Ribonucleoproteins Mediated Efficient In Vivo Gene Editing in Skin Stem Cells

  • Wenbo Wu
  • Ting ChenEmail author
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1879)


The clustered regularly interspaced, short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 system functions like an adaptive immune system in a variety of microbes and has recently been engineered as a powerful tool for manipulating genomic sequences in a huge variety of cell types. In mammals, CRISPR/Cas9 has the potential to bring curative therapies to patients with genetic diseases, although it remained unknown whether suitable in vivo methods for its use are feasible. It is now appreciated that the efficient delivery of these genome-editing tools into most tissue types, including skin, remains a major challenge. Here, we describe a detailed protocol for performing in vivo gene editing of genomic sequences in mouse skin stem cells using Cas9/sgRNAs ribonucleoproteins in combination with electrotransfer technology. We here present all of the required methods needed for the protocol, including molecular cloning, in vitro sgRNA expression and sgRNA purification, Cas9 protein purification, and in vivo delivery of cas9 ribonucleoproteins. This protocol provides a novel in vivo gene editing strategy using ribonucleoproteins for skin stem cells and can potentially be used as curative treatment for genetic diseases in skin and other somatic tissues.


Cas9/sgRNA ribonucleoproteins Electrotransfer In vivo gene editing Skin stem cells 


  1. 1.
    Horvath P, Barrangou R (2010) CRISPR/Cas, the immune system of bacteria and archaea. Science 327(5962):167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhaya D, Davison M, Barrangou R (2011) CRISPR-Cas systems in bacteria and archaea: versatile small RNAs for adaptive defense and regulation. Annu Rev Genet 45:273–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cong L et al (2013) Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339(6121):819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jinek M et al (2013) RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells. Elife 2:e00471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mali P et al (2013) RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339(6121):823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doudna JA, Charpentier E (2014) Genome editing. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science 346(6213):1258096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maddalo D et al (2014) In vivo engineering of oncogenic chromosomal rearrangements with the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Nature 516(7531):423–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yin H et al (2014) Genome editing with Cas9 in adult mice corrects a disease mutation and phenotype. Nat Biotechnol 32(6):551–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Swiech L et al (2015) In vivo interrogation of gene function in the mammalian brain using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Biotechnol 33(1):102–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chiou SH et al (2015) Pancreatic cancer modeling using retrograde viral vector delivery and in vivo CRISPR/Cas9-mediated somatic genome editing. Genes Dev 29(14):1576–1585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bakondi B et al (2016) In vivo CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing corrects retinal dystrophy in the S334ter-3 rat model of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Mol Ther 24(3):556–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Long C et al (2016) Postnatal genome editing partially restores dystrophin expression in a mouse model of muscular dystrophy. Science 351(6271):400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nelson CE et al (2016) In vivo genome editing improves muscle function in a mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Science 351(6271):403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maresch R et al (2016) Multiplexed pancreatic genome engineering and cancer induction by transfection-based CRISPR/Cas9 delivery in mice. Nat Commun 7:10770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yarmush ML, Golberg A, Sersa G, Kotnik T, Miklavcic D (2014) Electroporation-based technologies for medicine: principles, applications, and challenges. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 16:295–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Titomirov AV, Sukharev S, Kistanova E (1991) In vivo electroporation and stable transformation of skin cells of newborn mice by plasmid DNA. Biochim Biophys Acta 1088(1):131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heller R et al (1996) In vivo gene electroinjection and expression in rat liver. FEBS Lett 389(3):225–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aihara H, Miyazaki J (1998) Gene transfer into muscle by electroporation in vivo. Nat Biotechnol 16(9):867–870. 1087-0156 (Print)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heller LC, Heller R (2006) In vivo electroporation for gene therapy. Hum Gene Ther 17(9):890–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Favard C, Dean D, Rols M-P (2007) Electrotransfer as a non viral method of gene delivery. Curr Gene Ther 7(1):67–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cemazar M, Sersa G (2007) Electrotransfer of therapeutic molecules into tissues. Curr Opin Mol Ther 9(6):554–562PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suzuki K et al (2016) In vivo genome editing via CRISPR/Cas9 mediated homology-independent targeted integration. Nature 540(7631):144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wu W (2016) Efficient in vivo gene editing using ribonucleoproteins in skin stem cells of recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa mouse model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 114(7):1660–1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ran FA et al (2013) Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat Protoc 8(11):2281–2308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cong L, Zhang F (2015) Genome engineering using CRISPR-Cas9 system. Methods Mol Biol 1239:197–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Peking University-Tsinghua University-National Institute of Biological Sciences Joint Graduate Program, School of Life SciencesPeking UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.National Institute of Biological SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations