Dec 122017
 

The top of this diagram shows a 30-base-pair region of a single genetic locus (HLA-A) that is involved in the immune response and could potentially be targeted with gene editing. The six smaller bars below it represent different guide RNAs that are designed to bind to different parts of that HLA-A locus. On the Y (vertical) axis are haplotypes with highlighted DNA variations identified from different individuals. They are aligned according to their positions in the genetic sequence (represented horizontally on the X axis).
CREDIT
Lessard S; et al. PNAS Early Edition, week of Dec. 11, 2017.

Patients’ individual genomes may affect efficacy, safety of gene editing

Gene editing has begun to be tested in clinical trials, using CRISPR-Cas9 and other technologies to directly edit DNA inside people’s cells, and multiple trials are recruiting or in the planning stages. A new study led by Boston Children’s Hospital and the University of Montreal raises a note of caution, finding that person-to-person genetic differences may undercut the efficacy of the gene editing process or, in more rare cases, cause a potentially dangerous “off target” effect.

The study adds to evidence that gene editing may need to be adapted to each patient’s genome, to ensure there aren’t variants in DNA sequence in or near the gene being targeted that would throw off the technology. Findings appear this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Early Edition (December 11-15).

“Humans vary in their DNA sequences, and what is taken as the ‘normal’ DNA sequence for reference cannot account for all these differences,” says Stuart Orkin, MD, of Dana-Farber Boston Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center and co-corresponding author on the study with Matthew Canver, an MD-PhD student at Harvard Medical School. “We recommend that common variation be taken into account in designing targeting systems for therapeutic editing, to maximize efficacy and minimize potential safety concerns.”

The study analyzed 7,444 previously published whole-genome sequences. Based on a list of about 30 disease-related DNA targets that researchers are interested in altering through gene editing, the researchers made a second list of nearly 3,000 guide RNAs (gRNAs). These are bits of genetic code that have been developed to direct CRISPR-Cas9 enzymes to the right editing location on or adjacent to the target, like the address on an envelope.

The team, led by Orkin, Canver and Samuel Lessard of the University of Montreal, then looked to see whether any of the 7,444 individuals carried DNA sequence variants (“letter changes” or insertions/deletions) in the areas the gRNAs are looking for.

“If there are genetic differences at the site that CRISPR reagents are targeting for therapy, you are at risk for decreased efficacy or treatment failure,” explains Canver, who conceived and led the study in Orkin’s Boston Children’s Hospital lab. “A difference in just a single base pair can cause a decrease in binding efficiency due to a mismatch with the guide RNA. Overall, this can cause a reduction in treatment efficacy.”

The team found that such occurrences in the genome are not uncommon; about 50 percent of the analyzed gRNAs had the potential to be affected by variants at their target sites. In a few cases, the team found genetic variants that cause DNA sequences in the genome to more closely match a gRNA that could potentially draw it to the wrong place — resulting in an edit of a gene or other DNA region that’s not meant to be targeted.

“In rare cases, there was the potential to create very potent ‘off-target’ sites – where CRISPR reagents could bind and cut where they’re not intended to,” says Canver. “If an off-target effect happens to be in, say, a tumor suppressor gene, that would be a big concern.”

Although the study looked at CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, the researchers believe their findings extend to other gene-editing tools such as zinc-finger nucleases (ZFN) and TAL effector nucleases.

“The unifying theme is that all these technologies rely on identifying stretches of DNA bases very specifically,” says Canver. “So, a variant that affects the target sequence could reduce guide RNA binding. Variants can also lead to binding at new sites that could potentially cause harm. As these gene-editing therapies continue to develop and start to approach the clinic, it’s important to make sure each therapy is going to be tailored to the patient that’s going to be treated.”

Learn more: Patients’ individual genomes may affect efficacy, safety of gene editing

 

The Latest on: Gene editing
  • Some Patients May Have Existing Immunity To CRISPR Gene Editing Therapies, Research Finds
    on January 18, 2018 at 12:10 am

    The study could be another snag for CRISPR-based therapies but scientists not involved with the research said its findings, if substantiated, could be worked around. In other public health news: alcohol abuse, stomach reduction surgery, autism and sleep ... […]

  • The simple, ethical case for gene editing
    on January 17, 2018 at 4:35 pm

    For over three decades, scientists have had the ability to alter the genomes of other species of animals. Using viruses to alter DNA sequences, scientists were able to create a range of transgenic animals — with altered physical, cognitive and social ... […]

  • What are the ethics of gene editing?
    on January 17, 2018 at 12:17 pm

    New developments in gene editing have some people worried about blurring ethical boundaries. Is it a step too far to alter a person's genome to cure a disease or protect future generations? Jeff Kahn, director of the Berman Institute of Bioethics, joined ... […]

  • Gene editing startup Homology cuts deal for new Bedford HQ
    on January 17, 2018 at 8:16 am

    After raising one of the biggest rounds of financing for a local biotech in 2017, gene editing startup Homology Medicines has signed a lease for a new headquarters in Bedford, Massachusetts that is nearly triple the size of its current office. A ... […]

  • CRISPR Gene-Editing Stocks Going Down the Tubes? Think Again
    on January 16, 2018 at 3:34 am

    To paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of the deaths of CRISPR gene-editing stocks are greatly exaggerated. With the possibility that CRISPR-Cas9 could prove ineffective in humans, there was talk that the stocks of these biotechs that focus on the gene ... […]

  • What is gene editing and why should you care?
    on January 15, 2018 at 12:00 am

    Animal and plant breeders are trying out a set of powerful new tools which have the potential to revolutionize agricultural practices and provide consumers with more healthy and safe food options. Their new toolbox is called gene editing, and the ... […]

  • Gene editing could be the future, but doctors think humans might be immune to it
    on January 12, 2018 at 8:00 pm

    Our body's own immune system could present a roadblock to the efforts of medical researchers who aim to develop gene therapies based on the genome-editing tool called CRISPR-Cas9. The genome editing tool topped a few lists of the best science developments ... […]

  • Wall Street just freaked out about a potential hiccup to a revolutionary gene editing technology — but it’s not as bad as it seems
    on January 9, 2018 at 11:52 am

    A revolutionary gene-editing technology is making its way into humans for the first time in 2018. CRISPR-Cas9 is a gene-editing tool that allows researchers to go into a cell, find a particular gene, and make a change to it. Cas9, the protein that does ... […]

  • 3 Soaring Gene-Editing Biotech Stocks: Which Is the Best Buy?
    on January 8, 2018 at 3:07 am

    If you're looking to invest in stocks positioned to benefit from a literally game-changing technology, check out stocks of biotechs that are focused on gene editing. The future of medicine is likely to be radically transformed by therapies that involve the ... […]

  • Key CRISPR gene editing methods might not work for most humans
    on January 6, 2018 at 9:05 pm

    At first glance, CRISPR gene editing looks like the solution to all the world's ills: it could treat or even cure diseases, improve birth rates and otherwise fix genetic conditions that previously seemed permanent. You might want to keep your expectations ... […]

via Google News and Bing News

Other Interesting Posts

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: