» Articles » PMID: 35323942

Targeting DNA Polymerase to DNA Double-strand Breaks Reduces DNA Deletion Size and Increases Templated Insertions Generated by CRISPR/Cas9

Overview
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2022 Mar 24
PMID 35323942
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Most insertions or deletions generated by CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/CRISPR-associated protein 9) endonucleases are short (<25 bp), but unpredictable on-target long DNA deletions (>500 bp) can be observed. The possibility of generating long on-target DNA deletions poses safety risks to somatic genome editing and makes the outcomes of genome editing less predictable. Methods for generating refined mutations are desirable but currently unavailable. Here, we show that fusing Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I or the Klenow fragment to Cas9 greatly increases the frequencies of 1-bp deletions and decreases >1-bp deletions or insertions. Importantly, doing so also greatly decreases the generation of long deletions, including those >2 kb. In addition, templated insertions (the insertion of the nucleotide 4 nt upstream of the protospacer adjacent motif) were increased relative to other insertions. Counteracting DNA resection was one of the mechanisms perturbing deletion sizes. Targeting DNA polymerase to double-strand breaks did not increase off-targets or base substitution rates around the cleavage sites, yet increased editing efficiency in primary cells. Our strategy makes it possible to generate refined DNA mutations for improved safety without sacrificing efficiency of genome editing.

Citing Articles

Gene-editing in patient and humanized-mice primary muscle stem cells rescues dysferlin expression in dysferlin-deficient muscular dystrophy.

Escobar H, Di Francescantonio S, Smirnova J, Graf R, Muthel S, Marg A Nat Commun. 2025; 16(1):120.

PMID: 39747848 PMC: 11695731. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-55086-0.


Click editing enables programmable genome writing using DNA polymerases and HUH endonucleases.

Ferreira da Silva J, Tou C, King E, Eller M, Rufino-Ramos D, Ma L Nat Biotechnol. 2024; .

PMID: 39039307 PMC: 11751136. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-024-02324-x.


T4 DNA polymerase prevents deleterious on-target DNA damage and enhances precise CRISPR editing.

Yang Q, Abebe J, Mai M, Rudy G, Kim S, Devinsky O EMBO J. 2024; 43(17):3733-3751.

PMID: 39039289 PMC: 11377749. DOI: 10.1038/s44318-024-00158-6.


Epigenetic editing for autosomal dominant neurological disorders.

Waldo J, Halmai J, Fink K Front Genome Ed. 2024; 6:1304110.

PMID: 38510848 PMC: 10950933. DOI: 10.3389/fgeed.2024.1304110.


DNA polymerases in precise and predictable CRISPR/Cas9-mediated chromosomal rearrangements.

Mehryar M, Shi X, Li J, Wu Q BMC Biol. 2023; 21(1):288.

PMID: 38066536 PMC: 10709867. DOI: 10.1186/s12915-023-01784-y.


References
1.
Cradick T, Fine E, Antico C, Bao G . CRISPR/Cas9 systems targeting β-globin and CCR5 genes have substantial off-target activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013; 41(20):9584-92. PMC: 3814385. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkt714. View

2.
Allen F, Crepaldi L, Alsinet C, Strong A, Kleshchevnikov V, De Angeli P . Predicting the mutations generated by repair of Cas9-induced double-strand breaks. Nat Biotechnol. 2018; . PMC: 6949135. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4317. View

3.
Shi X, Shou J, Mehryar M, Li J, Wang L, Zhang M . Cas9 has no exonuclease activity resulting in staggered cleavage with overhangs and predictable di- and tri-nucleotide CRISPR insertions without template donor. Cell Discov. 2019; 5:53. PMC: 6796948. DOI: 10.1038/s41421-019-0120-z. View

4.
Schimmel J, Munoz-Subirana N, Kool H, van Schendel R, Tijsterman M . Small tandem DNA duplications result from CST-guided Pol α-primase action at DNA break termini. Nat Commun. 2021; 12(1):4843. PMC: 8355091. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-25154-w. View

5.
Ghosh D, Raghavan S . 20 years of DNA Polymerase μ, the polymerase that still surprises. FEBS J. 2021; 288(24):7230-7242. DOI: 10.1111/febs.15852. View