Automated design of CRISPR prime editors for thousands of human pathogenic variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Prime editors (PEs) are CRISPR-based genome engineering tools that can introduce precise base-pair edits at specific locations in the genome. These programmable gene editors have been predicted to repair 89% of known human pathogenic variants in the ClinVar database, although these PE constructs do not presently exist. Towards this end, we developed an automated pipeline to correct (therapeutic editing) or introduce (disease modeling) human pathogenic variants that optimizes the design of several RNA constructs required for prime editing and avoids predicted off-targets in the human genome. However, using optimal PE design criteria, we find that only a small fraction of these pathogenic variants can be targeted. Through the use of alternative Cas9 enzymes and extended templates, we increase the number of targetable pathogenic variants to >50,000 variants and make these pre-designed PE constructs accessible through a web-based portal ( http://primeedit.nygenome.org ). Given the tremendous potential for therapeutic gene editing, we also assessed the possibility of developing universal PE constructs. By examining the overlap of different PE components with common human genetic variants in dbSNP, we find that common variants affect only a small minority of designed PEs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".