Frequent aneuploidy in primary human T cells after CRISPR-Cas9 cleavage.
Journal
Nature biotechnology
ISSN: 1546-1696
Titre abrégé: Nat Biotechnol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9604648
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
18
08
2021
accepted:
31
05
2022
pubmed:
1
7
2022
medline:
17
12
2022
entrez:
30
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multiple clinical trials of allogeneic T cell therapy use site-specific nucleases to disrupt T cell receptor (TCR) and other genes
Identifiants
pubmed: 35773341
doi: 10.1038/s41587-022-01377-0
pii: 10.1038/s41587-022-01377-0
pmc: PMC7613940
mid: EMS145818
doi:
Substances chimiques
Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1807-1813Subventions
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : R01 AI167003
Pays : United States
Organisme : European Research Council
ID : 759296
Pays : International
Organisme : European Research Council
ID : 945674
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.
Références
Weber, E. W., Maus, M. V. & Mackall, C. L. The emerging landscape of immune cell therapies. Cell 181, 46–62 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.03.001
MacLeod, D. T. et al. Integration of a CD19 CAR into the TCR alpha chain locus streamlines production of allogeneic gene-edited CAR T cells. Mol. Ther. 25, 949–961 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2017.02.005
Philip, L. P. B. et al. Multiplex genome-edited T-cell manufacturing platform for ‘off-the-shelf’ adoptive T-cell immunotherapies. Cancer Res. 75, 3853–3864 (2015).
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-3321
Qasim, W. et al. Molecular remission of infant B-ALL after infusion of universal TALEN gene-edited CAR T cells. Sci. Transl. Med. 9, 1–10 (2017).
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaj2013
Osborn, M. J. et al. Evaluation of TCR gene editing achieved by TALENs, CRISPR/Cas9, and megaTAL nucleases. Mol. Ther. 24, 570–581 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/mt.2015.197
Stadtmauer, E. A. et al. CRISPR-engineered T cells in patients with refractory cancer. Science 367, eaba7365 (2020).
Braendstrup, P., Levine, B. L. & Ruella, M. The long road to the first FDA-approved gene therapy: chimeric antigen receptor T cells targeting CD19. Cytotherapy 22, 57–69 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2019.12.004
Eyquem, J. et al. Targeting a CAR to the TRAC locus with CRISPR/Cas9 enhances tumour rejection. Nature 543, 113–117 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/nature21405
Roth, T. L. et al. Reprogramming human T cell function and specificity with non-viral genome targeting. Nature 559, 405–409 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0326-5
Schober, K. et al. Orthotopic replacement of T-cell receptor α- and β-chains with preservation of near-physiological T-cell function. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 3, 977–984 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41551-019-0409-0
Mansilla-Soto, J. et al. HLA-independent T cell receptors for targeting tumors with low antigen density. Nat. Med. 28, 345–352 (2022).
doi: 10.1038/s41591-021-01621-1
Shifrut, E. et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screens in primary human T cells reveal key regulators of immune function. Cell 175, 1958–1971 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.024
Valton, J. et al. A multidrug-resistant engineered CAR T cell for allogeneic combination immunotherapy. Mol. Ther. 23, 1507–1518 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/mt.2015.104
Rupp, L. J. et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated PD-1 disruption enhances anti-tumor efficacy of human chimeric antigen receptor T cells. Sci Rep. 7, 737 (2017).
Nahmad, A. D. et al. Engineered B cells expressing an anti-HIV antibody enable memory retention, isotype switching and clonal expansion. Nat. Commun. 17, 5851 (2020).
Charlesworth, C. T. et al. Identification of preexisting adaptive immunity to Cas9 proteins in humans. Nat. Med. 25, 249–254 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0326-x
Enache, O. M. et al. Cas9 activates the p53 pathway and selects for p53-inactivating mutations. Nat. Genet. 52, 662–668 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-020-0623-4
Lazzarotto, C. R. et al. CHANGE-seq reveals genetic and epigenetic effects on CRISPR–Cas9 genome-wide activity. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 1317–1327 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41587-020-0555-7
Adikusuma, F. et al. Large deletions induced by Cas9 cleavage. Nature 560, E8–E9 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0380-z
Papathanasiou, S. et al. Whole chromosome loss and genomic instability in mouse embryos after CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing. Nat. Commun. 12, 5855 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-26097-y
Alanis-lobato, G., Zohren, J., Mccarthy, A., Fogarty, N. M. E. & Kubikova, N. Frequent loss-of-heterozygosity in CRISPR–Cas9-edited early human embryos. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2004832117 (2021).
Weisheit, I. et al. Detection of deleterious on-target effects after HDR-mediated CRISPR editing. Cell Rep. 31, 107689 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107689
Boutin, J. et al. CRISPR–Cas9 globin editing can induce megabase-scale copy-neutral losses of heterozygosity in hematopoietic cells. Nat. Commun. 12, 4922 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-25190-6
Przewrocka, J., Rowan, A., Rosenthal, R., Kanu, N. & Swanton, C. Unintended on-target chromosomal instability following CRISPR/Cas9 single gene targeting. Ann. Oncol. 31, 1270–1273 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.480
Kosicki, M., Tomberg, K. & Bradley, A. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR–Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 765–771 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/nbt.4192
Zuccaro, M. V. et al. Allele-specific chromosome removal after Cas9 cleavage in human embryos. Cell 183, 1650–1664 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.10.025
Leibowitz, M. L. et al. Chromothripsis as an on-target consequence of CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing. Nat. Genet. 53, 895–905 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-021-00838-7
Urnov, F. D. CRISPR–Cas9 can cause chromothripsis. Nat. Genet. 53, 765–769 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-021-00881-4
Patel, A. P. et al. Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma. Science 344, 1396–1402 (2014).
doi: 10.1126/science.1254257
Tirosh, I. et al. Dissecting the multicellular ecosystem of metastatic melanoma by single-cell RNA-seq. Science 352, 189–196 (2016).
doi: 10.1126/science.aad0501
Puig, M. et al. Determining the impact of uncharacterized inversions in the human genome by droplet digital PCR. Genome Res. 30, 724–735 (2020).
doi: 10.1101/gr.255273.119
Zetsche, B. et al. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR–Cas system. Cell 163, 759–771 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.038
Ben-David, U. & Amon, A. Context is everything: aneuploidy in cancer. Nat. Rev. Genet. 21, 44–62 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41576-019-0171-x
Mourra, N. et al. High frequency of chromosome 14 deletion in early-onset colon cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum 50, 1881–1886 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9040-3
Bandera, C. A. et al. Deletion mapping of two potential chromosome 14 tumor suppressor gene loci in ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 57, 513–516 (1997).
Tabernero, M. D. et al. Characterization of chromosome 14 abnormalities by interphase in situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization in 124 meningiomas. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 123, 744–751 (2005).
Lopez-Gines, C. et al. Association of chromosome 7, chromosome 10 and EGFR gene amplification in glioblastoma multiforme. Clin. Neuropathol. 24, 209–218 (2005).
Kamada, N. et al. Chromosome abnormalities in adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma: a karyotype review committee report. Cancer Res. 52, 1481–1493 (1992).
Webber, B. R. et al. Highly efficient multiplex human T cell engineering without double-strand breaks using Cas9 base editors. Nat. Commun. 10, 5222 (2019).
Anzalone, A. V., Koblan, L. W. & Liu, D. R. Genome editing with CRISPR–Cas nucleases, base editors, transposases and prime editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 824–844 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41587-020-0561-9
Barzel, A. et al. Promoterless gene targeting without nucleases ameliorates haemophilia B in mice. Nature 517, 360–364 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/nature13864
Porro, F. et al. Promoterless gene targeting without nucleases rescues lethality of a Crigler–Najjar syndrome mouse model. EMBO Mol. Med. 9, 1346–1355 (2017).
doi: 10.15252/emmm.201707601
Chandler, R. J. et al. Promoterless, nuclease- free genome editing confers a growth advantage for corrected hepatocytes in mice with methylmalonic acidemia. Hepatology 73, 2223–2237 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/hep.31570
Rutledge, S. D. et al. Selective advantage of trisomic human cells cultured in non-standard conditions. Sci Rep. 6, 22828 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/srep22828
Sheltzer, J. M. et al. Single-chromosome gains commonly function as tumor suppressors. Cancer Cell 31, 240–255 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2016.12.004
Stuart, T. et al. Comprehensive integration of single-cell data resource comprehensive integration of single-cell data. Cell 177, 1888–1902 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.031
Liberzon, A. et al. The Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB) hallmark gene set collection. Cell Syst. 1, 417–425 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2015.12.004
Subramanian, A. et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 15545–15550 (2005).
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506580102
Liberzon, A. et al. Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB) 3.0. Bioinformatics 27, 1739–1740 (2011).
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr260
Brinkman, E. K., Chen, T., Amendola, M. & Van Steensel, B. Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 1–8 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/nar/gku936