Advertisement

Gene-Editing Techniques

  • Kevin W. FreemanEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Success in Academic Surgery book series (SIAS)

Abstract

This chapter will broadly cover the newest genome editing technology, clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), and CRISPR-associated system (Cas), as a critical tool for a modern research laboratory. Multiplex gene mutagenesis, tissue-specific gene disruption, DNA insertions, transcriptional activation, transcriptional repression, megabase-sized deletions, translocations, and genetic screens are all possible with CRISPR/Cas technology. How CRISPR-genome editing works, its applications, and considerations for best use will be discussed.

Keywords

Genome editing CRISPR Cas9 Multiplexing Transcriptional regulation Animal models 

References

  1. 1.
    Mali P, Esvelt KM, Church GM. Cas9 as a versatile tool for engineering biology. Nat Methods. 2013;10:957–63.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2649.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Seruggia D, Montoliu L. The new CRISPR-Cas system: RNA-guided genome engineering to efficiently produce any desired genetic alteration in animals. Transgenic Res. 2014;23:707–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-014-9823-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jinek M, Chylinski K, Fonfara I, Hauer M, Doudna JA, Charpentier E. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science. 2012;337:816–21.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1225829.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ran FA, Hsu PD, Wright J, Agarwala V, Scott DA, Zhang F. Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc. 2013;8:2281–308.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2013.143.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Motta BM, Pramstaller PP, Hicks AA, Rossini A. The impact of CRISPR/Cas9 technology on cardiac research: from disease modelling to therapeutic approaches. Stem Cells Int. 2017;2017:8960236.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8960236.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tsakraklides V, Brevnova E, Stephanopoulos G, Shaw AJ. Improved gene targeting through cell cycle synchronization. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0133434.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133434.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang D, Scavuzzo MA, Chmielowiec J, Sharp R, Bajic A, Borowiak M. Enrichment of G2/M cell cycle phase in human pluripotent stem cells enhances HDR-mediated gene repair with customizable endonucleases. Sci Rep. 2016;6:21264.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep21264.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Canny MD, et al. Inhibition of 53BP1 favors homology-dependent DNA repair and increases CRISPR-Cas9 genome-editing efficiency. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36:95–102.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4021.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hess GT, Tycko J, Yao D, Bassik MC. Methods and applications of CRISPR-mediated base editing in eukaryotic genomes. Mol Cell. 2017;68:26–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.09.029.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gehrke JM et al. An APOBEC3A-Cas9 base editor with minimized bystander and off-target activities Nat Biotechnol. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4199.
  11. 11.
    Maekawa I, Kawamura T, Miyaka T. Chronic adult T-cell leukemia (ATL) complicating disseminated strongyloidiasis. Rinsho Ketsueki. 1988;29:64–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Montalbano A, Canver MC, Sanjana NE. High-throughput approaches to pinpoint function within the noncoding genome. Mol Cell. 2017;68:44–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.09.017.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kato T, et al. Creation of mutant mice with megabase-sized deletions containing custom-designed breakpoints by means of the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Sci Rep. 2017;7:59.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00140-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vanoli F, Jasin M. Generation of chromosomal translocations that lead to conditional fusion protein expression using CRISPR-Cas9 and homology-directed repair. Methods. 2017;121–122:138–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.05.006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jamal M, Khan FA, Da L, Habib Z, Dai J, Cao G. Keeping CRISPR/Cas on-Target. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2016;20:1–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen JS, et al. Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR-Cas9 targeting accuracy. Nature. 2017;550:407–10.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24268.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baliou S, Adamaki M, Kyriakopoulos AM, Spandidos DA, Panayiotidis M, Christodoulou I, Zoumpourlis V. Role of the CRISPR system in controlling gene transcription and monitoring cell fate (Review). Mol Med Rep. 2018;17:1421–7.  https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2017.8099.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kweon J, Kim Y. High-throughput genetic screens using CRISPR-Cas9 system Arch Pharm Res. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12272-018-1029-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tschaharganeh DF, Lowe SW, Garippa RJ, Livshits G. Using CRISPR/Cas to study gene function and model disease in vivo. FEBS J. 2016;283:3194–203.  https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.13750.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang L, et al. Large genomic fragment deletions and insertions in mouse using CRISPR/Cas9. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0120396.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0120396.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Huijbers IJ. Generating genetically modified mice: a decision guide. Methods Mol Biol. 2017;1642:1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7169-5_1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Genetics, Genomics and InformaticsUniversity of Tennessee Health Science CenterMemphisUSA

Personalised recommendations