Rapidly inducible Cas9 and DSB-ddPCR to probe editing kinetics

Nature Methods

Volumn 14, Issue 9, 2017, Pages 891-896

  Rose, John C ^a   Stephany, Jason J ^a   Valente, William J ^b   Trevillian, Bridget M ^a   Dang, Ha V ^c   Bielas, Jason H ^b   Maly, Dustin J ^a,c   Fowler, Douglas M ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d University of Washington   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BH3 PROTEIN; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA; GENOMIC DNA; NUCLEASE; NUCLEASE COMPETENT CAS9; PROTEIN; PROTEIN BCL XL; REC2 PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; CASPASE 9; DNA PROBE;

ARTICLE; CARBOXY TERMINAL SEQUENCE; CHROMATIN; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRISPR-CAS9 SYSTEM; DNA CLEAVAGE; DNA REPAIR; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; DROPLET DIGITAL POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; GENE EDITING; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE TARGETING; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HCT 116 CELL LINE; HEK293T CELL LINE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DOMAIN; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; DNA PROBE; GENETIC PROCEDURES; GENETICS; KINETICS; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PROCEDURES;

CASPASE 9; DNA BREAKS, DOUBLE-STRANDED; DNA PROBES; GENE EDITING; KINETICS; MOLECULAR PROBE TECHNIQUES; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION;

EID: 85028690546     PISSN: 15487091     EISSN: 15487105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4368     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Richardson, C.D., Ray, G.J., DeWitt, M.A., Curie, G.L. & Corn, J.E. Enhancing homology-directed genome editing by catalytically active and inactive CRISPR-Cas9 using asymmetric donor DNA. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 339-344 (2016).
2. Lin, S., Staahl, B.T., Alla, R.K. & Doudna, J.A. Enhanced homology-directed human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery. eLife 3, e04766 (2014).
3. Slaymaker, I.M. et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science 351, 84-88 (2016).
4. Kleinstiver, B.P. et al. High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529, 490-495 (2016).
5. Suzuki, K. et al. In vivo genome editing via CRISPR/Cas9 mediated homology-independent targeted integration. Nature 540, 144-149 (2016).
6. Sternberg, S.H., Redding, S., Jinek, M., Greene, E.C. & Doudna, J.A. DNA interrogation by the CRISPR RNA-guided endonuclease Cas9. Nature 507, 62-67 (2014).
7. Knight, S.C. et al. Dynamics of CRISPR-Cas9 genome interrogation in living cells. Science 350, 823-826 (2015).
8. Liu, K.I. et al. A chemical-inducible CRISPR-Cas9 system for rapid control of genome editing. Nat. Chem. Biol. 12, 980-987 (2016).
9. Nihongaki, Y., Kawano, F., Nakajima, T. & Sato, M. Photoactivatable CRISPR-Cas9 for optogenetic genome editing. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 755-760 (2015).
10. Davis, K.M., Pattanayak, V., Thompson, D.B., Zuris, J.A. & Liu, D.R. Small molecule-triggered Cas9 protein with improved genome-editing specificity. Nat. Chem. Biol. 11, 316-318 (2015).
11. Zetsche, B., Volz, S.E. & Zhang, F. A split-Cas9 architecture for inducible genome editing and transcription modulation. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 139-142 (2015).
12. Oakes, B.L. et al. Profiling of engineering hotspots identifies an allosteric CRISPR-Cas9 switch. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 646-651 (2016).
13. Nguyen, D.P. et al. Ligand-binding domains of nuclear receptors facilitate tight control of split CRISPR activity. Nat. Commun. 7, 12009 (2016).
14. Feng, J. et al. A general strategy to construct small molecule biosensors in eukaryotes. eLife 4, 4004 (2015).
15. Senturk, S. et al. Rapid and tunable method to temporally control gene editing based on conditional Cas9 stabilization. Nat. Commun. 8, 14370 (2017).
16. Maji, B. et al. Multidimensional chemical control of CRISPR-Cas9. Nat. Chem. Biol. 13, 9-11 (2017).
17. Ivashkevich, A., Redon, C.E., Nakamura, A.J., Martin, R.F. & Martin, O.A. Use of the γ-H2AX assay to monitor DNA damage and repair in translational cancer research. Cancer Lett. 327, 123-133 (2012).
18. Olive, P.L. & Banáth, J.P. The comet assay: a method to measure DNA damage in individual cells. Nat. Protoc. 1, 23-29 (2006).
19. Hanada, K. et al. The structure-specific endonuclease Mus81 contributes to replication restart by generating double-strand DNA breaks. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 14, 1096-1104 (2007).
20. Tsai, S.Q. et al. GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 187-197 (2015).
21. Liang, Z., Sunder, S., Nallasivam, S. & Wilson, T.E. Overhang polarity of chromosomal double-strand breaks impacts kinetics and fidelity of yeast non-homologous end joining. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 2769-2781 (2016).
22. Furda, A.M., Bess, A.S., Meyer, J.N. & Van Houten, B. Analysis of DNA damage and repair in nuclear and mitochondrial DNA of animal cells using quantitative PCR. Methods Mol. Biol. 920, 111-132 (2012).
23. Grégoire, M.-C. et al. Quantification and genome-wide mapping of DNA double-strand breaks. DNA Repair (Amst.) 48, 63-68 (2016).
24. Lensing, S.V. et al. DSBCapture: in situ capture and sequencing of DNA breaks. Nat. Methods 13, 855-857 (2016).
25. Ran, F.A. et al. In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature 520, 186-191 (2015).
26. Rose, J.C. et al. A computationally engineered RAS rheostat reveals RAS-ERK signaling dynamics. Nat. Chem. Biol. 13, 119-126 (2017).
27. Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 156, 935-949 (2014).
28. Moreno-Mateos, M.A. et al. CRISPRscan: designing highly efficient sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9 targeting in vivo. Nat. Methods 12, 982-988 (2015).
29. Isaac, R.S. et al. Nucleosome breathing and remodeling constrain CRISPR-Cas9 function. eLife 5, e13450 (2016).
30. Chen, X. et al. Probing the impact of chromatin conformation on genome editing tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 6482-6492 (2016).
31. Doench, J.G. et al. Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 184-191 (2016).
32. Rose, J.C. et al. Protocol for rapidly inducible Cas9 and DSB-ddPCR. Protocol Exchange http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/protex.2017.066 (2017).
33. Hindson, C.M. et al. Absolute quantification by droplet digital PCR versus analog real-time PCR. Nat. Methods 10, 1003-1005 (2013).
34. Hart, T. et al. High-resolution CRISPR screens reveal fitness genes and genotype-specific cancer liabilities. Cell 163, 1515-1526 (2015).
35. Ashkenazi, A., Fairbrother, W.J., Leverson, J.D. & Souers, A.J. From basic apoptosis discoveries to advanced selective BCL-2 family inhibitors. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 16, 273-284 (2017).
36. Konopleva, M. et al. Mechanisms of apoptosis sensitivity and resistance to the BH3 mimetic ABT-737 in acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Cell 10, 375-388 (2006).
37. Wei, G. et al. Chemical genomics identifies small-molecule MCL1 repressors and BCL-xL as a predictor of MCL1 dependency. Cancer Cell 21, 547-562 (2012).
38. Shoemaker, A.R. et al. A small-molecule inhibitor of Bcl-XL potentiates the activity of cytotoxic drugs in vitro and in vivo. Cancer Res. 66, 8731-8739 (2006).
39. Leverson, J.D. et al. Exploiting selective BCL-2 family inhibitors to dissect cell survival dependencies and define improved strategies for cancer therapy. Sci. Transl. Med. 7, 279ra40 (2015).
40. Tao, Z.-F. et al. Discovery of a potent and selective BCL-XL inhibitor with in vivo activity. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 5, 1088-1093 (2014).
41. Wendt, M.D. et al. Discovery and structure-activity relationship of antagonists of B-cell lymphoma 2 family proteins with chemopotentiation activity in vitro and in vivo. J. Med. Chem. 49, 1165-1181 (2006).
42. Oltersdorf, T. et al. An inhibitor of Bcl-2 family proteins induces regression of solid tumours. Nature 435, 677-681 (2005).
43. Lessene, G. et al. Structure-guided design of a selective BCL-X(L) inhibitor. Nat. Chem. Biol. 9, 390-397 (2013).
44. Tse, C. et al. ABT-263: a potent and orally bioavailable Bcl-2 family inhibitor. Cancer Res. 68, 3421-3428 (2008).
45. Wilson, W.H. et al. Navitoclax, a targeted high-affinity inhibitor of BCL-2, in lymphoid malignancies: a phase 1 dose-escalation study of safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumour activity. Lancet Oncol. 11, 1149-1159 (2010).
46. Geisinger, J.M., Turan, S., Hernandez, S., Spector, L.P. & Calos, M.P. In vivo blunt-end cloning through CRISPR/Cas9-facilitated non-homologous end-joining. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, e76 (2016).
47. Voss, N.R. & Gerstein, M. 3V: cavity, channel and cleft volume calculator and extractor. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, W555-W562 (2010).
48. Huang, P.-S. et al. RosettaRemodel: a generalized framework for flexible backbone protein design. PLoS One 6, e24109 (2011).
49. Kiani, S. et al. Cas9 gRNA engineering for genome editing, activation and repression. Nat. Methods 12, 1051-1054 (2015).
50. Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S.L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357-359 (2012).
51. Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078-2079 (2009).
52. Goreshnik, I. & Maly, D.J. A small molecule-regulated guanine nucleotide exchange factor. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 938-940 (2010).
53. Cer, R.Z., Mudunuri, U., Stephens, R. & Lebeda, F.J. IC50-to-Ki: a web-based tool for converting IC50 to Ki values for inhibitors of enzyme activity and ligand binding. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, W441-W445 (2009).