Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) have great therapeutic potential because of their ability to both self-renew and differentiate. It has been proposed that, given their unique properties, a small number of genetically modified HSPCs could accomplish lifelong, corrective reconstitution of the entire hematopoietic system in patients with various hematologic disorders. Scientists have demonstrated that gene addition therapies—targeted to HSPCs and using integrating retroviral vectors—possess clear clinical benefits in multiple diseases, among them immunodeficiencies, storage disorders, and hemoglobinopathies. Scientists attempting to develop clinically relevant gene therapy protocols have, however, encountered a number of unexpected hurdles because of their incomplete knowledge of target cells, genomic control, and gene transfer technologies. Targeted gene-editing technologies using engineered nucleases such as ZFN, TALEN, and/or CRISPR/Cas9 RGEN show great clinical promise, allowing for the site-specific correction of disease-causing mutations—a process with important applications in autosomal dominant or dominant-negative genetic disorders. The relative simplicity of the CRISPR/Cas9 system, in particular, has sparked an exponential increase in the scientific community's interest in and use of these gene-editing technologies. In this minireview, we discuss the specific applications of gene-editing technologies in human HSPCs, as informed by prior experience with gene addition strategies. HSPCs are desirable but challenging targets; the specific mechanisms these cells evolved to protect themselves from DNA damage render them potentially more susceptible to oncogenesis, especially given their ability to self-renew and their long-term proliferative potential. We further review scientists' experience with gene-editing technologies to date, focusing on strategies to move these techniques toward implementation in safe and effective clinical trials.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WilliamsDA, LemischkaIR, NathanDG, et al.Introduction of new genetic material into pluripotent hematopoietic stem-cells of the mouse. Nature, 1984; 310:476–480.
2.
Cavazzana-CalvoM, Hacein-BeyS, de Saint BasileG, et al.Gene therapy of human severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)-X1 disease. Science, 2000; 288:669–672.
3.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, HauerJ, LimA, et al.Efficacy of gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. N Engl J Med, 2010; 363:355–364.
4.
AiutiA, CattaneoF, GalimbertiS, et al.Gene therapy for immunodeficiency due to adenosine deaminase deficiency. N Engl J Med, 2009; 360:447–458.
5.
BoztugK, SchmidtM, SchwarzerA, et al.Stem-cell gene therapy for the Wiskott–Aldrich syndrome. N Engl J Med, 2010; 363:1918–1927.
6.
NaldiniL. Gene therapy returns to centre stage. Nature, 2015; 526:351–360.
7.
Hacein-Bey-AbinaS, GarrigueA, WangGP, et al.Insertional oncogenesis in 4 patients after retrovirus-mediated gene therapy of SCID-X1. J Clin Invest, 2008; 118:3132–3142.
8.
HoweSJ, MansourMR, SchwarzwaelderK, et al.Insertional mutagenesis combined with acquired somatic mutations causes leukemogenesis following gene therapy of SCID-X1 patients. J Clin Invest, 2008; 118:3143–3150.
9.
BaldoA, van den AkkerE, BergmansHE, et al.General considerations on the biosafety of virus-derived vectors used in gene therapy and vaccination. Curr Gene Ther, 2013; 13:385–394.
10.
YamashitaM, EmermanM. Retroviral infection of non-dividing cells: old and new perspectives. Virology, 2006; 344:88–93.
11.
SchroderAR, ShinnP, ChenH, et al.HIV-1 integration in the human genome favors active genes and local hotspots. Cell, 2002; 110:521–529.
12.
YiY, NohMJ, LeeKH. Current advances in retroviral gene therapy. Curr Gene Ther, 2011; 11:218–228.
13.
GuptaRM, MusunuruK. Expanding the genetic editing tool kit: ZFNs, TALENs, and CRISPR–Cas9. J Clin Invest, 2014; 124:4154–4161.
14.
MoscouMJ, BogdanoveAJ. A simple cipher governs DNA recognition by TAL effectors. Science, 2009; 326:1501.
15.
UrnovFD, MillerJC, LeeYL, et al.Highly efficient endogenous human gene correction using designed zinc-finger nucleases. Nature, 2005; 435:646–651.
16.
KimH, KimJS. A guide to genome engineering with programmable nucleases. Nat Rev Genet, 2014; 15:321–334.
17.
LiuJ, GajT, YangY, et al.Efficient delivery of nuclease proteins for genome editing in human stem cells and primary cells. Nat Protoc, 2015; 10:1842–1859.
18.
ChoSW, KimS, KimJM, et al.Targeted genome engineering in human cells with the Cas9 RNA-guided endonuclease. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:230–232.
19.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science, 2013; 339:819–823.
20.
HwangWY, FuY, ReyonD, et al.Efficient genome editing in zebrafish using a CRISPR–Cas system. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:227–229.
21.
JiangW, BikardD, CoxD, et al.RNA-guided editing of bacterial genomes using CRISPR–Cas systems. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:233–239.
22.
JinekM, ChylinskiK, FonfaraI, et al.A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 2012; 337:816–821.
23.
HutterG, NowakD, MossnerM, et al.Long-term control of HIV by CCR5 Δ32/Δ32 stem-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med, 2009; 360:692–698.
24.
BauerDE, OrkinSH. Hemoglobin switching's surprise: the versatile transcription factor BCL11A is a master repressor of fetal hemoglobin. Curr Opin Genet Dev, 2015; 33:62–70.
25.
SegalDJ, GoncalvesJ, EberhardyS, et al.Attenuation of HIV-1 replication in primary human cells with a designed zinc finger transcription factor. J Biol Chem, 2004; 279:14509–14519.
26.
HecklD, KowalczykMS, YudovichD, et al.Generation of mouse models of myeloid malignancy with combinatorial genetic lesions using CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2014; 32:941–946.
27.
YuKR, CoratMAF, MetaisJY, et al.The cytotoxic effect of RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9 on human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs). Mol Ther, 2016; 24:S225–S226.
28.
GajT, GuoJ, KatoY, et al.Targeted gene knockout by direct delivery of zinc-finger nuclease proteins. Nat Methods, 2012; 9:805–807.
29.
WanischK, Yanez-MunozRJ. Integration-deficient lentiviral vectors: a slow coming of age. Mol Ther, 2009; 17:1316–1332.
30.
LombardoA, GenoveseP, BeausejourCM, et al.Gene editing in human stem cells using zinc finger nucleases and integrase-defective lentiviral vector delivery. Nat Biotechnol, 2007; 25:1298–1306.
31.
JoglekarAV, HollisRP, KuftinecG, et al.Integrase-defective lentiviral vectors as a delivery platform for targeted modification of adenosine deaminase locus. Mol Ther, 2013; 21:1705–1717.
32.
LiLJ, KrymskayaL, WangJB, et al.Genomic editing of the HIV-1 coreceptor CCR5 in adult hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells using zinc finger nucleases. Mol Ther, 2013; 21:1259–1269.
33.
SaydaminovaK, YeX, WangH, et al.Efficient genome editing in hematopoietic stem cells with helper-dependent Ad5/35 vectors expressing site-specific endonucleases under microRNA regulation. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev, 2015; 1:14057.
34.
HastieE, SamulskiRJ. Adeno-associated virus at 50: a golden anniversary of discovery, research, and gene therapy success—a personal perspective. Hum Gene Ther, 2015; 26:257–265.
35.
NelsonCE, HakimCH, OusteroutDG, et al.In vivo genome editing improves muscle function in a mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Science, 2016; 351:403–407.
36.
RanFA, CongL, YanWX, et al.In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature, 2015; 520:186–191.
37.
WangJ, ExlineCM, DeClercqJJ, et al.Homology-driven genome editing in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells using ZFN mRNA and AAV6 donors. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:1256–1263.
38.
BuecheleC, BreeseEH, SchneidawindD, et al.MLL leukemia induction by genome editing of human CD34+ hematopoietic cells. Blood, 2015; 126:1683–1694.
39.
MandalPK, FerreiraLM, CollinsR, et al.Efficient ablation of genes in human hematopoietic stem and effector cells using CRISPR/Cas9. Cell Stem Cell, 2014; 15:643–652.
40.
HoltN, WangJ, KimK, et al.Human hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells modified by zinc-finger nucleases targeted to CCR5 control HIV-1 in vivo. Nat Biotechnol, 2010; 28:839–847.
41.
MaederML, GersbachCA. Genome-editing technologies for gene and cell therapy. Mol Ther, 2016; 24:430–446.
42.
GenoveseP, SchiroliG, EscobarG, et al.Targeted genome editing in human repopulating haematopoietic stem cells. Nature, 2014; 510:235–240.
43.
De RavinSS, ReikA, LiuPQ, et al.Targeted gene addition in human CD34+ hematopoietic cells for correction of X-linked chronic granulomatous disease. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:424–429.
44.
PetersonCW, WangJ, NormanKK, et al.Long-term multilineage engraftment of autologous genome-edited hematopoietic stem cells in nonhuman primates. Blood, 2016; 127:2416–2426.
45.
ChangKH, SullivanT, LiuM, et al.Clonal analysis of human bone marrow CD34+ cells edited by BCL11A-targeting zinc finger nucleases reveals clinically relevant levels of fetal globin expression in edited erythroid progeny. Blood, 2015; 126.
46.
HendelA, BakRO, ClarkJT, et al.Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR–Cas genome editing in human primary cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:985–989.
47.
LiangX, PotterJ, KumarS, et al.Rapid and highly efficient mammalian cell engineering via Cas9 protein transfection. J Biotechnol, 2015; 208:44–53.
48.
SchiroliG, GenoveseP, CapoV, et al.Targeted genome editing in mouse hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPC) to model gene correction of SCID-X1. Hum Gene Ther, 2015; 26:A8–A8.
49.
HobanMD, CostGJ, MendelMC, et al.Correction of the sickle cell disease mutation in human hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. Blood, 2015; 125:2597–2604.
50.
DeWittM, MagisW, BrayNL, et al.Efficient correction of the sickle mutation in human hematopoietic stem cells using a Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complex. bioRxiv (in press). Preprint available from: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/01/15/036236
51.
WeinstockDM, RichardsonCA, ElliottB, et al.Modeling oncogenic translocations: distinct roles for double-strand break repair pathways in translocation formation in mammalian cells. DNA Repair (Amst), 2006; 5:1065–1074.
52.
MillerJC, HolmesMC, WangJ, et al.An improved zinc-finger nuclease architecture for highly specific genome editing. Nat Biotechnol, 2007; 25:778–785.
53.
MillerJC, ZhangL, XiaDF, et al.Improved specificity of TALE-based genome editing using an expanded RVD repertoire. Nat Methods, 2015; 12:465–471.
FuY, SanderJD, ReyonD, et al.Improving CRISPR–Cas nuclease specificity using truncated guide RNAs. Nat Biotechnol, 2014; 32:279–284.
56.
ChoSW, KimS, KimY, et al.Analysis of off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas-derived RNA-guided endonucleases and nickases. Genome Res, 2014; 24:132–141.
57.
RanFA, HsuPD, LinCY, et al.Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR Cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell, 2013; 154:1380–1389.
58.
MaliP, AachJ, StrangesPB, et al.CAS9 transcriptional activators for target specificity screening and paired nickases for cooperative genome engineering. Nat Biotechnol, 2013; 31:833–838.
59.
KimD, KimJ, HurJK, et al.Genome-wide analysis reveals specificities of Cpf1 endonucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol, 2016; 34:863–868.
60.
ZetscheB, GootenbergJS, AbudayyehOO, et al.Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR–Cas system. Cell, 2015; 163:759–771.
61.
PetersW, DupuisM, CharoIF. A mechanism for the impaired IFN-γ production in C-C chemokine receptor 2 (CCR2) knockout mice: role of CCR2 in linking the innate and adaptive immune responses. J Immunol, 2000; 165:7072–7077.
62.
SmithMW, CarringtonM, WinklerC, et al.CCR2 chemokine receptor and AIDS progression. Nat Med, 1997; 3:1052–1053.
63.
GabrielR, LombardoA, ArensA, et al.An unbiased genome-wide analysis of zinc-finger nuclease specificity. Nat Biotechnol, 2011; 29:816–823.
64.
Corrigan-CurayJ, O'ReillyM, KohnDB, et al.Genome editing technologies: defining a path to clinic. Mol Ther, 2015; 23:796–806.
65.
TsaiSQ, ZhengZ, NguyenNT, et al.GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR–Cas nucleases. Nat Biotechnol, 2015; 33:187–197.
66.
MilyavskyM, GanOI, TrottierM, et al.A distinctive DNA damage response in human hematopoietic stem cells reveals an apoptosis-independent role for p53 in self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell, 2010; 7:186–197.
67.
PorteusMH. Towards a new era in medicine: therapeutic genome editing. Genome Biol, 2015; 16:286.
68.
MezquitaP, BeardBC, KiemHP. NOD/SCID repopulating cells contribute only to short-term repopulation in the baboon. Gene Ther, 2008; 15:1460–1462.
69.
McDermottSP, EppertK, LechmanER, et al.Comparison of human cord blood engraftment between immunocompromised mouse strains. Blood, 2010; 116:193–200.
70.
NaldiniL. Ex vivo gene transfer and correction for cell-based therapies. Nat Rev Genet, 2011; 12:301–315.
71.
TebasP, SteinD, TangWW, et al.Gene editing of CCR5 in autologous CD4 T cells of persons infected with HIV. N Engl J Med, 2014; 370:901–910.
72.
PoirotL, PhilipB, Schiffer-ManniouiC, et al.Multiplex genome-edited T-cell manufacturing platform for “off-the-shelf” adoptive T-cell immunotherapies. Cancer Res, 2015; 75:3853–3864.
