Cancer CRISPR Screens In Vivo

Trends in Cancer

Volumn 4, Issue 5, 2018, Pages 349-358

  Chow, Ryan D ^a   Chen, Sidi ^a,b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b YALE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

cancer; CRISPR screen; functional genomics; in vivo

Indexed keywords

CANCER CELL; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER TRANSPLANTATION; CARCINOGENESIS; CLUSTERED REGULARLY INTERSPACED SHORT PALINDROMIC REPEAT; GENE EDITING; HUMAN; IMMUNE SYSTEM; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO GENE TRANSFER; IN VIVO STUDY; MUTAGENESIS; NONHUMAN; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TARGET TISSUE; TUMOR ENGRAFTMENT; TUMOR MICROENVIRONMENT; ANIMAL; GENETICS; GENOMICS; NEOPLASM; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; CLUSTERED REGULARLY INTERSPACED SHORT PALINDROMIC REPEATS; GENE EDITING; GENOMICS; HUMANS; MUTAGENESIS; NEOPLASMS; PRECISION MEDICINE;

EID: 85044580368     PISSN: 24058033     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.trecan.2018.03.002     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Vogelstein, B., et al. Cancer genome landscapes. Science 339 (2013), 1546–1558.
2. Chin, L., et al. Making sense of cancer genomic data. Genes Dev. 25 (2011), 534–555.
3. Garraway, L.A., Lander, E.S., Lessons from the cancer genome. Cell 153 (2013), 17–37.
4. Hsu, P.D., et al. Development and applications of CRISPR–Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell 157 (2014), 1262–1278.
5. Cong, L., et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339 (2013), 819–823.
6. Jinek, M., et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337 (2012), 816–821.
7. Gilbert, L.A., et al. CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell 154 (2013), 442–451.
8. Qi, L.S., et al. Repurposing CRISPR as an RNA-guided platform for sequence-specific control of gene expression. Cell 152 (2013), 1173–1183.
9. Gilbert, L.A., et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-mediated control of gene repression and activation. Cell 159 (2014), 647–661.
10. Hilton, I.B., et al. Epigenome editing by a CRISPR–Cas9-based acetyltransferase activates genes from promoters and enhancers. Nat. Biotechnol. 33 (2015), 510–517.
11. Komor, A.C., et al. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533 (2016), 420–424.
12. Gaudelli, N.M., et al. Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature 551 (2017), 464–471.
13. Liu, X.S., et al. Editing DNA methylation in the mammalian genome. Cell 167 (2016), 233–247 e17.
14. Morita, S., et al. Targeted DNA demethylation in vivo using dCas9–peptide repeat and scFv–TET1 catalytic domain fusions. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 1060–1065.
15. Vojta, A., et al. Repurposing the CRISPR–Cas9 system for targeted DNA methylation. Nucleic Acids Res. 44 (2016), 5615–5628.
16. Morgan, S.L., et al. Manipulation of nuclear architecture through CRISPR-mediated chromosomal looping. Nat. Commun., 8, 2017, 15993.
17. Shalem, O., et al. High-throughput functional genomics using CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Rev. Genet. 16 (2015), 299–311.
18. Montalbano, A., et al. High-throughput approaches to pinpoint function within the noncoding genome. Mol. Cell 68 (2017), 44–59.
19. Shalem, O., et al. Genome-scale CRISPR–Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science 343 (2014), 84–87.
20. Wang, T., et al. Genetic screens in human cells using the CRISPR–Cas9 system. Science 343 (2014), 80–84.
21. Doench, J.G., et al. Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 184–191.
22. Evers, B., et al. CRISPR knockout screening outperforms shRNA and CRISPRi in identifying essential genes. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 631–633.
23. Sánchez-Rivera, F.J., Jacks, T., Applications of the CRISPR–Cas9 system in cancer biology. Nat. Rev. Cancer 15 (2015), 387–395.
24. Hou, P., et al. A genome-wide CRISPR screen identifies genes critical for resistance to FLT3 inhibitor AC220. Cancer Res. 77 (2017), 4402–4413.
25. Konermann, S., et al. Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR–Cas9 complex. Nature 517 (2015), 583–588.
26. Kong, X., et al. Cancer drug addiction is relayed by an ERK2-dependent phenotype switch. Nature 550 (2017), 270–274.
27. Ruiz, S., et al. A genome-wide CRISPR screen identifies CDC25A as a determinant of sensitivity to ATR inhibitors. Mol. Cell 62 (2016), 307–313.
28. Sanjana, N.E., et al. High-resolution interrogation of functional elements in the noncoding genome. Science 353 (2016), 1545–1549.
29. Han, K., et al. Synergistic drug combinations for cancer identified in a CRISPR screen for pairwise genetic interactions. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 463–474.
30. Shen, J.P., et al. Combinatorial CRISPR–Cas9 screens for de novo mapping of genetic interactions. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 573–576.
31. Burr, M.L., et al. CMTM6 maintains the expression of PD-L1 and regulates anti-tumour immunity. Nature 549 (2017), 101–105.
32. Hart, T., et al. High-resolution CRISPR screens reveal fitness genes and genotype-specific cancer liabilities. Cell 163 (2015), 1515–1526.
33. Wang, T., et al. Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome. Science 350 (2015), 1096–1101.
34. Wang, T., et al. Gene essentiality profiling reveals gene networks and synthetic lethal interactions with oncogenic Ras. Cell 168 (2017), 890–903 e15.
35. Quail, D., Joyce, J., Microenvironmental regulation of tumor progression and metastasis. Nat. Med. 19 (2013), 1423–1437.
36. Herbst, R.S., et al. Predictive correlates of response to the anti-PD-L1 antibody MPDL3280A in cancer patients. Nature 515 (2014), 563–567.
37. Sharma, P., et al. Primary, adaptive, and acquired resistance to cancer immunotherapy. Cell 168 (2017), 707–723.
38. Chen, D.S., Mellman, I., Oncology meets immunology: the cancer–immunity cycle. Immunity 39 (2013), 1–10.
39. Patel, S.P., Kurzrock, R., PD-L1 expression as a predictive biomarker in cancer immunotherapy. Mol. Cancer Ther. 14 (2015), 847–856.
40. Gordon, S.R., et al. PD-1 expression by tumour-associated macrophages inhibits phagocytosis and tumour immunity. Nature 545 (2017), 495–499.
41. Chen, S., et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screen in a mouse model of tumor growth and metastasis. Cell 160 (2015), 1246–1260.
42. Katigbak, A., et al. A CRISPR/Cas9 functional screen identifies rare tumor suppressors. Sci. Rep., 6, 2016, 38968.
43. Song, C.-Q., et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screen identifies regulators of mitogen-activated protein kinase as suppressors of liver tumors in mice. Gastroenterology 152 (2017), 1161–1173 e1.
44. Kodama, M., et al. In vivo loss-of-function screens identify KPNB1 as a new druggable oncogene in epithelial ovarian cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114 (2017), E7301–E7310.
45. Braun, C.J., et al. Versatile in vivo regulation of tumor phenotypes by dCas9-mediated transcriptional perturbation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 113 (2016), E3892–E3900.
46. Yau, E.H., et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screen for essential cell growth mediators in mutant KRAS colorectal cancers. Cancer Res. 77 (2017), 6330–6339.
47. Patel, S.J., et al. Identification of essential genes for cancer immunotherapy. Nature 548 (2017), 537–542.
48. Manguso, R.T., et al. In vivo CRISPR screening identifies Ptpn2 as a cancer immunotherapy target. Nature 547 (2017), 413–418.
49. Xue, W., et al. CRISPR-mediated direct mutation of cancer genes in the mouse liver. Nature 514 (2014), 380–384.
50. Sánchez-Rivera, F.J., et al. Rapid modelling of cooperating genetic events in cancer through somatic genome editing. Nature 516 (2014), 428–431.
51. Swiech, L., et al. In vivo interrogation of gene function in the mammalian brain using CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 33 (2015), 102–106.
52. Platt, R.J., et al. CRISPR–Cas9 knockin mice for genome editing and cancer modeling. Cell 159 (2014), 440–455.
53. Dow, L.E., et al. Inducible in vivo genome editing with CRISPR–Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 33 (2015), 390–394.
54. Chu, V.T., et al. Efficient generation of Rosa26 knock-in mice using CRISPR/Cas9 in C57BL/6 zygotes. BMC Biotechnol., 16, 2016, 4.
55. Weber, J., et al. CRISPR/Cas9 somatic multiplex-mutagenesis for high-throughput functional cancer genomics in mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112 (2015), 13982–13987.
56. Rogers, Z.N., et al. A quantitative and multiplexed approach to uncover the fitness landscape of tumor suppression in vivo. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 737–742.
57. Chow, R.D., et al. AAV-mediated direct in vivo CRISPR screen identifies functional suppressors in glioblastoma. Nat. Neurosci. 20 (2017), 1329–1341.
58. Wang, G., et al. Mapping a functional cancer genome atlas of tumor suppressors in mouse liver using AAV-CRISPR-mediated direct in vivo screening. Sci. Adv., 4, 2018, eaao5508.
59. Ben-David, U., et al. Patient-derived xenografts undergo mouse-specific tumor evolution. Nat. Genet. 49 (2017), 1567–1575.
60. Rongvaux, A., et al. Development and function of human innate immune cells in a humanized mouse model. Nat. Biotechnol. 32 (2014), 364–372.
61. McGranahan, N., Swanton, C., Clonal heterogeneity and tumor evolution: past, present, and the future. Cell 168 (2017), 613–628.
62. Schmitt, M.W., et al. The influence of subclonal resistance mutations on targeted cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 13 (2016), 335–347.
63. McGranahan, N., Swanton, C., Biological and therapeutic impact of intratumor heterogeneity in cancer evolution. Cancer Cell 27 (2015), 15–26.
64. Zetsche, B., et al. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR–Cas system. Cell 163 (2015), 759–771.
65. Zetsche, B., et al. Multiplex gene editing by CRISPR–Cpf1 using a single crRNA array. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 31–34.
66. Chow, R.D., et al. Mapping in vivo genetic interactomics through Cpf1 crRNA array screening. bioRxiv, 2017, 10.1101/153486 Published online June 21, 2017.
67. Zhou, H., et al. In vivo simultaneous transcriptional activation of multiple genes in the brain using CRISPR–dCas9-activator transgenic mice. Nat. Neurosci. 21 (2018), 440–446.
68. Dixit, A., et al. Perturb-seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell RNA profiling of pooled genetic screens. Cell 167 (2016), 1853–1866 e17.
69. Jaitin, D.A., et al. Dissecting immune circuits by linking CRISPR-pooled screens with single-cell RNA-seq. Cell 167 (2016), 1883–1896 e15.
70. Datlinger, P., et al. Pooled CRISPR screening with single-cell transcriptome readout. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 297–301.
71. Chen, K.H., et al. RNA imaging. Spatially resolved, highly multiplexed RNA profiling in single cells. Science, 348, 2015, aaa6090.