DOCSLIB.ORG

CRISPR/Cas9 - Gene-Editing Technology Takes Off

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CRISPR/Cas9 - Gene-Editing Technology Takes Off Brief for GSDR – 2016 Update CRISPR/Cas9 - gene-editing technology takes off Friedrich Soltau, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs* Introduction Issues for scientific debate Recent years have seen rapid progress in the The CRISPR technology involves the application area of biotechnology and the life sciences, of a defence mechanism developed by driven by factors such as the sharply falling bacterial; cells against viral invaders. In very cost of DNA sequencing and the wider simplified terms, what makes it useful is that it application of computational approaches. In allows researchers to precisely target a particular, it is a very new gene-editing location on the DNA of a cell, make a “cut”, and technology called CRISPR 1 that has caused then insert a custom-designed DNA sequence. excitement among researchers with its Or, alternatively, “cut” and thus delete the potential applications in biotechnology and targeted genetic sequence, say a gene medicine. The development of a rapid, reliable, encoding an undesirable trait associated with and cost-effective technology for editing the an illness. Unlike previous gene editing genomes of living plants, animals and humans technologies, it is easy to use, in that the holds out great promise. However, the new various elements can be quickly and reliably technology – especially the possibility of assembled, without a process of tinkering and editing the genome so that changes are passed trial and error. The process of gene-editing has down, so-called germline editing – raises essentially moved from being a very ethical and safety concerns (Ledford, 2015a). specialized, custom-designed approach, to a Reports that scientists had used CRISPR to powerful, reliable tool at the disposal of a wide engineer human embryos (albeit ones unable range of scientists. to result in live births) have added urgency to Like any new technology, there are different the ethical debate about the use of the technology (Cyranoski & Reardon, 2015). views about its application. Among the Safety concerns include the risk that the applications that have been raised is the use of CRISPR to propagate so-called gene drives to technique may cause unintended and potentially risky edits, or that lack of adequate eliminate diseases such as malaria, by controls may lead to the escape of edited influencing the capacity of the mosquito vector organisms capable of disrupting ecosystems to transmit the disease, or improving crops varieties (Je Wook Woo et al, 2015). In human and harming biodiversity (Ledford, 2015a). medicine, the CRISP could be used for a range The very rapid adoption of the technology, and of purposes, including improving the function its relative simplicity, adds urgency to of genes, carrying out screening for new discussions around how and when it should be targets for therapeutics, and direct used, as well as the need for monitoring and therapeutics, i.e. gene therapy (Charpentier, oversight. 2015). 1 Outside the realm of human medicine, CRISPR CRISPR stands for “clustered, regularly inter- spaced palindromic repeats”. It often referred to as is poised to accelerate efforts to use CRISPR/Cas9, with Cas9 being the enzyme that biotechnology to create plants and animals cleaves (cuts) the DNA strand. 1 * The views and opinions expressed are the author’s and do not represent those of the Secretariat of the United Nations. Online publication or dissemination does not imply endorsement by the United Nations. with desirable traits. CRISPR has also made deleterious effects, one would also need to possible the realization of a “gene drives”, consider other, protective effects (Lander, which works by installing the gene-editing 2015). machinery in a living thing so that it will spread specific DNA every time an organism In addition, from an ethical standpoint, there is reproduces (Gantz & Bier, 2015). This has it the consideration that the since the people possible, for instance, to engineer in the who would be affected by germline gene laboratory mosquitoes that resist malaria and therapy are not yet born, they are not in a spread this trait to their progeny (James et al, position to decide whether to have the 2015). A recent overview paper by leading treatment (NHI, 2016). Considerations such as this, together with appeal to some of genetic authorities in the field states that gene drives have the potential to prevent the spread of enhancement (“designer babies”), underpin disease, improve agriculture by addressing the call to secure through the United Nations a pesticide and herbicide resistance in insects complete ban on germline editing for and weeds, and help manage invasive species reproductive purposes (Haker, 2015). (Esvelt et al, 2014). The authors caution, The argument has been made that there is no however, that “the possibility of unwanted pressing need for making heritable ecological effects and near-certainty of spread modifications to the human germline (Lander, across political borders demand careful 2015). First, diseases caused by a single errant assessment of each potential application.” gene are actually rare, and germline gene It is important to distinguish the kinds of editing is not applicable to common diseases like cancer or diabetes where the hereditary human gene therapy that can be carried out with CRISPR. One involves targeting the component is caused by many different genes, therapy to body cells such as bone marrow or in conjunction with environmental factors. Second, in most cases pre-implantation genetic blood cells, so-called somatic cells. Importantly, any changes made using this kind testing can be used during IVF to detect the of gene therapy cannot be passed on to a egg cells carrying the disease-related gene. An person’s children. A second form of gene opposing view disputes the safety concerns therapy can targets egg and sperm cells, so- related to “off-target” edits, pointing out that called germline cells. Changes made to CRISPR is very accurate (Church, 2015) and germline cells – deletions or insertions – would becoming more so (Ledford, 2015b). It is also be passed on to future generations (NHI, argued that genetic diseases where prenatal 2016). While such as therapy could, for diagnosis would be of no assistance – e.g. instance potentially free future generations in where one parent has two dominant copies of a family from a particular genetic disorder, a disease-related gene – are more common there is also the risk of long-term side effects than otherwise thought (Church, 2015). that are not yet known. Thus it ought to be A statement released by the Organizing considered that the human genome reflects Committee of the International Summit on our evolution, and that there may be as yet Human Genome Editing, held in December unknown reasons why favourable, protective 2015, stated that germline editing in a clinical genes are not more common (Lander, 2015). setting should not proceed unless concerns Related to this, is the question of pleiotropy – a regarding safety and effectiveness have been single gene may have multiple effects. Thus in resolved, and there is broad social consensus deleting a gene a gene on grounds of its about the appropriateness of the use in this 2 setting (NAS, 2015). The scientists concluded seeking to modify the human genome may only that: “At present, these criteria have not been be undertaken for preventive, diagnostic or met for any proposed clinical use: the safety therapeutic purposes and only if its aim is not issues have not yet been adequately explored; to introduce any modification in the genome of the cases of most compelling benefit are any descendants”. The Convention, which has limited; and many nations have legislative or been ratified by 29 European countries regulatory bans on germline modification” (Council of Europe, 2016), effectively prohibits (NAS, 2015). However, they added the clinical germline interventions and limits the use of use of germline editing ought to be revisited at somatic gene therapy (Adorno, 2005). regular intervals, recognizing that scientific Among the applications that have been knowledge advances and as societal views suggested somatic cells - where changes are evolved. not transmitted to following generations – are The Summit was notable in being organized by sickle cell disease, haemophilia, and cystic the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the U.K. fibrosis (Porteus, 2015). While risks and Royal Academy, and the Chinese Academy of benefits need to be weighed, such clinical Sciences, thus spanning key domains of activity applications can be evaluated within existing in the life sciences. In addition, the gathering and evolving regulatory frameworks for gene consciously featured participants outside the therapy (NAS, 2015). It also needs to be natural sciences, in order to address ethical, recognized that many of the most important institutional and regulatory dimensions of the consequences of CRISPR are not the ones issue. grabbing the headlines, but rather fact that the technology makes many experiments easier to The statement recognized that basic and carry out, thus facilitating basic research on clinical research will continue, including with diseases such as cancer and autism (Regalado, human germline cells, but that where in the 2015). Another promising area of development “process of research, early human embryos or is the production of non-human organ donors. germline cells undergo gene editing, the Scientists reported that they were able to use modified cells should
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Genome Editing Efficiently Creates Specific
    www.nature.com/scientificreports Correction: Author Correction OPEN CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing efciently creates specifc mutations at multiple loci using one Received: 18 April 2017 Accepted: 3 July 2017 sgRNA in Brassica napus Published: xx xx xxxx Hong Yang1, Jia-Jing Wu1, Ting Tang1, Ke-De Liu 2 & Cheng Dai1 CRISPR/Cas9 is a valuable tool for both basic and applied research that has been widely applied to diferent plant species. Nonetheless, a systematical assessment of the efciency of this method is not available for the allotetraploid Brassica napus—an important oilseed crop. In this study, we examined the mutation efciency of the CRISPR/Cas9 method for 12 genes and also determined the pattern, specifcity and heritability of these gene modifcations in B. napus. The average mutation frequency for a single-gene targeted sgRNA in the T0 generation is 65.3%. For paralogous genes located in conserved regions that were targeted by sgRNAs, we observed mutation frequencies that ranged from 27.6% to 96.6%. Homozygotes were readily found in T0 plants. A total of 48.2% of the gene mutations, including homozygotes, bi-alleles, and heterozygotes were stably inherited as classic Mendelian alleles in the next generation (T1) without any new mutations or reversions. Moreover, no mutation was found in the putative of-target sites among the examined T0 plants. Collectively, our results demonstrate that CRISPR/Cas9 is an efcient tool for creating targeted genome modifcations at multiple loci that are stable and inheritable in B. napus. These fndings open many doors for biotechnological applications in oilseed crops.
    [Show full text]
  • RNA-Guided CRISPR-Cas Technologies for Genome-Scale Investigation of Disease Processes Sean E Humphrey and Andrea L Kasinski*
    Humphrey and Kasinski Journal of Hematology & Oncology (2015) 8:31 DOI 10.1186/s13045-015-0127-3 JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY & ONCOLOGY REVIEW Open Access RNA-guided CRISPR-Cas technologies for genome-scale investigation of disease processes Sean E Humphrey and Andrea L Kasinski* Abstract From its discovery as an adaptive bacterial and archaea immune system, the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas system has quickly been developed into a powerful and groundbreaking programmable nuclease technology for the global and precise editing of the genome in cells. This system allows for comprehensive unbiased functional studies and is already advancing the field by revealing genes that have previously unknown roles in disease processes. In this review, we examine and compare recently developed CRISPR-Cas platforms for global genome editing and examine the advancements these platforms have made in guide RNA design, guide RNA/Cas9 interaction, on-target specificity, and target sequence selection. We also explore some of the exciting therapeutic potentials of the CRISPR-Cas technology as well as some of the innovative new uses of this technology beyond genome editing. Introduction from a region of the host genome adjacent to the Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats CRISPR region is directed to the invading DNA in a (CRISPR)-Cas systems are adaptive immune systems used sequence-dependent manner via the crRNA. Once by many bacteria and archaea to fight off foreign DNA in bound to the foreign DNA, Cas9 introduces a double- the form of bacterial phages and/or plasmids [1-5]. Al- stranded break in the foreign DNA [11-13].
    [Show full text]
  • CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing Brochure
    mirusbio.com Cas9 Target Sequence Guide RNA GENOME EDITING: CRISPR/CAS9 DELIVERY METHODS GENOME EDITING: CRISPR/CAS9 DELIVERY What is CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing? The CRISPR/Cas9 system is a powerful tool for genome editing in mammalian cells that allows researchers to generate genetic variants at lower cost and with higher throughput than alternative methods like zinc finger nuclease (ZFN) or transcription activator-like effector nuclease (TALEN) genome editing. Cas9 PAM Genomic DNA Target Sequence Guide RNA crRNA tracrRNA The CRISPR/Cas9 RNP Complex. The CRISPR associated protein 9 (Cas9) endonuclease (blue) is targeted to DNA by a guide RNA (gRNA), which can be supplied as a two-part system consisting of CRISPR RNA (crRNA) and trans-activating crRNA (tracrRNA) or as a single guide RNA (sgRNA), where the crRNA and tracrRNA are connected by a linker (dotted line). Target recognition is facilitated by the protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM). A double strand break (DSB) occurs 3 bp upstream of the PAM. CRISPR Facilitates Multiple Types of Genome Modification Cleavage of Target DNA By Cas9 Deletion Modication Insertion Multiple Genomic Alterations are Possible Following Cleavage of Target DNA by Cas9. Variable length insertions and/ or deletions (indels) can result near the DNA break due to mistakes in DNA repair by the endogenous non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway. These indels frequently result in disruption of gene function. Alternatively, by supplying a DNA repair template, researchers can leverage the homology-directed repair (HDR) pathway to create defined deletions, insertions or other modifications. 2 TO ORDER | Toll Free 888.530.0801 | Direct 608.441.2852 | www.mirusbio.com Glossary of CRISPR Terms Term Definition CRISPR Associated Protein 9 - Cas9 is an RNA-guided DNA endonuclease from the type Cas9 II CRISPR system of Streptococcus pyogenes that has been adapted for use in genome editing applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Gene Editing Evidence Update
    Gene Editing Evidence Update Summary The three most widely used new gene-editing tools Gene editing involves the insertion, deletion use bacterial proteins to find, cut, edit, add or replace or replacement of genetic material called DNA. genes, and are known as Zinc Fingers (ZFNs), TALENs, New gene-editing technologies have been developed and CRISPR. which have increased the speed, ease and accuracy Gene-editing technologies open up new opportunities of making changes to DNA in cells, and their use is and potential risks from new uses which may challenge increasing rapidly. people’s views on what is acceptable. These technologies are beginning to be used for new These new technologies pose challenges for regulators approaches in a variety of areas including research, who will find it harder to distinguish between genetic medicine, agriculture, biotechnology and have the changes in organisms generated by conventional potential to be used in pest control. breeding, gene editing, or natural mutation. What is a genome? The characteristics of all living organisms are determined BOX 1 by their genetic material and their interaction with the environment. An organism’s complete set of genetic HISTORIC SELECTION IN AGRICULTURAL CROPS material is called its genome which, in all plants, animals Some 6,000 – 10,000 years ago, Meso-American and microbes, is made of long molecules of DNA farmers began the drastic changes to a grass (deoxyribonucleic acid). The genome contains all the species called teosinte to become what is now genetic information needed to build that organism and known as maize. Through selecting and growing allow it to grow and develop.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Issues Regarding CRISPR-Mediated Genome Editing Zabta Khan Shinwari1,2*, Faouzia Tanveer1 and Ali Talha Khalil1
    Ethical Issues Regarding CRISPR-mediated Genome Editing Zabta Khan Shinwari1,2*, Faouzia Tanveer1 and Ali Talha Khalil1 1Department of Biotechnology, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad. 2Pakistan Academy of Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan. *Correspondence: [email protected] htps://doi.org/10.21775/cimb.026.103 Abstract Introduction CRISPR/Cas9 has emerged as a simple, precise Te quest for introducing the site-specifc changes and most rapid genome editing technology. With in the DNA sequence began when DNA was frst a number of promising applications ranging from discovered. Progress in genome engineering tech- agriculture and environment to clinical therapeu- nologies began in 1990s now reaching to a highly tics, it is greatly transforming the feld of molecular advanced, easy, economical and sophisticated biology. However, there are certain ethical, moral method for editing genomes called CRISPR/Cas9. and safety concerns related to the atractive applica- CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Palin- tions of this technique. Te most contentious issues dromic Repeats) technology does not arrive as a concerning human germline modifcations are the breakthrough technology for editing the genomes challenges to human safety and morality such as risk but other genome editing platforms like TALENS of unforeseen, undesirable efects in clinical appli- (Transcription Activator-Like Efector Nucleases) cations particularly to correct or prevent genetic and ZFN (Zinc Finger Nucleases) were in use for diseases, mater of informed consent and the risk of some time but have lost their popularity because exploitation for eugenics. Stringent regulations and of their complexity, expensiveness and time con- guidelines as well as worldwide debate and aware- sumption (Carroll and Charo, 2015; Doudna and ness are required to ensure responsible and wise use Charpentier, 2014; Hsu et al., 2014; Jinek et al., of CRISPR mediated genome editing technology.
    [Show full text]
  • DP-Genome-Editing-EN-Web
    Discussion paper focusing on the scientific relevance of genome editing and on the ethical, legal and societal issues potentially involved ISSUED BY THE ETHICS COUNCIL OF THE MAX PLANCK SOCIETY 1. Introduction and motivation for the discussion paper Christiane Walch-Solimena As an organization dedicated to fundamental research, the intense controversies have emerged around some of its Max Planck Society (MPG) is committed to pursue issues at applications. Thus, first experiments in human embryonic cells the very frontiers of current knowledge and bears a special re- have been performed already since 2015 in China1 intended to sponsibility to critically evaluate novel scientific developments. correct certain disease-causing mutations. These publications Such assessment includes both the scientific potential as well have set off discussions throughout the scientific community as the risks that may be faced if the scientific findings may be and beyond about the ethical and safety implications of this put into practice one day in the future. To this end, the MPG research. An International Summit on Human Genome Editing Ethics Council has been asked to assemble a working group focused on the future of human genome editing and convened to outline and discuss questions arising from a revolutionary by the US National Academy of Medicine, the UK’s Royal Socie- technology that in recent years has opened up unforeseen ty and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in December 2015 opportunities in the manipulation of genes and genomes: the voiced the need for an ongoing global forum. Statements on CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing and genome engineering technolo- ethical and societal questions of genome editing, also cover- gy.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Issues with CRISPR Rnai and CRISPR Screening Approach
    ` siPOOLs and CRISPR: Partnering RNAi with gene editing Catherine Goh, Michaela Beitzinger, Andrew Walsh, Michael Hannus siTOOLs Biotech GmbH, Lochhamerstrasse 29A, 82152 Martinsried/Planegg, Germany With the discovery of CRISPR, gene editing has gained tremendous traction in the scientific community due to its ease of application and low cost. The rise in popularity mirrors that of the use of RNA interference (RNAi) in the early 2000s. Although RNAi is still widely used today for functional genomics, screening efforts are hampered by the lack of specificity of individual siRNAs, giving rise to wide- ranging off-target effects and hence, unreliable results. Many are therefore now turning to CRISPR which promises higher specificity and clearer phenotypes due to complete depletion of gene activity. Here we compare key features of both technologies, bringing to attention that complete gene knock-out also comes with its own set of challenges. Of particular importance is the phenomenon of adaptation, which has now been shown to occur in several gene knock-out models. The complete knock-out of a gene can incur compensatory effects not seen when a gene is transiently knocked-down. With siPOOLs, transient knock-down by RNAi can be specific and potent. The dose-dependent nature of RNAi-mediated gene knock-down also mimics pharmacological inhibition. In view of their complementary strengths and challenges it seems highly commendable to use both RNAi and CRISPR for a thorough investigation and understanding of gene function. With siPOOLs, a new and extremely specific RNAi reagent has now become available that will allow RNAi screening with dramatically reduced off-target effects.
    [Show full text]
  • CRISPR Gene Editing Amber Dance Doudna of the University of California, Science Writer Berkeley, One of the Developers of the Technology
    CORE CONCEPTS CORE CONCEPTS Core Concept: CRISPR gene editing Amber Dance Doudna of the University of California, Science Writer Berkeley, one of the developers of the technology. Some of the first researchers to investigate CRISPR were food scientists at Just a few years ago, molecular biologists an accompanying bit of RNA called a guide Danisco USA Inc.; they were worried about hoping to alter the genome of their favorite RNA. Then, the cell’s own DNA repair ma- viruses infecting the Streptococcus strains organisms faced an arduous task and likely chinery typically takes over in one of two used to make yogurt and cheese (1). These weeks of genetic tinkering. Today, those different modes. In the first mode, it simply researchers observed that bacterial chromo- scientists can quickly destroy or edit a glues the two pieces back together, but im- somes contain oddly repetitive sequences gene with a new technology called CRISPR perfectly, so the leftover scar interrupts and called “clustered regularly interspaced short (clustered regularly interspaced short palin- disables the targeted gene. Or, in a second palindromic repeats,” or CRISPR. Between dromic repeat)/Cas9. kind of repair, the cell can copy a nearby those repeats are sequences from viruses that “It really opens up the genome of virtu- piece of DNA to fill in the missing sequence. infect bacteria. The microbes use the viral ally every organism that’s been sequenced By providing their own DNA template, sci- sequences as a mnemonic to remember past to be edited and engineered,” says Jill entists can induce the cell to fill in any de- invaders.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Editing Research Review an Overview of Recent Gene Editing Research Publications Featuring Illumina® Technology TABLE of CONTENTS
    Gene Editing Research Review An Overview of Recent Gene Editing Research Publications Featuring Illumina® Technology TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 Introduction The CRISPR Locus and the Mechanism for CRISPR-Cas Technology 7 Applications of CRISPR-Cas9 Technology Research Applications in the Medical Field Agriculture and Environmental Science 13 Workflow and Specificity Overview of the Procedure On-Target Effects Specificity: What It Means and Why It Matters Method Development Integration of CRISPR-Cas9 Technology in a Research Workflow 24 Bibliography This document highlights recent publications that demonstrate the use of Illumina technologies in single-cell research. To learn more about the platforms and assays cited, visit www.illumina.com. For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures. An overview of recent publications featuring Illumina technology 3 INTRODUCTION Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas technology 1. Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, is a revolutionary gene editing method in which a programmable RNA guides a Doudna JA and Charpentier E. A program- nuclease to find a specific target location in the genome. This simple approach mable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science. replaces the laborious and expensive protein-based DNA editing techniques, such 2012;337:816-821. as the use of zinc finger proteins (ZNFs) or transcription activator–like effector 2. Gasiunas G, Barrangou R, Horvath P and Siksnys V. Cas9-crRNA ribonucleoprotein nucleases (TALENs). From the time of the initial publications describing its application complex mediates specific DNA cleavage for adaptive immunity in bacteria. Proc Natl Acad 1, 2 3, 4 for genome editing in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, the use of CRISPR- Sci U S A.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Gene Editing: CRISPR-Cas9
    Advanced Gene Editing: CRISPR-Cas9 Updated December 7, 2018 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44824 Advanced Gene Editing: CRISPR-Cas9 Summary Scientists have long sought the ability to control and modify DNA—the code of life. A gene editing technology known as CRISPR-Cas9 offers the potential for substantial improvement over other gene editing technologies in that it is simple to use and inexpensive and has a relatively high degree of precision and efficiency. These characteristics have led many in the scientific and business communities to assert that CRISPR-Cas9 will lead to groundbreaking advances in many fields, including agriculture, energy, ecosystem conservation, and the investigation, prevention, and treatment of diseases. Over the next 5 to 10 years, the National Academy of Sciences projects a rapid increase in the scale, scope, complexity, and development rate of biotechnology products, many enabled by CRISPR-Cas9. Concomitant with the promise of potential benefits, such advances may pose new risks and raise ethical concerns. For example, a Chinese researcher recently claimed that he had created the first genetically engineered human babies. According to the researcher, he used CRISPR-Cas9 to disable a gene that will make it harder for the twin girls, who were born in November 2018, to contract human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The as yet unsubstantiated claim has sparked outrage and ethical debates by the international scientific community and others. Prior use of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing in human embryos was generally limited to non- viable embryos, in part, to address ethical concerns such as the fact that the genetic change would affect not only the immediate patient, but also future generations who would inherit the change.
    [Show full text]
  • Is CRISPR/Cas9 an Option?
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Review Therapeutic Editing of the TP53 Gene: Is CRISPR/Cas9 an Option? Regina Mirgayazova 1, Raniya Khadiullina 1, Vitaly Chasov 1, Rimma Mingaleeva 1, Regina Miftakhova 1, Albert Rizvanov 1 and Emil Bulatov 1,2,* 1 Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia; [email protected] (R.M.); [email protected] (R.K.); [email protected] (V.C.); [email protected] (R.M.); [email protected] (R.M.); [email protected] (A.R.) 2 Shemyakin-Ovchinnikov Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, 117997 Moscow, Russia * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 6 May 2020; Accepted: 23 June 2020; Published: 25 June 2020 Abstract: The TP53 gene encodes the transcription factor and oncosuppressor p53 protein that regulates a multitude of intracellular metabolic pathways involved in DNA damage repair, cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, and senescence. In many cases, alterations (e.g., mutations of the TP53 gene) negatively affect these pathways resulting in tumor development. Recent advances in genome manipulation technologies, CRISPR/Cas9, in particular, brought us closer to therapeutic gene editing for the treatment of cancer and hereditary diseases. Genome-editing therapies for blood disorders, blindness, and cancer are currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Eventually CRISPR/Cas9 technology is expected to target TP53 as the most mutated gene in all types of cancers. A majority of TP53 mutations are missense which brings immense opportunities for the CRISPR/Cas9 system that has been successfully used for correcting single nucleotides in various models, both in vitro and in vivo.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Editing Technology: Innovation and Impact
    S. HRG. 115–663 GENE EDITING TECHNOLOGY: INNOVATION AND IMPACT HEARING OF THE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON EXAMINING GENE EDITING TECHNOLOGY, FOCUSING ON INNOVATION AND IMPACT NOVEMBER 14, 2017 Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 27–682 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019 COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee, Chairman MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD BURR, North Carolina BERNARD SANDERS (I), Vermont JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania RAND PAUL, Kentucky AL FRANKEN, Minnesota SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado BILL CASSIDY, M.D., Louisiana SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island TODD YOUNG, Indiana TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut PAT ROBERTS, Kansas ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM KAINE, Virginia TIM SCOTT, South Carolina MAGGIE WOOD HASSAN, New Hampshire DAVID P. CLEARY, Republican Staff Director LINDSEY WARD SEIDMAN, Republican Deputy Staff Director EVAN SCHATZ, Democratic Staff Director JOHN RIGHTER, Democratic Deputy Staff Director (II) CONTENTS STATEMENTS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2017 Page COMMITTEE MEMBERS Alexander, Hon. Lamar, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, opening statement ....................................................................... 1 Murray, Hon. Patty, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington, opening statement .............................................................................................................. 3 Warren, Hon. Elizabeth, a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ........ 5 Collins, Hon. Susan M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Maine ....................... 26 Scott, Hon. Tim, a U.S.
    [Show full text]