4.8 Article

Chromosomal context and epigenetic mechanisms control the efficacy of genome editing by rare-cutting designer endonucleases

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 40, Issue 13, Pages 6367-6379

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gks268

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Cellectis
  2. FWO (Belgium)
  3. Free University of Brussels
  4. University of Leuven
  5. FWO [G.0632.07]
  6. Association Nationale de la recherche et de la Technologie [Cifre 535/2008]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ability to specifically engineer the genome of living cells at precise locations using rare-cutting designer endonucleases has broad implications for biotechnology and medicine, particularly for functional genomics, transgenics and gene therapy. However, the potential impact of chromosomal context and epigenetics on designer endonuclease-mediated genome editing is poorly understood. To address this question, we conducted a comprehensive analysis on the efficacy of 37 endonucleases derived from the quintessential I-CreI meganuclease that were specifically designed to cleave 39 different genomic targets. The analysis revealed that the efficiency of targeted mutagenesis at a given chromosomal locus is predictive of that of homologous gene targeting. Consequently, a strong genome-wide correlation was apparent between the efficiency of targeted mutagenesis (0.1% to similar to 6%) with that of homologous gene targeting (0.1% to similar to 15%). In contrast, the efficiency of targeted mutagenesis or homologous gene targeting at a given chromosomal locus does not correlate with the activity of individual endonucleases on transiently transfected substrates. Finally, we demonstrate that chromatin accessibility modulates the efficacy of rare-cutting endonucleases, accounting for strong position effects. Thus, chromosomal context and epigenetic mechanisms may play a major role in the efficiency rare-cutting endonuclease-induced genome engineering.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available