ArticleBMC biology2023
Efficient prioritization of CRISPR screen hits by accounting for targeting efficiency of guide RNA.
Article in BMC biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuropsychiatric drug development in China: Current status and emerging trends.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Review
- Inducible CRISPR-Cas9 screening platform to interrogate non-proliferative cellular states.Nature protocols · 2026Review
- Essentiality and dynamic expression of the human tRNA pool during viral infection.Molecular systems biology · 2026Article
- nf-core/crisprseq: a versatile pipeline for comprehensive analysis of CRISPR gene editing and screening assays.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Variation in guide RNA library representation results in gene effect score bias in genome-wide CRISPR screens.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Polyamine and EIF5A hypusination downstream of c-Myc confers targeted therapy resistance in BRAF mutant melanoma.Molecular cancer · 2024Article
- A multiplex RPA coupled with CRISPR-Cas12a system for rapid and cost-effective identification of carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCRISPR-based screens are revolutionizing drug discovery as tools to identify genes whose ablation induces a phenotype of interest. For instance, CRISPR-Cas9 screening has been successfully used to identify novel therapeutic targets in cancer where disruption of genes leads to decreased viability of malignant cells. However, low-activity guide RNAs may give rise to variable changes in phenotype, preventing easy identification of hits and leading to false negative results. Therefore, correcting the effects of bias due to differences in guide RNA efficiency in CRISPR screening data can improve the efficiency of prioritizing hits for further validation. Here, we developed an approach to identify hits from negative CRISPR screens by correcting the fold changes (FC) in gRNA frequency by the actual, observed frequency of indel mutations generated by gRNA.
resultsEach gRNA was coupled with the "reporter sequence" that can be targeted by the same gRNA so that the frequency of mutations in the reporter sequence can be used as a proxy for the endogenous target gene. The measured gRNA activity was used to correct the FC. We identified indel generation efficiency as the dominant factor contributing significant bias to screening results, and our method significantly removed such bias and was better at identifying essential genes when compared to conventional fold change analysis. We successfully applied our gRNA activity data to previously published gRNA screening data, and identified novel genes whose ablation could synergize with vemurafenib in the A375 melanoma cell line. Our method identified nicotinamide N-methyltransferase, lactate dehydrogenase B, and polypyrimidine tract-binding protein 1 as synergistic targets whose ablation sensitized A375 cells to vemurafenib.
conclusionsWe identified the variations in target cleavage efficiency, even in optimized sgRNA libraries, that pose a strong bias in phenotype and developed an analysis method that corrects phenotype score by the measured differences in the targeting efficiency among sgRNAs. Collectively, we expect that our new analysis method will more accurately identify genes that confer the phenotype of interest.
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.