A Practical Guide to Genome Editing Using Targeted Nuclease Technologies

Emerging technology has a brilliant future: the CRISPR-Cas system for senescence, inflammation, and cartilage repair in osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA), known as one of the most common types of aseptic inflammation of the musculoskeletal system, is characterized by chronic pain and whole-joint lesions. With cellular and molecular changes including senescence, inflammatory alterations, and subsequent cartilage defects, OA eventually leads to a series of adverse outcomes such as pain and disability. CRISPR-Cas-related technology has been proposed and explored as a gene therapy, offering potential gene-editing tools that are in the spotlight. Considering the genetic and multigene regulatory mechanisms of OA, we systematically review current studies on CRISPR-Cas technology for improving OA in terms of senescence, inflammation, and cartilage damage and summarize various strategies for delivering CRISPR products, hoping to provide a new perspective for the treatment of OA by taking advantage of CRISPR technology.

Epigenome editing for targeted DNA (de)methylation: a new perspective in modulating gene expression

Traditionally, it has been believed that inheritance is driven as phenotypic variations resulting from changes in DNA sequence. However, this paradigm has been challenged and redefined in the contemporary era of epigenetics. The changes in DNA methylation, histone modification, non-coding RNA biogenesis, and chromatin remodeling play crucial roles in genomic functions and regulation of gene expression. More importantly, some of these changes are inherited to the next generations as a part of epigenetic memory and play significant roles in gene expression. The sum total of all changes in DNA bases, histone proteins, and ncRNA biogenesis constitutes the epigenome. Continuous progress in deciphering epigenetic regulations and the existence of heritable epigenetic/epiallelic variations associated with trait of interest enables to deploy epigenome editing tools to modulate gene expression. DNA methylation marks can be utilized in epigenome editing for the manipulation of gene expression. Initially, genome/epigenome editing technologies relied on zinc-finger protein or transcriptional activator-like effector protein. However, the discovery of clustered regulatory interspaced short palindromic repeats CRISPR)/deadCRISPR-associated protein 9 (dCas9) enabled epigenome editing to be more specific/efficient for targeted DNA (de)methylation. One of the major concerns has been the off-target effects, wherein epigenome editing may unintentionally modify gene/regulatory element which may cause unintended change/harmful effects. Moreover, epigenome editing of germline cell raises several ethical/safety issues. This review focuses on the recent developments in epigenome editing tools/techniques, technological limitations, and future perspectives of this emerging technology in therapeutics for human diseases as well as plant improvement to achieve sustainable developmental goals.

Improvements of nuclease and nickase gene modification techniques for the treatment of genetic diseases

Advancements in genome editing make possible to exploit the functions of enzymes for efficient DNA modifications with tremendous potential to treat human genetic diseases. Several nuclease genome editing strategies including Meganucleases (MNs), Zinc Finger Nucleases (ZFNs), Transcription Activator-like Effector Nucleases (TALENs) and Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-CRISPR associated proteins (CRISPR-Cas) have been developed for the correction of genetic mutations. CRISPR-Cas has further been engineered to create nickase genome editing tools including Base editors and Prime editors with much precision and efficacy. In this review, we summarized recent improvements in nuclease and nickase genome editing approaches for the treatment of genetic diseases. We also highlighted some limitations for the translation of these approaches into clinical applications.

Comparison of the Feasibility, Efficiency, and Safety of Genome Editing Technologies

Recent advances in programmable nucleases including meganucleases (MNs), zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-Cas (CRISPR-Cas) have propelled genome editing from explorative research to clinical and industrial settings. Each technology, however, features distinct modes of action that unevenly impact their applicability across the entire genome and are often tested under significantly different conditions. While CRISPR-Cas is currently leading the field due to its versatility, quick adoption, and high degree of support, it is not without limitations. Currently, no technology can be regarded as ideal or even applicable to every case as the context dictates the best approach for genetic modification within a target organism. In this review, we implement a four-pillar framework (context, feasibility, efficiency, and safety) to assess the main genome editing platforms, as a basis for rational decision-making by an expanding base of users, regulators, and consumers. Beyond carefully considering their specific use case with the assessment framework proposed here, we urge stakeholders interested in genome editing to independently validate the parameters of their chosen platform prior to commitment. Furthermore, safety across all applications, particularly in clinical settings, is a paramount consideration and comprehensive off-target detection strategies should be incorporated within workflows to address this. Often neglected aspects such as immunogenicity and the inadvertent selection of mutants deficient for DNA repair pathways must also be considered.

Therapeutic gene editing strategies using CRISPR-Cas9 for the β-hemoglobinopathies

With advancements in gene editing technologies, our ability to make precise and efficient modifications to the genome is increasing at a remarkable rate, paving the way for scientists and clinicians to uniquely treat a multitude of previously irremediable diseases. CRISPR-Cas9, short for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and CRISPR-associated protein 9, is a gene editing platform with the ability to alter the nucleotide sequence of the genome in living cells. This technology is increasing the number and pace at which new gene editing treatments for genetic disorders are moving toward the clinic. The β-hemoglobinopathies are a group of monogenic diseases, which despite their high prevalence and chronic debilitating nature, continue to have few therapeutic options available. In this review, we will discuss our existing comprehension of the genetics and current state of treatment for β-hemoglobinopathies, consider potential genome editing therapeutic strategies, and provide an overview of the current state of clinical trials using CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing.

Copy-number variation introduced by long transgenes compromises mouse male fertility independently of pachytene checkpoints

Long transgenes are often used in mammalian genetics, e.g., to rescue mutations in large genes. In the course of experiments addressing the genetic basis of hybrid sterility caused by meiotic defects in mice bearing different alleles of Prdm9, we discovered that introduction of copy-number variation (CNV) via two independent insertions of long transgenes containing incomplete Prdm9 decreased testicular weight and epididymal sperm count. Transgenic animals displayed increased occurrence of seminiferous tubules with apoptotic cells at 18 days postpartum (dpp) corresponding to late meiotic prophase I, but not at 21 dpp. We hypothesized that long transgene insertions could cause asynapsis, but the immunocytochemical data revealed that the adult transgenic testes carried a similar percentage of asynaptic pachytene spermatocytes as the controls. These transgenic spermatocytes displayed less crossovers but similar numbers of unrepaired meiotic breaks. Despite slightly increased frequency of metaphase I spermatocytes with univalent chromosome(s) and reduced numbers of metaphase II spermatocytes, cytological studies did not reveal increased apoptosis in tubules containing the metaphase spermatocytes, but found an increased percentage of tubules carrying apoptotic spermatids. Sperm counts of subfertile animals inversely correlated with the transcription levels of the Psmb1 gene encoded within these two transgenes. The effect of the transgenes was dependent on sex and genetic background. Our results imply that the fertility of transgenic hybrid animals is not compromised by the impaired meiotic synapsis of homologous chromosomes, but can be negatively influenced by the increased expression of the introduced genes.