TP53-dependent toxicity of CRISPR/Cas9 cuts is differential across genomic loci and can confound genetic screening
Miguel M. Álvarez,
Josep Biayna and
Fran Supek ()
Additional contact information
Miguel M. Álvarez: Barcelona institute for Science and Technology
Josep Biayna: Barcelona institute for Science and Technology
Fran Supek: Barcelona institute for Science and Technology
Nature Communications, 2022, vol. 13, issue 1, 1-14
Abstract:
Abstract CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing can inactivate genes in a precise manner. This process involves DNA double-strand breaks (DSB), which may incur a loss of cell fitness. We hypothesize that DSB toxicity may be variable depending on the chromatin environment in the targeted locus. Here, by analyzing isogenic cell line pair CRISPR experiments jointly with previous screening data from across ~900 cell lines, we show that TP53-associated break toxicity is higher in genomic regions that harbor active chromatin, such as gene regulatory elements or transcription elongation histone marks. DSB repair pathway choice and DNA sequence context also associate with toxicity. We also show that, due to noise introduced by differential toxicity of sgRNA-targeted sites, the power of genetic screens to detect conditional essentiality is reduced in TP53 wild-type cells. Understanding the determinants of Cas9 cut toxicity will help improve design of CRISPR reagents to avoid incidental selection of TP53-deficient and/or DNA repair deficient cells.
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-32285-1 Abstract (text/html)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:13:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-022-32285-1
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-32285-1
Access Statistics for this article
Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie
More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().