Background and Aim:Low-volume polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid (PEG-Asc) use is reported to be as safe and effective as traditional 4-L polyethylene glycol use. However, PEG-Asc produces bubbles, which cause problems during colonoscopy. Data on the effects of using antifoaming agents such as simethicone with PEG-Asc are lacking. The aim of this CONSORT-prospective, randomized, observer-blinded, controlled trial is to compare the quality of bowel preparation and compliance between PEG-Asc users and PEG-Asc plus simethicone users.Methods:Adult outpatients aged 18 to 80 years undergoing colonoscopy were recruited to the study. Two hundred sixty patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment arms, PEG-Asc or PEG-Asc plus simethicone. The primary outcome measure was the bowel cleansing quality using Boston bowel preparation scale and bubble scores. The secondary outcome measures were patient tolerability and doctor tolerability.Results:The simethicone group showed superior cleansing results (6–9 Boston scale scores: 99% vs. 84%, <5% bubble scores: 96% vs. 49%, P < 0.001) and fewer gastrointestinal symptoms (abdominal fullness: 24% vs. 55%, colicky pain: 5% vs. 24%, P < 0.001) than the non-simethicone group. Moreover, endoscopist fatigue during colonoscopy was lower in the simethicone group than in the non-simethicone group (1.31 ± 0.75 vs. 2.97 ± 2.14, P < 0.001).Conclusion:PEG-Asc plus simethicone use was more effective and associated with better patient and endoscopist tolerance than PEG-Asc use. Therefore, this combination is recommended as one of the promising methods for bowel preparation before colonoscopy.

The CRISPR–Cas9 system is widely used for target-specific genome engineering. CRISPR–Cas12a (Cpf1) is one of the CRISPR effectors that controls target genes by recognizing thymine-rich protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) sequences. Cas12a has a higher sensitivity to mismatches in the guide RNA than does Cas9; therefore, off-target sequence recognition and cleavage are lower. However, it tolerates mismatches in regions distant from the PAM sequence (TTTN or TTN) in the protospacer, and off-target cleavage issues may become more problematic when Cas12a activity is improved for therapeutic purposes. Therefore, we investigated off-target cleavage by Cas12a and modified the Cas12a (cr)RNA to address the off-target cleavage issue. We developed a CRISPR–Cas12a that can induce mutations in target DNA sequences in a highly specific and effective manner by partially substituting the (cr)RNA with DNA to change the energy potential of base pairing to the target DNA. A model to explain how chimeric (cr)RNA guided CRISPR–Cas12a and SpCas9 nickase effectively work in the intracellular genome is suggested. Chimeric guide-based CRISPR- Cas12a genome editing with reduced off-target cleavage, and the resultant, increased safety has potential for therapeutic applications in incurable diseases caused by genetic mutations.

Genotoxic events have been known as crucial step in the initiation of cancer. To assess the risk of cancer, genotoxicity assays, including comet, micronucleus (MN), chromosomal aberration, bacterial reverse, and sister chromatid exchange assay, can be performed. Compared with in vitro genotoxicity assay, in vivo genotoxicity assay has been used to verify in vitro assay result and definitely provide biological significance for certain organs or cell types. The comet assay can detect DNA strand breaks as markers of genotoxicity. Methods of the in vivo comet assay have been established by Japanese Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (JaCVAM) validation studies depending on tissue and sample types. The MN can be initiated by segregation error and lagging acentric chromosome fragment. Methods of the in vivo MN assay have been established by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test guidelines and many studies. Combining the in vivo comet and MN assay has been regarded as useful methodology for evaluating genetic damage, and it has been used in the assessment of potential carcinogenicity by complementarily presenting two distinct endpoints of the in vivo genotoxicity individual test. Few studies have investigated the quantitative relation between in vivo genotoxicity results and carcinogenicity. Extensive studies emphasizes that positive correlation is detectable. This review summarizes the results of the in vivo comet and MN assays that have investigated the genotoxicity of carcinogens as classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) carcinogenicity database. As a result, these genotoxicity data may provide meaningful information for the assessment of potential carcinogenicity and for implementation in the prevention of cancer.