P53 inhibits CRISPR-Cas9 engineering in human pluripotent stem cells

Nature Medicine

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2018, Pages 939-946

  Ihry, Robert J ^a   Worringer, Kathleen A ^a   Salick, Max R ^a   Frias, Elizabeth ^a   Ho, Daniel ^a   Theriault, Kraig ^a   Kommineni, Sravya ^a   Chen, Julie ^a   Sondey, Marie ^b   Ye, Chaoyang ^c   Randhawa, Ranjit ^a   Kulkarni, Tripti ^a   Yang, Zinger ^a   McAllister, Gregory ^a   Russ, Carsten ^a   Reece Hoyes, John ^a   Forrester, William ^a   Hoffman, Gregory R ^a   Dolmetsch, Ricardo ^a   Kaykas, Ajamete ^a  

^a NOVARTIS INSTITUTES FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

^b ABBVIE   (United States)

^c Blueprint Medicines   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROTEIN P53; RIBONUCLEOPROTEIN; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR 1A; FAS PROTEIN, HUMAN; GUIDE RNA; MESSENGER RNA; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR RECEPTOR SUPERFAMILY MEMBER 6;

ARTICLE; CELL ENGINEERING; CELL THERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRISPR-CAS9 SYSTEM; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; GENE DELETION; GENE INSERTION; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; GENETIC TRANSFECTION; GENOME; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; CRISPR CAS SYSTEM; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICS; METABOLISM;

CRISPR-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN 9; CRISPR-CAS SYSTEMS; CYCLIN-DEPENDENT KINASE INHIBITOR P21; DNA BREAKS, DOUBLE-STRANDED; FAS RECEPTOR; GENE DELETION; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMANS; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS; RNA, GUIDE; RNA, MESSENGER; TRANSCRIPTION, GENETIC; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN P53;

EID: 85048314977     PISSN: 10788956     EISSN: 1546170X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41591-018-0050-6     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816-822 (2012).
2. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819-823 (2013).
3. Mali, P. et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823-826 (2013).
4. Hsu, P. D. et al. DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 827-832 (2013).
5. He, X. et al. Knock-in of large reporter genes in human cells via CRISPR/ Cas9-induced homology-dependent and independent DNA repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, e85 (2016).
6. Lombardo, A. et al. Gene editing in human stem cells using zinc finger nucleases and integrase-defective lentiviral vector delivery. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1298-1306 (2007).
7. Lin, S., Staahl, B. T., Alla, R. K. &Doudna, J. A. Enhanced homologydirected human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery. Elife 3, e04766 (2014).
8. Zwaka, T. P. &Thomson, J. A. Homologous recombination in human embryonic stem cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 319-321 (2003).
9. Hockemeyer, D. et al. Efficient targeting of expressed and silent genes in human ESCs and iPSCs using zinc-finger nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 851-857 (2009).
10. Liu, Y. &Rao, M. Gene targeting in human pluripotent stem cells. Methods Mol. Biol. 767, 355-367 (2011).
11. Hockemeyer, D. &Jaenisch, R. Induced pluripotent stem cells meet genome editing. Cell Stem Cell 18, 573-586 (2016).
12. Song, H., Chung, S. K. &Xu, Y. Modeling disease in human ESCs using an efficient BAC-based homologous recombination system. Cell Stem Cell 6, 80-89 (2010).
13. Merkle, F. T. et al. Efficient CRISPR-Cas9-mediated generation of knockin human pluripotent stem cells lacking undesired mutations at the targeted locus. Cell Rep. 11, 875-883 (2015).
14. Merkle, F. T. et al. Human pluripotent stem cells recurrently acquire and expand dominant negative P53 mutations. Nature 545, 229-233 (2017).
15. Avior, Y., Sagi, I. &Benvenisty, N. Pluripotent stem cells in disease modelling and drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 17, 170-182 (2016).
16. González, F. et al. An iCRISPR platform for rapid, multiplexable, and inducible genome editing in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 15, 215-226 (2014).
17. Wells, M. F. et al. Genetic ablation of AXL does not protect human neural progenitor cells and cerebral organoids from Zika virus infection. Stem Cell 19, 703-708 (2016).
18. Liang, X. et al. Rapid and highly efficient mammalian cell engineering via Cas9 protein transfection. J. Biotechnol. 208, 44-53 (2015).
19. Slaymaker, I. M. et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science 351, 84-88 (2015).
20. Banaszynski, L. A., Chen, L., Maynard-Smith, L. A., Ooi, A. G. L. &Wandless, T. J. A. Rapid, reversible, and tunable method to regulate protein function in living cells using synthetic small molecules. Cell 126, 995-1004 (2006).
21. Love, M. I., Huber, W. &Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
22. Chindelevitch, L. et al. Causal reasoning on biological networks: interpreting transcriptional changes. Bioinformatics 28, 1114-1121 (2012).
23. Jaeger, S. et al. Causal network models for predicting compound targets and driving pathways in cancer. J. Biomol. Screen. 19, 791-802 (2014).
24. Lane, D. P. p53, Guardian of the genome. Nature 358, 15-16 (1992).
25. El-Deiry, W. S. et al. WAF1, a potential mediator of p53 tumor suppression. Cell 75, 817-825 (1993).
26. Canman, C. E. et al. Activation of the ATM kinase by ionizing radiation and phosphorylation of p53. Science 281, 1677-1679 (1998).
27. Vassilev, L. T. et al. In vivo activation of the p53 pathway by small-molecule antagonists of MDM2. Science 303, 844-848 (2004).
28. Cazzalini, O., Scovassi, A. I., Savio, M., Stivala, L. A. &Prosperi, E. Multiple roles of the cell cycle inhibitor p21(CDKN1A) in the DNA damage response. Mutat. Res. 704, 12-20 (2010).
29. Schlaeger, T. M. et al. A comparison of non-integrating reprogramming methods. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 58-63 (2015).
30. Hong, H. et al. Suppression of induced pluripotent stem cell generation by the p53-p21 pathway. Nature 460, 1132-1135 (2009).
31. Hagiyama, H. et al. Signaling through the antigen receptor of B lymphocytes activates a p53-independent pathway of c-Myc-induced apoptosis. Oncogene 18, 4091-4098 (1999).
32. Wang, T. et al. Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome. Science 350, 1096-1101 (2015).
33. Munoz, D. M. et al. CRISPR screens provide a comprehensive assessment of cancer vulnerabilities but generate false-positive hits for highly amplified genomic regions. Cancer Discov. 6, 900-913 (2016).
34. Aguirre, A. J. et al. Genomic copy number dictates a gene-independent cell response to CRISPR-Cas9 targeting. Cancer Discov. 2641, 617-632 (2016).
35. Hart, T. et al. High-resolution CRISPR screens reveal fitness genes and genotype-specific cancer liabilities. Cell 163, 1515-1526 (2015).
36. Dumitru, R. et al. Human embryonic stem cells have constitutively active Bax at the golgi and are primed to undergo rapid apoptosis. Mol. Cell 46, 573-583 (2012).
37. Liu, J. C. et al. High mitochondrial priming sensitizes hESCs to DNAdamage-induced apoptosis. Cell Stem Cell 13, 483-491 (2013).
38. Hanel, W. &Moll, U. M. Links between mutant p53 and genomic instability. J. Cell. Biochem. 113, 433-439 (2012).
39. Qin, H. et al. Regulation of apoptosis and differentiation by p53 in human embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 5842-5852 (2007).
40. Love, M. I., Huber, W. &Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
41. Sun, Y. et al. A deleterious Nav1.1 mutation selectively impairs telencephalic inhibitory neurons derived from Dravet syndrome patients. eLife 5, e13073 (2016).
42. Wells, M. F. et al. Genetic ablation of AXL does not protect human neural progenitor cells and cerebral organoids from Zika virus infection. Stem Cell 19, 703-708 (2016).
43. Bidinosti, M. et al. CLK2 inhibition ameliorates autistic features associated with SHANK3 deficiency. Science 351, 1199-1203 (2016).
44. Dejesus, R. et al. Functional CRISPR screening identifies the ufmylation pathway as a regulator of SQSTM1/p62. eLife 5, e17290 (2016).
45. Liang, X. et al. Rapid and highly efficient mammalian cell engineering via Cas9 protein transfection. J. Biotechnol. 208, 44-53 (2015).
46. Dobin, A. et al. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics 29, 15-21 (2013).
47. Anders, S., Pyl, P. T. &Huber, W. HTSeq-A Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data HTSeq. Bioinformatics 31, 166-169 (2015).
48. Li, B. &Dewey, C. N. RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC Bioinformatics 12, 323 (2011).
49. Pfaffl, M. W. A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 16-21 (2001).
50. Chindelevitch, L. et al. Causal reasoning on biological networks: interpreting transcriptional changes. Bioinformatics 28, 1114-1121 (2012).
51. Jaeger, S. et al. Causal network models for predicting compound targets and driving pathways in cancer. J. Biomol. Screen. 19, 791-802 (2014).
52. Szklarczyk, D. et al. STRINGv10: protein-protein interaction networks, integrated over the tree of life. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D447-D452 (2015).
53. Ran, F. A. et al. Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell 154, 1380-1389 (2013).