DOI: 10.1186/s12915-020-00866-5.
53.
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.
54.
ShamsA, HigginsSA, FellmannC, et al.Comprehensive deletion landscape of CRISPR-Cas9 identifies minimal RNA-guided DNA-binding modules. bioRxiv 2020:2020.2010.2019.344077. DOI: 10.1101/2020.10.19.344077.
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.
