The use of CRISPR-derived, RNA-guided nucleases for genome editing has shown great promise for addressing genetic disease. Encouraging work in cell culture and animal models has demonstrated the capability of genome-editing enzymes to correct disease-causing loci, but clinical translation can only proceed once the corrective enzymes have been rendered safe, effective, and capable of being delivered to the appropriate cells. To address these needs, there has been rapid and extensive progress in the engineering of the RNA and protein components of Cas9, the most widely-used genome editor. Here we review advances in engineering of the enzyme Cas9 by altering its chemical or molecular composition. Such efforts have enhanced enzyme stability, improved capacity for delivery, augmented specificity, and broadened the horizons of genome manipulation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JinekM, ChylinskiK, FonfaraI, et al.A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 2012; 337:816–821. DOI: 10.1126/science.1225829.
2.
AdliM. The CRISPR tool kit for genome editing and beyond. Nat Commun. 2018; 9:191–1. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04252-2.
3.
RanFA, CongL, YanWX, et al.In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature, 2015; 520:186–191. DOI: 10.1038/nature14299.
4.
CongL, RanFA, CoxD, et al.Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science, 2013; 339:819–823. DOI: 10.1126/science.1231143.
5.
HouZ, ZhangY, PropsonNE, et al.Efficient genome engineering in human pluripotent stem cells using Cas9 from Neisseria meningitidis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013; 110:15644–15649. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1313587110.
6.
HarringtonLB, Paez-EspinoD, StaahlBT, et al.A thermostable Cas9 with increased lifetime in human plasma. Nat Commun. 2017; 8:142–4. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01408-4.
7.
ZetscheB, GootenbergJS, AbudayyehOO, et al.Cpf1 Is a Single RNA-Guided Endonuclease of a Class 2 CRISPR-Cas System. Cell, 2015; 163:759–771. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.038.
8.
WangY, LiuKI, SutrisnohNB, et al.Systematic evaluation of CRISPR-Cas systems reveals design principles for genome editing in human cells. Genome Biol. 2018; 19:6–2. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-018-1445-x.
9.
DeltchevaE, ChylinskiK, SharmaCM, et al.CRISPR RNA maturation by trans-encoded small RNA and host factor RNase III. Nature, 2011; 471:602–607. DOI: 10.1038/nature09886.
10.
JinekM, EastA, ChengA, et al.RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells. eLife, 2013; 2:e0047–1. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.00471.
11.
MaliP, YangL, EsveltKM, et al.RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science, 2013; 339:823–826. DOI: 10.1126/science.1232033.
12.
HuJH, MillerSM, GeurtsMH, et al.Evolved Cas9 variants with broad PAM compatibility and high DNA specificity. Nature, 2018; 556:57–63. DOI: 10.1038/nature26155.
13.
KleinstiverBP, PrewMS, TsaiSQ, et al.Broadening the targeting range of Staphylococcus aureus CRISPR-Cas9 by modifying PAM recognition. Nat Biotechnol. 2015; 33:1293–1298. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3404.
14.
KleinstiverBP, PrewMS, TsaiSQ, et al.Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature, 2015; 523:481–485. DOI: 10.1038/nature14592.
15.
NishimasuH, ShiX, IshiguroS, et al.Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nuclease with expanded targeting space. Science, 2018; 361:1259–1262. DOI: 10.1126/science.aas9129
16.
SlaymakerIM, GaoL, ZetscheB, et al.Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science, 2016; 351:84–88. DOI: 10.1126/science.aad5227.
17.
KleinstiverBP, PattanayakV, PrewMS, et al.High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature, 2016; 529:490–495. DOI: 10.1038/nature16526.
VakulskasCA, DeverDP, RettigGR, et al.A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. Nat Med. 2018; 24:1216–1224. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-018-0137-0.
20.
NishimasuH, RanFA, HsuPD, et al.Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell, 2014; 156:935–949. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.02.001.
21.
OakesBL, NadlerDC, SavageDF. Protein engineering of Cas9 for enhanced function. Methods Enzymol. 2014; 546:491–511. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801185-0.00024-6.
22.
OakesBL, NadlerDC, FlamholzA, et al.Profiling of engineering hotspots identifies an allosteric CRISPR-Cas9 switch. Nat Biotechnol. 2016; 34:646–651. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3528.
23.
QiLS, LarsonMH, GilbertLA, et al.Repurposing CRISPR as an RNA-guided platform for sequence-specific control of gene expression. Cell, 2013; 152:1173–1183. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.02.022.
ChavezA, TuttleM, PruittBW, et al.Comparison of Cas9 activators in multiple species. Nat Methods, 2016; 13:563–567. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.3871.
26.
GilbertLA, LarsonMD, MorsutL, et al.CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell, 2013; 154:442–451. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.06.044.
27.
YeoNC, ChavezA, Lance-ByrneA, et al.An enhanced CRISPR repressor for targeted mammalian gene regulation. Nat Methods, 2018; 15:611–616. DOI: 10.1038/s41592-018-0048-5.
28.
KearnsNA, PhamH, TabakB, et al.Functional annotation of native enhancers with a Cas9-histone demethylase fusion. Nat Methods, 2015; 12:401–403. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.3325.
29.
YeomYI, FuhrmannG, OvittCE, et al.Germline regulatory element of Oct-4 specific for the totipotent cycle of embryonal cells. Dev Camb Engl. 1996; 122:881–894.
30.
ChenB, GilbertLA, CiminiBA, et al.Dynamic Imaging of Genomic Loci in Living Human Cells by an Optimized CRISPR/Cas System. Cell, 2013; 155:1479–1491. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.12.001.
31.
MaliP, AachJ, StrangesPB, et al.CAS9 transcriptional activators for target specificity screening and paired nickases for cooperative genome engineering. Nat Biotechnol. 2013; 31:833–838. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2675.
32.
ZalatanJG, LeeME, AlmeidaR, et al.Engineering complex synthetic transcriptional programs with CRISPR RNA scaffolds. Cell, 2015; 160:339–350. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.052.
33.
ReesHA, LiuDR. Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells. Nat Rev Genet. 2018; 19:770–788. DOI:10.1038/s41576-018-0059-1.
34.
KomorAC, KimYB, PackerMS, et al.Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature, 2016; 533:420–424. DOI: 10.1038/nature17946.
35.
GaudelliNM, KomorAC, ReesHA, et al.Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature, 2017; 551:464–471. DOI: 10.1038/nature24644.
36.
GapinskeM, LuuA, WinterJ, et al.CRISPR-SKIP: programmable gene splicing with single base editors. Genome Biol. 2018; 19:10–7. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-018-1482-5.
37.
YehW-H, ChiangH, ReesHA, EdgeASB, LiuDR. In vivo base editing of post-mitotic sensory cells. Nat Commun. 2018; 9:218–4. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04580-3.
38.
HalperinSO, TouCJ, WongEB, et al.CRISPR-guided DNA polymerases enable diversification of all nucleotides in a tunable window. Nature, 2018; 560:248–252. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0384-8.
39.
NasoMF, TomkowiczB, PerryWL, StrohlWR. Adeno-associated virus (AAV) as a vector for gene therapy. Biodrugs, 2017; 31:317–334. DOI: 10.1007/s40259-017-0234-5.
40.
SwiechL, HeidenreichM, BanerjeeA, et al.In vivo interrogation of gene function in the mammalian brain using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Biotechnol. 2015; 33:102–106. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3055.
MillerJB, ZhangS, KosP, et al.Non-Viral CRISPR/Cas Gene Editing In Vitro and In Vivo Enabled by Synthetic Nanoparticle Co-Delivery of Cas9 mRNA and sgRNA. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2017; 56:1059–1063. DOI: 10.1002/anie.201610209.
44.
YinH, SongCQ, SureshS, et al.Structure-guided chemical modification of guide RNA enables potent non-viral in vivo genome editing. Nat Biotechnol. 2017; 35:1179–1187. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4005.
45.
JiangC, MeiM, LiB, et al.A non-viral CRISPR/Cas9 delivery system for therapeutically targeting HBV DNA and pcsk9 in vivo. Cell Res. 2017; 27:440–443. DOI: 10.1038/cr.2017.16.
46.
FinnJD, SmithAR, PatelMC, et al.A Single Administration of CRISPR/Cas9 Lipid Nanoparticles Achieves Robust and Persistent In Vivo Genome Editing. Cell Rep. 2018; 22:2227–2235. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.02.014.
47.
YinH, SongCQ, DorkinJR, et al.Therapeutic genome editing by combined viral and non-viral delivery of CRISPR system components in vivo. Nat Biotechnol. 2016; 34:328–333. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3471.
48.
ZhangL, WangP, FengQ, et al.Lipid nanoparticle-mediated efficient delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 for tumor therapy. NPG Asia Mater. 2017; 9:e44–1. DOI: 10.1038/am.2017.185.
49.
LiuY, CaoZT, XuCF, et al.Optimization of lipid-assisted nanoparticle for disturbing neutrophils-related inflammation. Biomaterials, 2018; 172:92–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.04.052.
50.
LuoY-L, XuCF, LiHJ, et al.Macrophage-Specific in Vivo Gene Editing Using Cationic Lipid-Assisted Polymeric Nanoparticles. ACS Nano. 2018; 12:994–1005. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.7b07874.
51.
KimS, KimD, ChoSW, et al.Highly efficient RNA-guided genome editing in human cells via delivery of purified Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Genome Res. 2014; 24:1012–1019. DOI: 10.1101/gr.171322.113.
52.
ZurisJA, ThompsonDB, ShuY, et al.Cationic lipid-mediated delivery of proteins enables efficient protein-based genome editing in vitro and in vivo. Nat Biotechnol. 2015; 33:73–80. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3081.
53.
GaoX, TaoY, LamasV, et al.Treatment of autosomal dominant hearing loss by in vivo delivery of genome editing agents. Nature, 2018; 553:217–221. DOI: 10.1038/nature25164.
54.
LeeB, LeeK, PandaS, et al.Nanoparticle delivery of CRISPR into the brain rescues a mouse model of fragile X syndrome from exaggerated repetitive behaviours. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018; 2:497–507. DOI: 10.1038/s41551-018-0252-8.
55.
LeeK, ConboyM, ParkHM, et al.Nanoparticle delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein and donor DNA in vivo induces homology-directed DNA repair. Nat Biomed Eng. 2017; 1:889–901. DOI: 10.1038/s41551-017-0137-2.
56.
StaahlBT, BenekareddyM, Coulon-BainerC, et al.Efficient genome editing in the mouse brain by local delivery of engineered Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat Biotechnol. 2017; 35:431–434. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3806.
57.
LiY, BolingerJ, YuY, et al.Intracellular delivery and biodistribution study of CRISPR/Cas9 ribonucleoprotein loaded bioreducible lipidoid nanoparticles. Biomater Sci. 2018 Jul 31. DOI: 10.1039/c8bm00637g.
58.
RamakrishnaS, Kwaku DadAB, BeloorJ, et al.Gene disruption by cell-penetrating peptide-mediated delivery of Cas9 protein and guide RNA. Genome Res. 2014; 24:1020–1027. DOI: 10.1101/gr.171264.113.
59.
Rádis-BaptistaG, CampeloIS, MorlighemJRL, et al.Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs): from delivery of nucleic acids and antigens to transduction of engineered nucleases for application in transgenesis. J Biotechnol. 2017; 252:15–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.05.002.
60.
MatsuiH, TomizawaK, LuY-F, MatsushitaM. Protein Therapy: in vivo protein transduction by polyarginine (11R) PTD and subcellular targeting delivery. Curr Protein Pept Sci. 2003; 4:151–157.
61.
DingH, InoueS, LjubimovAV, et al.Inhibition of brain tumor growth by intravenous poly (β-L-malic acid) nanobioconjugate with pH-dependent drug release [corrected]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107:18143–18148. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003919107.
62.
Del'GuidiceT, Lepetit-StoffaesJ-P, BordeleauL-J, et al.Membrane permeabilizing amphiphilic peptide delivers recombinant transcription factor and CRISPR-Cas9/Cpf1 ribonucleoproteins in hard-to-modify cells. PLOS ONE, 2018; 13:e019555–8. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195558.
63.
MoutR, Yesilbag TongaG, LeeY-W, et al.Direct Cytosolic Delivery of CRISPR/Cas9-Ribonucleoprotein for Efficient Gene Editing. ACS Nano, 2017; 11:2452–2458. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.6b07600.
64.
ZhouW, CuiH, YingL, YuX-F. Enhanced Cytosolic Delivery and Release of CRISPR/Cas9 by Black Phosphorus Nanosheets for Genome Editing. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2018; 57:10268–10272. DOI: 10.1002/anie.201806941.
65.
ChoiJG, DangY, AbrahamS, et al.Lentivirus pre-packed with Cas9 protein for safer gene editing. Gene Ther. 2016; 23:627–633. DOI: 10.1038/gt.2016.27.
66.
CroninJ, ZhangX-Y, ReiserJ. Altering the tropism of lentiviral vectors through pseudotyping. Curr Gene Ther. 2005; 5:387–398.
67.
WangQ, YuJ, KadungureT, et al.ARMMs as a versatile platform for intracellular delivery of macromolecules. Nat Commun. 2018; 9:96–0. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-03390-x.
68.
QaziS, MiettinenHM, WilkinsonRA, et al.Programmed Self-Assembly of an Active P22-Cas9 Nanocarrier System. Mol Pharm. 2016; 13:1191–1196. DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.5b00822.
69.
Hansen-BruhnM, de ÁvilaBE, Beltrán-GastélumM, et al.Active Intracellular Delivery of a Cas9/sgRNA Complex Using Ultrasound-Propelled Nanomotors. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2018; 57:2657–2661. DOI: 10.1002/anie.201713082.
70.
RouetR, ThumaBA, RoyMD, et al.Receptor-Mediated Delivery of CRISPR-Cas9 Endonuclease for Cell-Type-Specific Gene Editing. J Am Chem Soc. 2018; 140:6596–6603. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.8b01551.
71.
SavicN, RingnaldaFC, LindsayH, et al.Covalent linkage of the DNA repair template to the CRISPR-Cas9 nuclease enhances homology-directed repair. eLife, 2018; 7:pi–i: e33761. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.33761.
72.
LovendahlKN, HaywardAN, GordonWR. Sequence-Directed Covalent Protein-DNA Linkages in a Single Step Using HUH-Tags. J Am Chem Soc. 2017; 139:7030–7035. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b02572.
73.
AirdEJ, LovendahlKN, St MartinA, et al.Increasing Cas9-mediated homology-directed repair efficiency through covalent tethering of DNA repair template. Commun Biol. 2018; 1:5–4. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-018-0054-2.
74.
LeeK, MackleyVA, RaoA, et al.Synthetically modified guide RNA and donor DNA are a versatile platform for CRISPR-Cas9 engineering. eLife, 2017; 6:pii: e25312. DOI:10.7554/eLife.25312.
75.
Carlson-StevermerJ, AbdeenAA, KohlenbergL, et al.Assembly of CRISPR ribonucleoproteins with biotinylated oligonucleotides via an RNA aptamer for precise gene editing. Nat Commun. 2017; 8:171–1. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01875-9.
76.
BrinerAE, DonohouePD, GomaaAA, et al.Guide RNA functional modules direct Cas9 activity and orthogonality. Mol Cell, 2014; 56:333–339. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.09.019.
77.
KimS, KooT, JeeHG, et al.CRISPR RNAs trigger innate immune responses in human cells. Genome Res, 2018 Feb 22. DOI: 10.1101/gr.231936.117.
78.
WienertB, ShinJ, ZelinE, et al.In vitro–transcribed guide RNAs trigger an innate immune response via the RIG-I pathway. PLoS Biol. 2018; 16:e200584–0. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005840.
79.
de la PeñaM, García-RoblesI, CerveraA. The hammerhead ribozyme: a long history for a short RNA. Molecules, 2017; 22:7–8. DOI: 10.3390/molecules22010078.
ChadalavadaDM, Cerrone-SzakalAL, BevilacquaPC. Wild-type is the optimal sequence of the HDV ribozyme under cotranscriptional conditions. RNA, 2007; 13:2189–2201. DOI: 10.1261/rna.778107.
82.
HeY, ZhangT, YangN, et al.Self-cleaving ribozymes enable the production of guide RNAs from unlimited choices of promoters for CRISPR/Cas9 mediated genome editing. J Genet Genomics Yi Chuan Xue Bao, 2017; 44:469–472. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgg.2017.08.003.
83.
HendelA, BakRO, ClarkJT, et al.Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR-Cas genome editing in human primary cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2015; 33:985–989. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3290.
84.
BasilaM, KelleyML, SmithAVB. Minimal 2′-O-methyl phosphorothioate linkage modification pattern of synthetic guide RNAs for increased stability and efficient CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing avoiding cellular toxicity. PLOS ONE, 2017; 12:e018859–3. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188593.
85.
MirA, AltermanJF, HasslerMR, et al.Heavily and fully modified RNAs guide efficient SpyCas9-mediated genome editing. Nat Commun. 2018; 9:264–1. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05073-z.
86.
RanFA, HsuPD, LinC-Y, et al.Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR Cas9 for enhanced genome editing specificity. Cell, 2013; 154:1380–1389. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.08.021.
87.
FuY, FodenJA, KhayterC, et al.High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2013; 31:822–826. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2623.
88.
KianiS, ChavezA, TuttleM, et al.Cas9 gRNA engineering for genome editing, activation and repression. Nat Methods, 2015; 12:1051–1054. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.3580.
89.
ChoSW, KimS, KimY, et al.Analysis of off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas-derived RNA-guided endonucleases and nickases. Genome Res. 2014; 24:132–141. DOI: 10.1101/gr.162339.113.
90.
KimD, KimS, KimS, et al.Genome-wide target specificities of CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases revealed by multiplex Digenome-seq. Genome Res. 2016; 26:406–415. DOI: 10.1101/gr.199588.
91.
SungYH, KimJM, KimHT, et al.Highly efficient gene knockout in mice and zebrafish with RNA-guided endonucleases. Genome Res. 2014; 24:125–131. DOI: 10.1101/gr.163394.113.
RyanDE, TaussigD, SteinfeldI, et al.Improving CRISPR–Cas specificity with chemical modifications in single-guide RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018; 46:792–803. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx1199.
94.
HessGT, FrésardL, HanK, et al.Directed evolution using dCas9-targeted somatic hypermutation in mammalian cells. Nat Methods, 2016; 13:1036–1042. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4038.
95.
KosickiM, TombergK, BradleyA. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR–Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat Biotechnol. 2018; 36:765–771. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4192.
96.
WilsonRC, GilbertLA. The Promise and Challenge of In Vivo Delivery for Genome Therapeutics. ACS Chem Biol. 2018; 13:376–382. DOI: 10.1021/acschembio.7b00680.
