2022
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-29339-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highly efficient prime editing by introducing same-sense mutations in pegRNA or stabilizing its structure

Abstract: Prime editor (PE), which is developed by combining Cas9 nickase and an engineered reverse transcriptase, can mediate all twelve types of base substitutions and small insertions or deletions in living cells but its efficiency remains low. Here, we develop spegRNA by introducing same-sense mutations at proper positions in the reverse-transcription template of pegRNA to increase PE’s base-editing efficiency up-to 4,976-fold (on-average 353-fold). We also develop apegRNA by altering the pegRNA secondary structure … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
51
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
5
51
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Alternatively, expressing pegRNAs with RNA polymerase II also removes the need to avoid poly(U) termination signals 79 . In addition, Chen and co-workers showed higher prime editing efficiency with apegRNAs that stabilize the secondary structure of the second stem-loop within the pegRNA scaffold 80 (Table 1). However, other pegRNA scaffold variants with even lower folding energies did not improve prime editing 80 , suggesting that the sequence determinants of pegRNA efficiency are complex.…”
Section: Table 1 (Continued) | Prime Editor and Pegrna Architecturesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Alternatively, expressing pegRNAs with RNA polymerase II also removes the need to avoid poly(U) termination signals 79 . In addition, Chen and co-workers showed higher prime editing efficiency with apegRNAs that stabilize the secondary structure of the second stem-loop within the pegRNA scaffold 80 (Table 1). However, other pegRNA scaffold variants with even lower folding energies did not improve prime editing 80 , suggesting that the sequence determinants of pegRNA efficiency are complex.…”
Section: Table 1 (Continued) | Prime Editor and Pegrna Architecturesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, Chen and co-workers showed higher prime editing efficiency with apegRNAs that stabilize the secondary structure of the second stem-loop within the pegRNA scaffold 80 (Table 1). However, other pegRNA scaffold variants with even lower folding energies did not improve prime editing 80 , suggesting that the sequence determinants of pegRNA efficiency are complex. Additional exploration of pegRNA scaffold variants may therefore provide an opportunity for further prime editing improvement.…”
Section: Table 1 (Continued) | Prime Editor and Pegrna Architecturesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Li et al stabilized pegRNA by inserting a C/G pair or changing each non-C/G pair to a C/G pair in the small hairpin of pegRNA(apegRNA), resulting in an average 2.77-fold improvement in indel-editing efficiency when applied it to PE3 [ 31 ]. They also adopted the second strategy: introducing same-sense mutations at appropriate positions in the RT template portion of pegRNA (spegRNA), which increased the base-editing efficiency by an average of 353-fold.…”
Section: Improvements In Prime Editorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, a number of modifications proposed further make it possible to increase its efficiency many times over. Optimization of nuclear localization sequence of the genome editor (PE2*) [ 94 ], additional single-strand DNA break (PE3) [ 95 ], modification of gRNA backbone [ 96 ] and blocking DNA mismatch repair mechanisms using transient expression of dominant negative MMR protein (MLH1dn)—PE5 [ 97 ]—all increased the modification efficiency of prime editing up to 15–99% (depending on the edited gene, length and nature of the modification) and reduced the probability of indels to 1–10% [ 96 , 97 ].…”
Section: Genome Editingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latest modifications of prime editing (twinPE) make it possible to overcome this limit and integrate up to 40,000 base pairs into the genome or delete protensive DNA fragments (at least, 800 base pairs long) with an efficiency of up to 80% [ 98 ]. In most cases, such high efficiency of editing systems (including prime editing) has been demonstrated on transformed cell cultures: HEK293, HeLa, K562, and U2OS [ 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 ], whereas the efficiency of most genome editors in primary cells and iPSCs remains rather modest. The effectiveness of the latest modifications of prime editing in iPSCs and primary cell cultures has yet to be established, but preliminary studies demonstrate the high potential and flexibility of this editing system.…”
Section: Genome Editingmentioning
confidence: 99%