4.8 Article

Safe harbor-targeted CRISPR-Cas9 homology-independent targeted integration for multimodality reporter gene-based cell tracking

期刊

SCIENCE ADVANCES
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abc3791

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) [377071]
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) [RGPIN-2016-05420]
  3. University of Western Ontario

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study utilized HITI CRISPR-Cas9 minicircle donors for precise targeted knock-in of reporter genes at safe harbor loci. Results showed higher knock-in efficiency and functional reporter gene activity with HITI vectors, enabling multi-modal longitudinal in vivo imaging of cells. This work demonstrates the first CRISPR-Cas9 HITI system for large DNA donor constructs at a safe harbor locus.
Imaging reporter genes provides longitudinal information on the biodistribution, growth, and survival of engineered cells in vivo. A translational bottleneck to using reporter genes is the necessity to engineer cells with randomly integrating vectors. Here, we built homology-independent targeted integration (HITI) CRISPR-Cas9 minicircle donors for precise safe harbor-targeted knock-in of fluorescence, bioluminescence, and MRI (Oatpl al) reporter genes. Our results showed greater knock-in efficiency using HITI vectors compared to homology-directed repair vectors. HITI clones demonstrated functional fluorescence and bioluminescence reporter activity as well as significant Oatp1a1-mediated uptake of the clinically approved MRI agent gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid. Contrast-enhanced MRI improved the conspicuity of both subcutaneous and metastatic Oatp1a1-expressing tumors before they became palpable or even readily visible on precontrast images. Our work demonstrates the first CRISPR-Cas9 HITI system for knock-in of large DNA donor constructs at a safe harbor locus, enabling multimodal longitudinal in vivo imaging of cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据