Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.advisorMartin, Francisco
dc.contributor.authorGutierrez-Guerrero, A
dc.contributor.authorSanchez-Gilabert, Almudena
dc.contributor.authorGalvani, G
dc.contributor.authorPinedo-Gomez, J
dc.contributor.authorSanchez-Hernandez, Sabina
dc.contributor.authorMartin-Guerra, Rocio
dc.contributor.authorCobo, Mariem
dc.contributor.authorGregory, Phyllips
dc.contributor.authorHolmes, Mickael
dc.contributor.authorBenabdellah, Karim
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Francisco
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-01T10:59:02Z
dc.date.available2025-02-01T10:59:02Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationHuman Gene Therapy.. Vol29(3):366-380 (2018)es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/101722
dc.description.abstractPrimary immunodeficiencies, including Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome (WAS), are a main target for genome-editing strategies using specific nucleases (SNs) because a small number of corrected hematopoietic stem cells could cure patients. In this work, we have designed various WAS gene-specific CRISPR/Cas9 systems and compared their efficiency and specificity with homodimeric and heterodimeric WAS-specific zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), using K-562 cells as a cellular model and plasmid nucleofection or integration-deficient lentiviral vectors (IDLVs) for delivery. The various CRISPR/Cas9 and ZFN SNs showed similar efficiency when using plasmid nucleofection for delivery. However, dual IDLVs expressing ZFNs were more efficient than dual IDLVs expressing Cas9 and guide RNA or all-in-one IDLVs, expressing Cas9 and guide RNA in the same vector. The specificity of heterodimeric ZFNs and CRISPR/Cas9, measured by increments in γ-H2AX focus formation in WAS-edited cells, was similar for both, and both outperformed homodimeric ZFNs independently of the delivery system used. Interestingly, we show that delivery of SNs, using IDLVs, is more efficient and less genotoxic than plasmid nucleofection. We also show the similar behavior of heterodimeric ZFNs and CRISPR/Cas9 for homology-directed gene knock-in strategies, with 88 and 83% of the donors inserted in the WAS locus, respectively, whereas when using homodimeric ZFNs only 45% of the insertions were on target. In summary, our data indicate that CRISPR/Cas9 and heterodimeric ZFNs are both good alternatives to further develop SN-based gene therapy strategies for WAS. However, IDLV delivery of WAS-specific heterodimeric ZFNs was the best option of all systems compared in this study.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherMARY ANN LIEBERTes_ES
dc.subjectLentiviral vectorses_ES
dc.subjectgene therapy es_ES
dc.subjectEdition génicaes_ES
dc.subjectCRISPRes_ES
dc.subjectZinc-Finger Nucleaseses_ES
dc.subjectWiskott-Aldrich syndromees_ES
dc.subjectrare deiseaseses_ES
dc.titleComparison of ZFNs versus CRISPR specific nucleases for genome edition of the Wiskott-Aldrich Syndrome locuses_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1089/hum.2017.047
dc.type.hasVersionAOes_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem