Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells

Martina Fiumara, Samuele Ferrari, Attya Omer-Javed and 13 more (opens in a new tab)

Nature Biotechnology · 2023 · CC BY

doi:10.1038/s41587-023-01915-4 (opens in a new tab)

Abstract

Base and prime editors (BEs and PEs) may provide more precise genetic engineering than nuclease-based approaches because they bypass the dependence on DNA double-strand breaks. However, little is known about their cellular responses and genotoxicity. Here, we compared state-of-the-art BEs and PEs and Cas9 in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells with respect to editing efficiency, cytotoxicity, transcriptomic changes and on-target and genome-wide genotoxicity. BEs and PEs induced detrimental transcriptional responses that reduced editing efficiency and hematopoietic repopulation in xenotransplants and also generated DNA double-strand breaks and genotoxic byproducts, including deletions and translocations, at a lower frequency than Cas9. These effects were strongest for cytidine BEs due to suboptimal inhibition of base excision repair and were mitigated by tailoring delivery timing and editor expression through optimized mRNA design. However, BEs altered the mutational landscape of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells across the genome by increasing the load and relative proportions of nucleotide variants. These findings raise concerns about the genotoxicity of BEs and PEs and warrant further investigation in view of their clinical application.

References 64

1.
Naldini L. Genetic engineering of hematopoiesis: current stage of clinical translation and future perspectives. EMBO Mol. Med. 2019;11:e9958.
Not in our library10.15252/emmm.201809958 (opens in a new tab)
2.
The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing · 2020
No notice
3.
Ferrari S, et al. Genetic engineering meets hematopoietic stem cell biology for next-generation gene therapy. Cell Stem Cell. 2023;30:549-570.
Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2023.04.014 (opens in a new tab)
4.
Porteus MH. A new class of medicines through DNA editing. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019;380:947-959.
Not in our library10.1056/nejmra1800729 (opens in a new tab)
5.
Schiroli G, et al. Precise gene editing preserves hematopoietic stem cell function following transient p53-mediated DNA damage response. Cell Stem Cell. 2019;24:551-565.
Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2019.02.019 (opens in a new tab)
6.
Ferrari S, et al. Efficient gene editing of human long-term hematopoietic stem cells validated by clonal tracking. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020;38:1298-1308.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-020-0551-y (opens in a new tab)
7.
Adikusuma F, et al. Large deletions induced by Cas9 cleavage. Nature. 2018;560:E8-E9.
Not in our library10.1038/s41586-018-0380-z (opens in a new tab)
8.
Leibowitz ML, et al. Chromothripsis as an on-target consequence of CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing. Nat. Genet. 2021;53:895-905.
Not in our library10.1038/s41588-021-00838-7 (opens in a new tab)
9.
Park SH, et al. Comprehensive analysis and accurate quantification of unintended large gene modifications induced by CRISPR–Cas9 gene editing. Sci. Adv. 2022;8:eabo7676.
Not in our library10.1126/sciadv.abo7676 (opens in a new tab)
10.
Turchiano G, et al. Quantitative evaluation of chromosomal rearrangements in gene-edited human stem cells by CAST-seq. Cell Stem Cell. 2021;28:1136-1147.
Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2021.02.002 (opens in a new tab)
11.
Kosicki M, Tomberg K, Bradley A. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat. Biotechnol. 2018;36:765-771.
Not in our library10.1038/nbt.4192 (opens in a new tab)
12.
Takata M, et al. Homologous recombination and non-homologous end-joining pathways of DNA double-strand break repair have overlapping roles in the maintenance of chromosomal integrity in vertebrate cells. EMBO J. 1998;17:5497-5508.
Not in our library10.1093/emboj/17.18.5497 (opens in a new tab)
13.
Anzalone AV, Koblan LW, Liu DR. Genome editing with CRISPR–Cas nucleases, base editors, transposases and prime editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020;38:824-844.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-020-0561-9 (opens in a new tab)
14.
Ferrari S, et al. Choice of template delivery mitigates the genotoxic risk and adverse impact of editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2022;29:1428-1444.
Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2022.09.001 (opens in a new tab)
15.
Rees HA, Liu DR. Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2018;19:770-788.
Not in our library10.1038/s41576-018-0059-1 (opens in a new tab)
16.
Komor AC, Kim YB, Packer MS, Zuris JA, Liu DR. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature. 2016;533:420-424.
Not in our library10.1038/nature17946 (opens in a new tab)
17.
Antoniou P, Miccio A, Brusson M. Base and prime editing technologies for blood disorders. Front. Genome Ed. 2021;3:618406.
Not in our library10.3389/fgeed.2021.618406 (opens in a new tab)
18.
Wang L, et al. Reactivation of γ-globin expression through Cas9 or base editor to treat β-hemoglobinopathies. Cell Res. 2020;30:276-278.
Not in our library10.1038/s41422-019-0267-z (opens in a new tab)
19.
Zeng J, et al. Therapeutic base editing of human hematopoietic stem cells. Nat. Med. 2020;26:535-541.
Not in our library10.1038/s41591-020-0790-y (opens in a new tab)
20.
Gaudelli NM, et al. Directed evolution of adenine base editors with increased activity and therapeutic application. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020;38:892-900.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-020-0491-6 (opens in a new tab)
21.
Newby GA, et al. Base editing of haematopoietic stem cells rescues sickle cell disease in mice. Nature. 2021;595:295-302.
Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03609-w (opens in a new tab)
22.
Anzalone AV, et al. Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature. 2019;576:149-157.
Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 (opens in a new tab)
23.
Petri K, et al. CRISPR prime editing with ribonucleoprotein complexes in zebrafish and primary human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022;40:189-193.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-021-00901-y (opens in a new tab)
24.
Enhanced prime editing systems by manipulating cellular determinants of editing outcomes · 2021
No notice
25.
Ex vivo prime editing of patient haematopoietic stem cells rescues sickle-cell disease phenotypes after engraftment in mice · 2023
No notice
26.
Nelson JW, et al. Engineered pegRNAs improve prime editing efficiency. Nat. Biotechnol. 2021;40:402-410.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-021-01039-7 (opens in a new tab)
27.
Koblan LW, et al. Improving cytidine and adenine base editors by expression optimization and ancestral reconstruction. Nat. Biotechnol. 2018;36:843-846.
Not in our library10.1038/nbt.4172 (opens in a new tab)
28.
Kurt IC, et al. CRISPR C-to-G base editors for inducing targeted DNA transversions in human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 2021;39:41-46.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-020-0609-x (opens in a new tab)
29.
Bai T, et al. Expansion of primitive human hematopoietic stem cells by culture in a zwitterionic hydrogel. Nat. Med. 2019;25:1566-1575.
Not in our library10.1038/s41591-019-0601-5 (opens in a new tab)
30.
Scala S, et al. Dynamics of genetically engineered hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells after autologous transplantation in humans. Nat. Med. 2018;24:1683-1690.
Not in our library10.1038/s41591-018-0195-3 (opens in a new tab)
31.
Prime editing efficiency and fidelity are enhanced in the absence of mismatch repair · 2022
No notice
32.
Evolution of an adenine base editor into a small, efficient cytosine base editor with low off-target activity · 2022
No notice
33.
Improved cytosine base editors generated from TadA variants · 2023
No notice
34.
Al-Bahlani S, et al. P73 regulates cisplatin-induced apoptosis in ovarian cancer cells via a calcium/calpain-dependent mechanism. Oncogene. 2011;30:4219-4230.
Not in our library10.1038/onc.2011.134 (opens in a new tab)
35.
Long SL, Morales JC, Hwang A, Wagner MW, Boothman DA. DNA mismatch repair-dependent activation of c-Abl/p73α/GADD45α-mediated apoptosis. J. Biol. Chem. 2008;283:21394-21403.
Not in our library10.1074/jbc.m709954200 (opens in a new tab)
36.
Kuzminov A. Single-strand interruptions in replicating chromosomes cause double-strand breaks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2001;98:8241-8246.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.131009198 (opens in a new tab)
37.
Beerman I, Seita J, Inlay MA, Weissman IL, Rossi DJ. Quiescent hematopoietic stem cells accumulate DNA damage during aging that is repaired upon entry into cell cycle. Cell Stem Cell. 2014;15:37-50.
Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2014.04.016 (opens in a new tab)
38.
Canarutto D, et al. Peripheral blood stem and progenitor cell collection in pediatric candidates for ex vivo gene therapy: a 10-year series. Mol. Ther. Methods Clin. Dev. 2021;22:76-83.
Not in our library10.1016/j.omtm.2021.05.013 (opens in a new tab)
39.
Inheritable Silencing of Endogenous Genes by Hit-and-Run Targeted Epigenetic Editing · 2016
No notice
40.
Nuñez JK, et al. Genome-wide programmable transcriptional memory by CRISPR-based epigenome editing. Cell. 2021;184:2503-2519.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.025 (opens in a new tab)
41.
PrimeDesign software for rapid and simplified design of prime editing guide RNAs · 2021
No notice
42.
Mathis N, et al. Predicting prime editing efficiency and product purity by deep learning. Nat. Biotechnol. 2023;41:1151-1159.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-022-01613-7 (opens in a new tab)
43.
Li GM. The role of mismatch repair in DNA damage-induced apoptosis. Oncol. Res. 1999;11:393-400.
Not in our library
44.
Sobol RW, et al. Mutations associated with base excision repair deficiency and methylation-induced genotoxic stress. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2002;99:6860-6865.
Not in our library
45.
Schanz S, Castor D, Fischer F, Jiricny J. Interference of mismatch and base excision repair during the processing of adjacent U/G mispairs may play a key role in somatic hypermutation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:5593-5598.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0901726106 (opens in a new tab)
46.
Omer-Javed A, et al. Mobilization-based chemotherapy-free engraftment of gene-edited human hematopoietic stem cells. Cell. 2022;185:2248-2264.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2022.04.039 (opens in a new tab)
47.
Chow RD, Chen JS, Shen J, Chen S. A web tool for the design of prime-editing guide RNAs. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2020;5:190-194.
Not in our library10.1038/s41551-020-00622-8 (opens in a new tab)
48.
Kluesner MG, et al. EditR: a method to quantify base editing from Sanger sequencing. CRISPR J. 2018;1:239-250.
Not in our library10.1089/crispr.2018.0014 (opens in a new tab)
49.
Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition · 2014
No notice
50.
Soldi M, et al. Laboratory-scale lentiviral vector production and purification for enhanced ex vivo and in vivo genetic engineering. Mol. Ther. Methods Clin. Dev. 2020;19:411-425.
Not in our library10.1016/j.omtm.2020.10.009 (opens in a new tab)
51.
Clement K, et al. Accurate and rapid analysis of genome editing data from nucleases and base editors with CRISPResso2. Nat. Biotechnol. 2019;37:224-226.
Not in our library10.1038/s41587-019-0032-3 (opens in a new tab)
52.
Ferrari S, et al. BAR-seq clonal tracking of gene-edited cells. Nat. Protoc. 2021;16:2991-3025.
Not in our library10.1038/s41596-021-00529-x (opens in a new tab)
53.
Li J, et al. Structure-guided engineering of adenine base editor with minimized RNA off-targeting activity. Nat. Commun. 2021;12:2287.
Not in our library10.1038/s41467-021-22519-z (opens in a new tab)
54.
Analysis and minimization of cellular RNA editing by DNA adenine base editors · 2019
No notice
55.
Ahdesmäki MJ, Gray SR, Johnson JH, Lai Z. Disambiguate: an open-source application for disambiguating two species in next generation sequencing data from grafted samples. F1000Res. 2016;5:2741.
Not in our library10.12688/f1000research.10082.1 (opens in a new tab)
56.
Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 2015;67:1-48.
Not in our library
57.
Pinheiro, J. & Bates, D. Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models (nlme). https://svn.r-project.org/R-packages/trunk/nlme/ (2011).
Not in our library
58.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S., Beretta, S., Merelli, I. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. BAR-Seq, RNA-Seq. Gene Expression Omnibushttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE218464 (2023).
Not in our library
59.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S., Beretta, S., Merelli, I. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. In vivo experiment with standard mRNA constructs. European Nucleotide Archivehttps://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB58344 (2023).
Not in our library
60.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S., Beretta, S., Merelli, I. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. HSPC derived colonies. European Nucleotide Archivehttps://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB64207 (2023).
Not in our library
61.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S., Beretta, S., Merelli, I. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. In vivo experiment with standard and optimized mRNA constructs. European Nucleotide Archivehttps://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB64407 (2023).
Not in our library
62.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. Raw data. Mendeley10.17632/mnpg6dp8fh.1 (2023).
Not in our library
63.
Fiumara, M., Ferrari, S., Beretta, S., Merelli, I. & Naldini, L. Genotoxic effects of base and prime editing in human hematopoietic stem cells. Scripts for bioinformatic analysis. GitLabhttp://www.bioinfotiget.it/gitlab/custom/fiumara_baseprimeed2022 (2023).
Not in our library
64.
Nestorowa S, et al. A single-cell resolution map of mouse hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell differentiation. Blood. 2016;128:e20-e31.
Not in our library10.1182/blood-2016-05-716480 (opens in a new tab)

Cited by papers we hold 3

Exploring treatment options in cancer: tumor treatment strategies · 2024
No notice
Brainwide silencing of prion protein by AAV-mediated delivery of an engineered compact epigenetic editor · 2024
No notice
Durable and efficient gene silencing in vivo by hit-and-run epigenome editing · 2024
No notice

Questions about this paper

We email you if it is retracted, withdrawn, corrected or flagged.

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.