Skip to main content

Gene Editing in Clinical Practice: Where are We?

Abstract

Multitude of gene-altering capabilities in combination with ease of design and low cost have all led to the adoption of the sophisticated and yet simple gene editing system that are clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-associated protein 9 (CRISPR). The CRISPR/Cas9 system holds promise for the correction of deleterious mutations by taking advantage of the homology directed repair pathway and by supplying a correction template to the affected patient’s cells. CRISPR is a tool that allows researchers to edit genes very precisely, easily and quickly. It does this by harnessing a mechanism that already existed in bacteria. Basically, there’s a protein that acts like a scissors and cuts the DNA, and there’s an RNA molecule that directs the scissors to any point on the genome one wants which results basically a word processor for genes. An entire gene can be taken out, put one in, or even edit just a single letter within a gene. Several platforms for molecular scissors that enable targeted genome engineering have been developed, including zinc-finger nucleases, transcription activator-like effector nucleases and, most recently, CRISPR/CRISPR-associated-9 (Cas9). The CRISPR/Cas9 system’s simplicity, facile engineering and amenability to multiplexing make it the system of choice for many applications. CRISPR/Cas9 has been used to generate disease models to study genetic diseases. Improvements are urgently needed for various aspects of the CRISPR/Cas9 system, including the system’s precision, delivery and control over the outcome of the repair process. However, there are still some glitches to be mended like how to regulate gene drives and its safeguards. The creation of gene knockouts is one of the first and most widely used applications of the CRISPR–Cas9 system. Nuclease-active Cas9 creates a double-strand break at the single guide RNA-targeted locus. These breaks can be repaired by homologous recombination, which can be used to introduce new mutations. When the double-strand break is repaired by the error-prone nonhomologous end joining process, indels are introduced which can produce frame shifts and stop codons, leading to functional knockout of the gene. Precedence modification have to be done on mechanism of CRISPR/Cas9, including its biochemical and structural implications incorporating the latest improvements in the CRISPR/Cas9 system, especially Cas9 protein modifications for customization. Current applications, where the versatile CRISPR/Cas9 system is to be used to edit the genome, epigenome, or RNA of various organisms is debated. Although CRISPR/Cas9 allows convenient genome editing accompanied by many benefits, one should not ignore the significant ethical and biosafety concerns that it raises. Conclusively lot of prospective applications and challenges of several promising techniques adapted from CRISPR/Cas9. Is discussed. Although many mechanistic questions remain to be answered and several challenges to be addressed yet, the use of CRISPR–Cas9-based genome technologies will increase our knowledge of disease process and their treatment in near future. Undoubtedly this field is revolutionizing in current era and may open new vistas in the treatment of fatal genetic disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Veltman JA, Brunner HG. De novo mutations in human genetic disease. Nat Rev Genet. 2012;13:565–75.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Yoshimi K, Kaneko T, Voigt B, Mashimo T. Allele-specific genome editing and correction of disease-associated phenotypes in rats using the CRISPR–Cas platform. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4240–58.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ishino Y, Krupovic M, Forterre P. History of CRISPR–Cas from encounter with a mysterious repeated sequence to genome editing technology. J Bacteriol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00580-17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Scharf I, Bierbaumer L, Huber H, Wittmann P, Haider C, Pirker C, Berger W, Mikulits W. Dynamics of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genomic editing of the AXL locus in hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Oncol Lett. 2018;15(2):2441–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Motta BM, Pramstaller PP, Hicks AA, Rossini A. The impact of CRISPR/Cas9 technology on cardiac research: from disease modelling to therapeutic approaches. Stem Cells Int. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8960236.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Lemay ML, Horvath P, Moineau S. The CRISPR–Cas app goes viral. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2017;37:103–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fellmann C, Gowen BG, Lin PC, Doudna JA, Corn JE. Cornerstones of CRISPR–Cas in drug discovery and therapy. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(2):89–100.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Doudna JA, Gersbach CA. Genome editing: the end of the beginning. Genome Biol. 2015;16:292–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hille F, Charpentier E. CRISPR–Cas: biology, mechanisms and relevance. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016;371(1707):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cong L, Ran FA, Cox D, Lin S, Barretto R, Zhang F, et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science. 2013;339(6121):819–23.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Platt RJ, Chen S, Zhou Y, Yim MJ, Swiech L, Zhang F. CRISPR–Cas9 knockin mice for genome editing and cancer modeling. Cell. 2014;159(2):440–55.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Stupp R, Hegi ME, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Taphoorn MJ, Janzer RC, et al. Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:459–66.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ran FA, Hsu PD, Wright J, Agarwala V, Scott DA, Zhang F. Genome engineering using the CRISPR–Cas9 system. Nat Protoc. 2013;8(11):2281–307.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chin A. CRISPR–Cas9 therapeutics: a technology overview. Oxford: Oxford Biotechnology; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chowdhury R, Chinmaya AM. Translating cancer genomes and transcriptomes for precision oncology. CA. 2016;66:75–88.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Khan FA, Pandupuspitasari PS, Chun-Jie H, Zhou A, Jamal M, Zohaib S, et al. CRISPR/Cas9 therapeutics: a cure for cancer and other genetic diseases. Oncotarget. 2016;7(32):52541–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cai M, Yang Y. Targeted genome editing tools for disease modelling and gene therapy. Curr Gene Ther. 2014;14:2–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rongxue P, Guigao L, Jinming L. Potential pitfalls of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing. FEBS J. 2016;283:1218–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Plaza RA, Lanner F. Towards a CRISPR view of early human development: applications, limitations and ethical concerns of genome editing in human embryos. Development. 2017;144:3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Eid A, Magdy MM. Genome editing: the road of CRISPR/Cas9 from bench to clinic. Exp Mol Med. 2016;48:1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tatjana IC, Claudio M, Toni C. Refining strategies to translate genome editing to the clinic. Nat Med. 2017;23(4):415–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Otieno MO. CRISPR–Cas9 human genome editing: challenges, ethical concerns and implications. J Clin Res Bioeth. 2015;6(6):1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chu VT, et al. Increasing the efficiency of homology-directed repair for CRISPR–Cas9-induced precise gene editing in mammalian cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:543–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maruyama T, et al. Increasing the efficiency of precise genome editing with CRISPR–Cas9 by inibition of nonhomologous end joining. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:538–42.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lanphier E, Urnov F, Haecker SE, Werner M, Smolenski J. Don’t edit the human germ line. Nature. 2015;519(7544):410–1.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Baltimore D, Berg P, Botchan M, Carroll D, Charo RA, Church G, et al. Biotechnology. A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification. Science. 2015;348(6230):36–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Men K, Xingmei D, Zhiyao H, Yang Y, Shaohua Y, Yuquan W. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated correction of human genetic disease. Sci China Life Sci. 2017;60(5):447–57.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang HX, Li M, Lee CM, Chakraborty S, Kim HW, Bao G, Leong KW. CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing for disease modeling and therapy: challenges and opportunities for non-viral delivery. Chem Rev. 2017;117(15):9874–906.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lau V, Davie JR. The discovery and development of the CRISPR system in applications in genome manipulation. Biochem Cell Biol. 2017;95(2):203–10.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Xiao-Jie L, Hui-Ying X, Zun-Ping K, Jin-Lian C, Li-Juan J. CRISPR–Cas9: a new and promising player in gene therapy. J Med Genet. 2015;52(5):289–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Liang P, Ding C, Sun H, Xie X, Xu Y, Zhang X. Correction of β-thalassemia mutant by base editor in human embryos. Protein Cell. 2017;8(11):811–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ma H, Marti-Gutierrez N, Mitalipov S. Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos. Nature. 2017;548:413–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mulvihill JJ, Capps B, Joly Y, Hub T, Zwart AE, Chadwick R. Ethical issues of CRISPR technology and gene editing through the lens of solidarity: the International Human Genome Organisation (HUGO) Committee of Ethics, Law, and Society (CELS). Br Med Bull. 2017;122(1):17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nordberg A, Minssen T, Holm S, Horst M, Mortensen K, Møller BL. Cutting edges and weaving threads in the gene editing (Я)evolution: reconciling scientific progress with legal, ethical, and social concerns. J Law Biosci. 2018;5(1):35–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Cornu TI, Mussolino C, Cathomen T. Refining strategies to translate genome editing to the clinic. Nat Med. 2017;23(4):415–23.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Thurtle-Schmidt DM, Lo TW. Molecular biology at the cutting edge: a review on CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing for undergraduates. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2018;46(2):195–205.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Howard HC, van Carla G, Forzano F, Radojkovic D, Rial-Sebbag E, de Wert G, Borry P, Cornel MC. One small edit for humans, one giant edit for humankind? Points and questions to consider for a responsible way forward for gene editing in humans. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26:1–11.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Roy B, Zhao J, Yang C, Luo W, Xiong T, Li Y, Fang X, Gao G, Singh CO, Madsen L, Zhou Y, Kristiansen K. CRISPR/Cascade 9-mediated genome editing-challenges and opportunities. Front Genet. 2018;9:240–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rama Devi Mittal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mittal, R.D. Gene Editing in Clinical Practice: Where are We?. Ind J Clin Biochem 34, 19–25 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12291-018-0804-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12291-018-0804-4

Keywords

  • Genome editing
  • CASPR Cas9 systems
  • Molecular scissors
  • Palindromic repeats
  • Nucleases
  • Gene targeting
  • Gene therapy embryo
  • Ethics
  • Potential pitfalls