Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages (May 2015)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
Advertisements

Targeted Disruption of V600E-Mutant BRAF Gene by CRISPR-Cpf1
Figure 1. AsCpf1 and LbCpf1-mediated gene editing in human cells
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages (March 2017)
Yuming Lu, Jian-Kang Zhu  Molecular Plant 
Volume 22, Issue 7, Pages (July 2015)
A Combinatorial CRISPR-Cas9 Attack on HIV-1 DNA Extinguishes All Infectious Provirus in Infected T Cell Cultures  Gang Wang, Na Zhao, Ben Berkhout, Atze.
Dan Ding, Kaiyuan Chen, Yuedan Chen, Hong Li, Kabin Xie 
Volume 12, Issue 10, Pages (September 2015)
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing of PML in human cell lines.
Shiran Bar, Maya Schachter, Talia Eldar-Geva, Nissim Benvenisty 
AGEseq: Analysis of Genome Editing by Sequencing
Correction of a Genetic Disease in Mouse via Use of CRISPR-Cas9
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages (November 2014)
Gaelen T. Hess, Josh Tycko, David Yao, Michael C. Bassik 
Volume 9, Issue 4, Pages (October 2017)
Mouse Genome Engineering via CRISPR-Cas9 for Study of Immune Function
Volume 24, Issue 8, Pages (August 2018)
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages (January 2018)
Volume 65, Issue 1, Pages (January 2017)
Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages (April 2014)
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages (October 2015)
Genome Engineering with CRISPR-Cas9 in the Mosquito Aedes aegypti
Target-Specific Precision of CRISPR-Mediated Genome Editing
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages (September 2016)
Volume 13, Issue 6, Pages (December 2013)
CRISPR-Cas9 for in vivo Gene Therapy: Promise and Hurdles
USH2A Gene Editing Using the CRISPR System
Guide RNA Functional Modules Direct Cas9 Activity and Orthogonality
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages (March 2017)
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages (November 2014)
Andrew R. Bassett, Charlotte Tibbit, Chris P. Ponting, Ji-Long Liu 
Volume 154, Issue 6, Pages (September 2013)
Simultaneous Reprogramming and Gene Correction of Patient Fibroblasts
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages (March 2015)
Volume 10, Issue 5, Pages (May 2012)
Gang Wang, Na Zhao, Ben Berkhout, Atze T Das  Molecular Therapy 
TALEN Gene Knockouts Reveal No Requirement for the Conserved Human Shelterin Protein Rap1 in Telomere Protection and Length Regulation  Shaheen Kabir,
Volume 9, Issue 4, Pages (November 2014)
Shiran Bar, Maya Schachter, Talia Eldar-Geva, Nissim Benvenisty 
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Volume 12, Issue 9, Pages (September 2015)
Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages (January 2014)
William T. Hendriks, Curtis R. Warren, Chad A. Cowan  Cell Stem Cell 
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages (April 2016)
Ignazio Maggio, Manuel A.F.V. Gonçalves  Trends in Biotechnology 
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
Volume 11, Issue 9, Pages (June 2015)
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages (September 2017)
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages (March 2015)
Casey Brewer, Elizabeth Chu, Mike Chin, Rong Lu  Cell Reports 
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages (October 2016)
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages (August 2015)
Volume 26, Issue 6, Pages (June 2018)
Ciaran M Lee, Thomas J Cradick, Gang Bao  Molecular Therapy 
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages (August 2014)
Volume 16, Issue 2, Pages (February 2015)
Polq-Mediated End Joining Is Essential for Surviving DNA Double-Strand Breaks during Early Zebrafish Development  Summer B. Thyme, Alexander F. Schier 
Fig. 4 Gene disruption via chip.
Volume 5, Issue 5, Pages (November 2015)
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
Volume 26, Issue 11, Pages (November 2018)
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (July 2014)
Genome-wide Functional Analysis Reveals Factors Needed at the Transition Steps of Induced Reprogramming  Chao-Shun Yang, Kung-Yen Chang, Tariq M. Rana 
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages e8 (May 2019)
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages (October 2016)
Genome-Edited Triple-Recessive Mutation Alters Seed Dormancy in Wheat
Trisomy Correction in Down Syndrome Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells
Fig. 3 Genome editing of the MSTN gene.
Presentation transcript:

Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages 875-883 (May 2015) Efficient CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Generation of Knockin Human Pluripotent Stem Cells Lacking Undesired Mutations at the Targeted Locus  Florian T. Merkle, Werner M. Neuhausser, David Santos, Eivind Valen, James A. Gagnon, Kristi Maas, Jackson Sandoe, Alexander F. Schier, Kevin Eggan  Cell Reports  Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages 875-883 (May 2015) DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007 Copyright © 2015 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Cell Reports 2015 11, 875-883DOI: (10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007) Copyright © 2015 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Gene Targeting Efficiency in hPSCs (A) Percentage of analyzed drug-resistant clones that gave PCR products of the expected size across both the 5′ and 3′ homology arms for each locus and Cas9-targeting strategy tested. Each dot represents a distinct combination of CRISPR sequence and targeted locus for a given Cas9 strategy. Clone numbers and targeting efficiencies are listed in Table 1. (B) Summary of targeting efficiencies for each Cas9 strategy at each locus and CRISPR combination (left) or at distinct genes (right). (C) Relative targeting efficiencies observed when using identical guide sequences but different Cas9-based strategies. (D) Relationship between number of clones analyzed and number of clones correctly targeted for each Cas9-based strategy. Error bars in (B) and (C) denote SEM. See also Figure S1. Cell Reports 2015 11, 875-883DOI: (10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007) Copyright © 2015 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Frequency of CRISPR-Cas9-Induced On-Target Indels (A) Schematic of a correctly targeted human pluripotent stem cell clone showing untargeted and targeted alleles, CRISPR-Cas9 cleavage sites (triangles), and the sequenced amplicons. (B) Schematic of deep-sequencing data, showing the genomic locus with the CRISPR guide sequence (red), PAM motif (blue), predicted cleavage site (triangles), and the calculation of the indel frequency. (C) The indel frequency at the untargeted allele of correctly targeted hPSC clones (number of sequenced clones indicated) is plotted for each targeted locus and Cas9 strategy. (D) Mean indel frequencies at the untargeted allele of correctly targeted hPSC clones. (E and F) Analysis as in (C) and (D) but performed at targeted alleles with intact CRISPR target sites. See also Figure S2. (G) Number of intact and unique indel alleles (sub-clones) per correctly targeted hPSC clone, examined at the untargeted allele of the HCRT-C locus. (H) Average allele frequency (sub-clone size) in hPSC clones. (I) Schematic diagram illustrating the hypothesis of heterogeneous clone formation. Error bars in (D), (F), and (H) denote SEM. See also Figure S2. Cell Reports 2015 11, 875-883DOI: (10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007) Copyright © 2015 The Authors Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Strategy for Generating Intact Knockin hPSC Lines (A) Schematic of a prototypical targeted allele with CRISPR target sites physically separated by gene insertion. Cas9 dn cleavage sites (triangles), 5′ amplicon (T5′), and 3′ amplicon (T3′) across 5′ and 3′ CRISPR target sites of the Cas9 dn strategy are illustrated. (B and C) Indel frequencies at the targeted allele of Cas9-dn-targeted clones shown for each clone (B) or as the mean indel frequency for each locus (C). (D) Mean indel frequencies at the untargeted allele of correctly targeted hPSC clones plotted against the targeting efficiency for each locus. (E) Percentage of clones with indel frequencies of 2% or less at the untargeted allele plotted against targeting efficiency for each locus. (F) Percentage of correctly targeted clones intact at both the targeted and untargeted allele. (G) Percentage of correctly targeted and intact clones among all drug-resistant clones screened. (H) Workflow for identifying clones of knockin hPSC clones free of unwanted mutations at the targeted locus. Error bars in (D), (F), and (G) denote SEM. See also Figure S3. Cell Reports 2015 11, 875-883DOI: (10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007) Copyright © 2015 The Authors Terms and Conditions