Mitigating the Off-target Effects in CRISPR/Cas9-mediated Genetic Editing with Bioinformatic Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biological and clinical fields have recognized the CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat/CRISPR associated protein 9) system as a precise and efficient tool for editing the genome. Despite its merits, the system poses crucial challenges, notably the off-target effects which could lead to unintended mutations - a substantial impediment for clinical applications that may potentially compromise the validity of research and the safety of therapeutic applications. Bioinformatics plays a pivotal role in mitigating this risk. Utilizing more refined bioinformatic tools and algorithms, researchers can reduce off-target mutations remarkably. These instruments, powered by machine learning and computational modelling, are able to predict off-target effects and provide aid for the design of more efficient sgRNA. Despite these advancements, it remains crucial to continue to focus on the improvement and assessment of such bioinformatics strategies. This review aims to holistically explore the mechanism and applications of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing, its off-target effects, and the consequent impacts, along with the potential of bioinformatics techniques to identify off-target risks and facilitate sgRNA design. This review will also incorporate a clinical trial on HIV-1 treatment as a case study to highlight the potential of bioinformatics in devising solutions to mitigate the potential off-target effects of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genetic editing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".