JACKS: joint analysis of CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screens.
Journal
Genome research
ISSN: 1549-5469
Titre abrégé: Genome Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9518021
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2019
03 2019
Historique:
received:
27
04
2018
accepted:
16
01
2019
pubmed:
25
1
2019
medline:
14
6
2019
entrez:
25
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screens are revolutionizing mammalian functional genomics. However, their range of applications remains limited by signal variability from different guide RNAs that target the same gene, which confounds gene effect estimation and dictates large experiment sizes. To address this problem, we report JACKS, a Bayesian method that jointly analyzes screens performed with the same guide RNA library. Modeling the variable guide efficacies greatly improves hit identification over processing a single screen at a time and outperforms existing methods. This more efficient analysis gives additional hits and allows designing libraries with a 2.5-fold reduction in required cell numbers without sacrificing performance compared to current analysis standards.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30674557
pii: gr.238923.118
doi: 10.1101/gr.238923.118
pmc: PMC6396427
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
464-471Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2019 Allen et al.; Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2507-16
pubmed: 21639808
Nature. 2012 Jan 26;483(7387):100-3
pubmed: 22281684
Nature. 2012 Mar 28;483(7391):603-7
pubmed: 22460905
Science. 2014 Jan 3;343(6166):80-4
pubmed: 24336569
Science. 2014 Jan 3;343(6166):84-87
pubmed: 24336571
Nat Biotechnol. 2014 Mar;32(3):267-73
pubmed: 24535568
Nat Methods. 2014 Jul;11(7):705-6
pubmed: 24972169
Mol Syst Biol. 2014 Jul 01;10:733
pubmed: 24987113
Nat Methods. 2014 Aug;11(8):783-784
pubmed: 25075903
Nat Biotechnol. 2014 Dec;32(12):1262-7
pubmed: 25184501
Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):554
pubmed: 25476604
Nat Methods. 2015 Oct;12(10):982-8
pubmed: 26322839
Bioinformatics. 2016 Jan 15;32(2):260-7
pubmed: 26415723
Science. 2015 Nov 27;350(6264):1096-101
pubmed: 26472758
Cell. 2015 Dec 3;163(6):1515-26
pubmed: 26627737
Genome Biol. 2015 Dec 16;16:281
pubmed: 26673418
Nat Biotechnol. 2016 Feb;34(2):184-191
pubmed: 26780180
PLoS Comput Biol. 2016 Jan 29;12(1):e1004724
pubmed: 26824432
Elife. 2016 Mar 17;5:
pubmed: 26987018
BMC Bioinformatics. 2016 Apr 16;17:164
pubmed: 27083490
Cancer Discov. 2016 Aug;6(8):914-29
pubmed: 27260156
Genome Biol. 2016 Jul 05;17(1):148
pubmed: 27380939
Trends Biotechnol. 2017 Jan;35(1):12-21
pubmed: 27418421
Cell Rep. 2016 Oct 18;17(4):1193-1205
pubmed: 27760321
ACS Synth Biol. 2017 May 19;6(5):902-904
pubmed: 28146356
Cell. 2017 Feb 23;168(5):890-903.e15
pubmed: 28162770
G3 (Bethesda). 2017 Aug 7;7(8):2719-2727
pubmed: 28655737
BMC Genomics. 2017 Jul 19;18(1):545
pubmed: 28724352
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 2;12(8):e0181943
pubmed: 28767689
Nat Genet. 2017 Dec;49(12):1779-1784
pubmed: 29083409
Nucleic Acids Res. 2018 Feb 16;46(3):1375-1385
pubmed: 29267886
Sci Rep. 2018 Apr 12;8(1):6136
pubmed: 29643451
BMC Genomics. 2018 Aug 13;19(1):604
pubmed: 30103702