2023
DOI: 10.1038/s41587-023-01756-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficient engineering of human and mouse primary cells using peptide-assisted genome editing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
14
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
4
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Efficient editing was achieved in human T cells using Cas9‐CPP or Cas12a‐CPP with an assistant CPP and guide RNAs delivered through a viral vector. However, efficient gene editing was only evident when guide RNA was delivered through Cas12a‐CPP‐RNP, but not Cas9‐CPP‐RNP, using nonviral RNP delivery 84 . The requirement of Cas protein engineering and incompatibility with Cas9 RNP might limit the broad application of this study.…”
Section: Advancements Of Crispr Technology In T‐cell‐based Therapymentioning
confidence: 94%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Efficient editing was achieved in human T cells using Cas9‐CPP or Cas12a‐CPP with an assistant CPP and guide RNAs delivered through a viral vector. However, efficient gene editing was only evident when guide RNA was delivered through Cas12a‐CPP‐RNP, but not Cas9‐CPP‐RNP, using nonviral RNP delivery 84 . The requirement of Cas protein engineering and incompatibility with Cas9 RNP might limit the broad application of this study.…”
Section: Advancements Of Crispr Technology In T‐cell‐based Therapymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…In the previously mentioned approaches, CRISPR editing components were delivered either by viral transduction or electroporation. However, the use of viral transduction and electroporation for CRISPR‐mediated gene editing can be problematic due to undesired mutagenesis and disturbances to the cell transcriptome and phenotype 84 . To improve this, many groups are actively developing novel delivery methods to efficiently perform CRISPR‐mediated gene editing while avoiding genotoxicity.…”
Section: Advancements Of Crispr Technology In T‐cell‐based Therapymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although the field of SAMs seemed dormant, this review is a testimony that the field has not been stagnated, but rather deviated from its beginnings. With the discovery of novel peptide sequences by combinatorial, high-throughput, and machine learning methods (e.g., AMPs), and the emergence of applications using renewed peptide functions (e.g., peptide-assisted genome editing), 308 as well as the need to provide hierarchical presentation of epitopes, 117 peptide-SAMs will continue to provide a reliable platform for in vitro screening of artificial protein mimics that offers great flexibility for chemical processability, surface imaging and integration of sensors for detection. In fact, this review was conceived with the idea of reinvigorating the research on peptide-SAMs by showcasing the numerous transformative contributions made in the field and discussing emerging directions.…”
Section: Final Overview Challenges and Prospectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For different types of cells and tissues, the efficiency of genetic editing can be variable, for example, efficient and well‐tolerated genome editing in primary cells remains a major challenge. [ 19 ] Additionally, the non‐specificity of lead compounds may interfere with the functions of several proteins, that can be challenging to include them all when engineering genes. Some proteins inhibited by compounds may also act as scaffolds for protein–protein interactions, which would be disrupted by genetic knockout or knockdown.…”
Section: Principles Of Designing Chemical Probesmentioning
confidence: 99%