DNA and RNA base editors can correct the majority of pathogenic single nucleotide variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of human genetic diseases are caused by single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in the genome sequence. Excitingly, new genomic techniques known as base editing have opened efficient pathways to correct erroneous nucleotides. Due to reliance on deaminases, which have the capability to convert A to I(G) and C to U, the direct applicability of base editing might seem constrained in terms of the range of mutations that can be reverted. In this evaluation, we assess the potential of DNA and RNA base editing methods for treating human genetic diseases. Our findings indicate that 62% of pathogenic SNVs found within genes can be amended by base editing; 30% are G>A and T>C SNVs that can be corrected by DNA base editing, and most of them by RNA base editing as well, and 29% are C>T and A>G SNVs that can be corrected by DNA base editing directed to the complementary strand. For each, we also present several factors that affect applicability such as bystander and off-target occurrences. For cases where editing the mismatched nucleotide is not feasible, we introduce an approach that calculates the optimal substitution of the deleterious amino acid with a new amino acid, further expanding the scope of applicability. As personalized therapy is rapidly advancing, our demonstration that most SNVs can be treated by base editing is of high importance. The data provided will serve as a comprehensive resource for those seeking to design therapeutic base editors and study their potential in curing genetic diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".