ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
Comparison of the Feasibility, Efficiency, and Safety of Genome Editing Technologies.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Targets and Trait Innovation in CRISPR-Edited Vegetable Crops: An Up-to-Date Review (2020-2026).Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Genome Editing in Solanaceae: Harnessing CRISPR-Cas Technology for Precision Crop Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Host cell protein impurities in therapeutic proteins: overview of advances in detection, nonconventional removal technologies and immunogenicity assessment.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- Recent developments in CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing research for edible fungiculture.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Review
- Biodiversity and genetic improvement ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Advances in gene therapy for mitochondrial genetic disorders: current status and clinical implementation challenges.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- CRISPR Technology in Disease Management: An Updated Review of Clinical Translation and Therapeutic Potential.Cell proliferation · 2025Article
- Review
- TALEN-Interceded Genome Editing in Plants: Unveiling New Frontiers in Secondary Metabolite Improvement and Genetic Diversity.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Beyond Cutting: CRISPR-Driven Synthetic Biology Toolkit for Next-Generation Microalgal Metabolic Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Applications of Gene Editing and Nanotechnology in Stem Cell-Based Therapies for Human Diseases.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2025Review
- Excision of HIV-1 Provirus in Human Primary Cells with Nanocapsuled TALEN Proteins.ACS applied bio materials · 2025Article
- Advancing vegetable genetics with gene editing: a pathway to food security and nutritional resilience in climate-shifted environments.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Review
- CRISPR/Cas System: A Powerful Strategy to Improve Monogenic Human Diseases as Therapeutic Delivery; Current Applications and Challenges.Current gene therapy · 2025Review
- Genetic engineering frontiers in cell manipulation-based tissue engineering: A comprehensive review.BioImpacts : BI · 2025Review
- Gene editing therapy as a therapeutic approach for cardiovascular diseases in animal models: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Efficient DNA-free co-targeting of nuclear genes in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii.Biology direct · 2024Article
- Unleashing the Potential of CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing for Yield-Related Traits in Rice.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- CRISPR-Cas gene knockouts to optimize engineered T cells for cancer immunotherapy.Cancer gene therapy · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in programmable nucleases including meganucleases (MNs), zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-Cas (CRISPR-Cas) have propelled genome editing from explorative research to clinical and industrial settings. Each technology, however, features distinct modes of action that unevenly impact their applicability across the entire genome and are often tested under significantly different conditions. While CRISPR-Cas is currently leading the field due to its versatility, quick adoption, and high degree of support, it is not without limitations. Currently, no technology can be regarded as ideal or even applicable to every case as the context dictates the best approach for genetic modification within a target organism. In this review, we implement a four-pillar framework (context, feasibility, efficiency, and safety) to assess the main genome editing platforms, as a basis for rational decision-making by an expanding base of users, regulators, and consumers. Beyond carefully considering their specific use case with the assessment framework proposed here, we urge stakeholders interested in genome editing to independently validate the parameters of their chosen platform prior to commitment. Furthermore, safety across all applications, particularly in clinical settings, is a paramount consideration and comprehensive off-target detection strategies should be incorporated within workflows to address this. Often neglected aspects such as immunogenicity and the inadvertent selection of mutants deficient for DNA repair pathways must also be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.