Posts Tagged ‘reference’

A single subretinal dose of a gene therapy was not only well tolerated among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), but there was sustained expression of the RGX-314 protein for at least 2 years, showing the potential to control exudation. The results of the phase I/IIa dose escalation trial were published in The Lancet.1

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) causes vision loss that can turn into partial blindness.

Image credit: Syda Productions - stock.adobe.com

RGX-314, also known as ABBV-RGX-314, is an adeno-associated virus serotype 8 vector that provides potential continuous suppression of VEGF-A. nAMD, also called wet AMD, causes faster vision loss than AMD and, while it doesnt cause complete blindness, can cause patients to lose central vision.2

Real-world outcomes of long-term nAMD treatment have been inferior to those seen in clinical trials because of undertreatment or nonadherence with visits for injections. Therefore, there is strong motivation to develop treatments that provide sustained suppression of VEGF-A, the authors explained.

The open-label, multiple-cohort, multicenter, phase I/IIa, dose-escalation study was conducted at 8 sites in the US with 68 patients. On day 1, all patients received intravitreal ranibizumab. At week 2, 42 who demonstrated the required anatomic response received a subretinal injection of RGX-314. There were 5 different doses being evaluated with 12 patients placed into each cohort based on dosing. The mean (IQR) age at baseline was 80 years (74-85), nearly all (41 of 42) patients were White, and 52% were female.

While all patients experienced at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), most were grade 1 or 2. The most common TEAEs were postprocedure conjunctival hemorrhage and retinal pigmentary changes. There were also 7 instances of a retinal degeneration event, which were mostly grade 1, typically occurred 6 to 12 months after the gene therapy was administered, and had not resolved at the end of the study.

In 9 of 46 study eyes, reduced visual acuity was reported, although 6 of these were mild or moderate and deemed unrelated to RGX-314. However, the other 3 events were possibly related to the therapy.

The mean baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was maintained or improved in 4 of the 5 cohorts, while cohort 1, which received 3x109 genome copies per eye, experienced a gradual reduction in BCVA over time. Patients in cohorts 3 through 5 who did not receive any supplemental antiVEGF-A injections throughout the last year of the study maintained or improved baseline BCVA.

"The publication of the ABBV-RGX-314 Phase I/IIa trial results in The Lancet reinforces the encouraging long-term clinical data observed using subretinal delivery and underscores the potential of ABBV-RGX-314 gene therapy to offer a new approach to the clinical management of wet AMD," Jeffrey S. Heier, MD, director of the Vitreoretinal Service and director of Retina Research at Ophthalmic Consultants of Boston, and primary investigator for the trial, said in a statement.3 "Wet AMD is a chronic, life-long disease and real-world evidence shows patients are losing significant vision over time, and the burden of frequent anti-VEGF injections needed to manage their wet AMD is a major reason why. A single treatment of ABBV-RGX-314 that can potentially provide long-lasting treatment outcomes and a strong safety profile would offer a novel approach to treating this serious and blinding disease."

In an interview4 ahead of the Angiogenesis, Exudation, and Degeneration 2023 meeting, Charles C. Wykoff, MD, PhD, director of research at Retina Consultants of Texas; chair of research, Retina Consultants of America; and deputy chair of ophthalmology for the Blanton Eye Institute, Houston Methodist Hospital; and coauthor on the study, explained that a gene therapy for the most common cause of irreversible blindness would be a tremendous step forward for the opportunity for management of this chronic disease.

He also noted that while gene therapy holds the promise of being one and done, data have shown that some patients do need ongoing therapy.5

"Even if we are using gene therapy, it's important to realize that these patients will continue to need retinal care and retinal follow-up," he said. "You're looking for signs of efficacy, you're monitoring them for safety, you're making sure that they get any retreatments if they need them. Of course, there's a host of other retinal issues that may come up in these patients. They're going to continue to need retina care, certainly, even in the context of gene therapy."

Reference

1. Campochiaro PA, Avery R, Brown DM, et al. Gene therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration by subretinal delivery of RGX-314: a phase 1/2a dose-escalation study. Lancet. 2024:S0140-6736(24)00310-6. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00310-6

2. Age-related macular degeneration. National Eye Institute. June 22, 2021. Accessed April 12, 2024. https://www.nei.nih.gov/learn-about-eye-health/eye-conditions-and-diseases/age-related-macular-degeneration

3. REGENXBIO announces Lancet publication of phase I/IIa study evaluating ABBV-RGX-314 as a one-time gene therapy for wet AMD. REGENXBIO. News release. March 28, 2024. Accessed April 12, 2024. https://regenxbio.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/regenxbio-announces-lancet-publication-phase-iiia-study

4. Joszt L. Dr Charles Wykoff: gene therapy for wet AMD would be a tremendous opportunity. The American Journal of Managed Care. May 21, 2023. Accessed April 12, 2024. https://www.ajmc.com/view/dr-charles-wykoff-gene-therapy-for-wet-amd-would-be-a-tremendous-opportunity

5. Joszt L. Dr Charles Wykoff discusses gene therapy to treat wet age-related macular degeneration. The American Journal of Managed Care. April 23, 2023. Accessed April 12, 2024. https://www.ajmc.com/view/dr-charles-wykoff-discusses-gene-therapy-to-treat-wet-age-related-macular-degeneration

Read the original post:
Gene Therapy Well Tolerated in Wet AMD, Shows Promise in Visual Acuity - AJMC.com Managed Markets Network

Sponsored by Embark

Adam Christman, DVM, MBA: Once we have the Embark DNA testing going on, what does that look like from a CSR perspective, a technician, and a generalist?

Jenna Dockweiler, MS DVM, DACT, CCRT, CVAT: Absolutely, so we have a couple of different options with our Embark clinic testing. So the first option is you can carry the tests in clinic. You can buy them in bulk packs, do the swab right there in the exam room, and send it off. The results will go back to the veterinarian first so they have a chance to review those results and then those can be released to the client. That's option one.

Option two, for folks who maybe don't have a lot of inventory space, would be our recommend and review program. Essentially, the client orders through our website through a special QR code. They get a little bit of a discount on their test purchase and then once that results comes back, they go to the veterinarian and the client at the same time. The veterinarian's experience as far as the very detailed reporting and the support with me is not different, but the client will get the result at the same time. So just two different options for the testing.

As far as how we've seen this work best in clinics is it is very, very, very helpful to assign a genetics champion to be the one to have that initial conversation about the benefits of genetic testing with your clients. And typically that is a technician or another interested staff member. Embark will absolutely support training that person. We offer lunch and learns to get all the clinic staff kind of up to speed on what the testing looks like, how to have those initial conversations.

Adam Christman, DVM, MBA: I wanna talk about our educational school and that school with genetics. I'm curious to get your thoughts on where we should be going in the next five to 10 years with genetic counseling and understanding for the new graduates that are coming out of school.

Jenna Dockweiler, MS DVM, DACT, CCRT, CVAT: Typically we don't get much genetics education in either vet or tech schools. So typically whenever I speak, I always tell people, hey, you're gonna be reaching back to your high school biology. We're gonna be talking about Mendel's peas today. So I think that there is definitely an opportunity. I would say just doing like a brief review of the modes of inheritance, which is the way that a variant is passed on to the next generation, would be really, really helpful if we had that kind of again in vet school. Then, using some examples with either breeding dogs and how to smartly pair them, or with personalized medicine and individual dogs who may be at risk for genetic diseases.

Adam Christman, DVM, MBA: I think the new graduates know about this. They're excited about it, but I think they're just learning so much through mentorship and trying to get their communication under control. But I do think that this is a great opportunity for a mentorship opportunity for hospitals to teach the new grads. This is what we should do moving forward, right?

Lindsey Kock, DVM: Yeah, absolutely. I think one thing to maybe be cautious of not getting too bogged down in is, there's over 350 some odd different variants that we know of in the world of dogs. So I think if you come at it from the perspective of like, "Oh my gosh, I got to know all of the details about all of these disorders, there's a new one coming out every week, right, that may only affect a certain subpopulation or a certain breed of dog.

And so I think the recommendation to really focus on inheritance, is huge because it helps you interpret the results for the pet parent. And then making sure that when you do testing, you do it from a reputable lab that lets you know what the inheritance is as well, right? And it tells you what actual marker they're looking at, because that is also important in the interpretation of those results.

Adam Christman, DVM, MBA: The fact that you can talk to somebody at Embark to go over these results, I was just going to mention that. Because I know that you feel inundated if you get these results, but it's almost as if going through a ClinPath case when you're calling your reference lab, you want to walk through some of the differentials. So it's important. I'm sure you must get quite a few phone calls with that.

Jenna Dockweiler, MS DVM, DACT, CCRT, CVAT: Absolutely. I talk to veterinarians all day long helping them interpret their results and then again as a theriogenologist, I'm definitely able to help with the breeder clients as well.

See original here:
Behind the science - DVM 360

Access to this page has been denied because we believe you are using automation tools to browse the website.

This may happen as a result of the following:

Please make sure that Javascript and cookies are enabled on your browser and that you are not blocking them from loading.

Reference ID: #8a1d39ee-ed97-11ee-84ca-ce0121ee4eed

Read the original post:
Crispr Stock, A Cathie Wood's Holding, Dives For The Fifth Straight Week Here's Why - Investor's Business Daily

TCGA data acquisition and pre-processing

TCGA SNV data for 16 cancer types (BLCA, BRCA, COAD, GBM, HNSC, KIRC, KIRP, LIHC, LUAD, LUSC, OV, PAAD, PRAD, READ, STAD, and UCEC) were downloaded from the GDC data portal (https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/, DR-7.0). The mutation files were initially collected as VarScan2 processed protected mutation annotation format (MAF) files. To eliminate low-quality and potential germline variants, we further processed the files according to the guidelines provided by the GDC portal (https://docs.gdc.cancer.gov/Data/File_Formats/MAF_Format/) to generate high-confidence somatic mutation files. For gene expression analysis, we obtained fragments per kilobase of exon per million mapped fragments (FPKM) data using the TCGAbiolinks19 R package (version 2.26.0). The gene expression values were then normalized to log2(FPKM+1).

The DepMap CRISPR/Cas9 screen dataset20 (https://depmap.org/portal/, DepMap Public 21Q2) was used to collect essential genes. Haploinsufficient genes were compiled from three sources: (1) Vinh T Dang et al.s study11, (2) ClinGen12 (https://clinicalgenome.org, genes with haploinsufficiency scores of 2 or 3, downloaded on January 20, 2021), and (3) DECIPHER13 (https://deciphergenomics.org, genes located in the top 5% probability of haploinsufficiency scores, version 3). Oncogenes were obtained from the COSMIC Cancer Gene Census9 (https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/census, v94) data by applying the filter Somatic=yes and including genes with the role of oncogene in cancer. Hotspot mutations were annotated using data from the Cancer Hotspots portal3 (https://www.cancerhotspots.org, Hotspot Results V2).

To generate targetable SNVs and the corresponding sgRNA sequences from a given SNV list of a sample, we followed the following steps: First, we identified the SNVs located within essential or haploinsufficient genes. If an SNV was encoded by an essential gene, only homozygous SNVs were further analyzed. Next, we calculated the allele frequency (AF) threshold ({AF}_{cut}) using the following equation:

$${AF}_{cut}={AF}_{M}+MAD(hetAF)$$

(1)

where ({AF}_{M}) is the median of AFs of SNVs from the sample, and (MAD(hetAF)) is the median absolute deviation (MAD) of AFs of heterozygous SNVs from the patient or sample. SNVs with AF below the samples ({AF}_{cut}) were filtered out. We then considered the expression of the gene in which an SNV was located and retained SNVs where the gene expression (log2(FPKM+1)) was greater than 1.

To identify SNVs that generate a novel and specific targetable site for the CRISPR/Cas9 approach, we searched for a PAM sequence (NGG, where N represents any nucleotide) within a 12-base pair region around the SNV or checked if the SNV itself created a new PAM sequence. For the satisfying SNVs, a 20-nucleotide sgRNA sequence was obtained.

To obtain sgRNAs with precise knockout efficiency and low potential off-target effects, we calculated the on- and off-target scores and applied strict cutoffs as follows: First, on-target scores were calculated using the Azimuth 2.015 method implemented in the crisprScore21 R package (version 1.2.0). sgRNAs with on-target scores greater than 0.5 were examined for possible off-target sites using CasOFFinder16 (offline version 2.4). The UCSC human reference genome assembly (GRCh38) was used as a reference, and off-target sites with a maximum of three mismatches were searched. If an sgRNA was found to have off-target sites, the off-target score was calculated using the CFD15 method, which was also implemented in the crisprScore21 R package. If off-target sites with scores>0.175 were present, the sgRNA was filtered out to mitigate potential off-target risks. Finally, the SNVs were reported along with their corresponding sgRNAs, on-target scores, and off-target scores.

All cells were maintained at 37C in a 5% CO2 atmosphere. Human embryonic kidney 293T (HEK293T) cells were purchased from ATCC. HEK293T cells were cultured in Dulbeccos modified Eagles medium (DMEM) (Gibco, USA) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) (Gibco) and 1% penicillinstreptomycin (Invitrogen, USA). Human colorectal cancer cell lines (SNUC4, SW620, and NCIH498) were also purchased from the Korean Cell Line Bank and cultured in RPMI-1640 medium (Gibco) supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% penicillinstreptomycin.

The lentiviral plasmids lentiCas9-Blast and lentiGuide-puro were purchased from Addgene USA (#52,962, #52,963). The sgRNA sequences were cloned following the lentiCRISPR v2 cloning protocol22,23. For transfection, 7.5105 HEK293T cells were seeded in 60-mm plates one day before transfection. Transfection was performed using Opti-MEM I Reduced Serum Medium (Gibco) with 1g of lentiviral plasmid, 0.25g of pMD2.G (#12,259; Addgene), 0.75g of psPAX2 (#12,260; Addgene), and 6 L of FuGENE (Promega, USA). The medium was changed after 16h of incubation at 37C under 5% CO2. Viral supernatants were collected 48 and 72h after transfection, filtered through a 0.45-m membrane (Corning, USA), and stored at -80C. Cells were transduced with lentivirus encoding lentiCas9-Blast to establish stable Cas9-expressing cells, followed by selection with blasticidin (10g/mL) (Invitrogen) for seven days.

Stable Cas9-expressing SNUC4 and SW620 cells were transduced with a lentivirus encoding either control sgRNA (non-targeting sgRNA, GCGAGGTATTCGGCTCCGCG) or sgRNA targeting the RRP9 SNV of SNUC4 (sgRRP9-SNV). After selection with puromycin (SNUC4: 10g/mL, SW620: 2g/mL, Invitrogen) for 72h, 1103 cells/well were seeded into six-well plates. The medium was replaced every 72h. After 14days, the medium was removed, and the cells were stained with 0.05% crystal violet solution in a 6% glutaraldehyde solution for 30min. The crystal violet solution was then removed, and the cells were washed with H2O and allowed to dry. Colonies comprising more than 50 cells were counted using the ImageJ software24.

Parental or stable Cas9-expressing SNUC4 and SW620 cells were transduced with a lentivirus encoding either control sgRNA (non-targeting sgRNA, GCGAGGTATTCGGCTCCGCG) or sgRRP9-SNV. After selection with puromycin (SNUC4: 10g/mL, SW620: 2g/mL) for 72h, 1105 cells/well were seeded into six-well plates. After 3days, cells were trypsinized, stained with trypan blue (Bio-Rad, USA), and counted. All harvested cells were seeded onto 60-mm plates. After 3days of incubation, cells were trypsinized and counted with trypan blue again. The subculture was repeated once more using 100-mm plates. Growth curves were generated using cell counts obtained during the subculture.

Total RNA was extracted from SW620 cell line using the RNeasy Plus Mini Kit (QIAGEN, Germany) following the manufacturers instructions. cDNA was synthesized with PrimeScript RT Master Mix (Takara Korea Biomedical Inc, Korea), and full-length RRP9 cDNA was PCR amplified with CloneAmp HiFi PCR Premix (Takara Korea Biomedical Inc). The PCR-amplified RRP9 wild-type cDNA was cloned into pcDNA3 Flag HA (#10,792, Addgene) using In-Fusion HD Cloning Kit (Takara Korea Biomedical Inc). RRP9 sequence was confirmed by Sanger-sequencing.

Stable Cas9-expressing SNUC4 cells were transduced with lentivirus encoding either control sgRNA (non-targeting sgRNA, GCGAGGTATTCGGCTCCGCG) or sgRRP9-SNV. After selection with puromycin (10g/mL) for 72h, 3103 cells/well were seeded into 96-well plates. After a 24h incubation, 2g of empty or RRP9 plasmids were transfected with FuGene HD (Promega) according to the manufacturers protocol. Cell viability was assessed after 4days using Cell Titer Glo (Promega), and relative luminescence units (RLU) were measured using an EnVision plate reader (Perkin-Elmer, USA).

Stable Cas9-expressing NCIH498 and SW620 cells were transduced with a lentivirus encoding either control sgRNA (non-targeting sgRNA, GCGAGGTATTCGGCTCCGCG) or sgRNA targeting the SMG6 SNV of NCIH498 (sgSMG6-SNV). After selection with puromycin (NCIH498: 10g/mL, SW620: 2g/mL) for 72h, 3103 cells/well were seeded into 96-well plates. After 6days, cell viability was determined with Cell Titer Glo according to the manufacturers protocol, and RLU were measured using an EnVision plate reader.

Cells and tissues were harvested, washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and lysed on ice for 15min in a radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer (R0278; Sigma, USA) supplemented with a protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (GenDEPOT, USA). Cell lysates were centrifuged at 4C for 10min at 15,000rpm. Protein concentrations were determined using Bradford assay (Bio-Rad). Equal amounts of total protein were separated via sodium dodecyl sulfate gel electrophoresis and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Bio-Rad). The membranes were blocked with 5% skim milk for 1h at 22C and then incubated overnight at 4C with a primary antibody against the target protein in a buffer containing 0.1% Tween 20. Subsequently, the membranes were washed with Tween-PBS buffer three times for 10min each and incubated with a secondary antibody (anti-rabbit IgG or anti-mouse IgG) diluted in a blocking buffer containing 0.1% Tween 20 for 1h at 22C. The membranes were then washed with Tween-PBS three times for 10min each. The immunoreactive bands were visualized using Pierce enhanced chemiluminescence western blotting substrate (32,106; Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). Mouse monoclonal anti-Cas9 (#14,697; Cell Signaling Technology, USA), rabbit polyclonal anti-RRP9 (#ab168845, Abcam, UK), rabbit polyclonal anti-FLAG (DYKDDDDK) (#2368; Cell Signaling Technology) and rabbit monoclonal anti-heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) (#4877, Cell Signaling Technology) and were used at a 1:1000 dilution. Anti-rabbit IgG (#111-035-144; Jackson ImmunoResearch, USA) was used at a 1:5000 dilution except for anti-FLAG which was used at a 1:10,000 dilution. Anti-mouse IgG (#115-035-146, Jackson ImmunoResearch) was used at a 1:10,000 dilution.

Genomic DNA was extracted using the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN) following the manufacturers instructions. Libraries were prepared with a two-step PCR reaction, in which the first step uses target-specific primers, and the second step utilizes primers containing unique barcodes and Illumina sequencing adaptor sequences. The primers used here are listed in Supplementary Data 4. PCR reactions were performed with KAPA HiFi HotStart Ready Mix (Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. USA). For the first PCR step, 100ng of genomic DNA was denatured at 95 for 5min, followed by 30 cycles of (98C at 20s, 61C for 15s, and 72C for 15s), and a final extension at 72C for 1min. Primers with unique barcodes and Illumina sequencing adaptor sequences were added to the PCR product from step 1 for the second PCR reaction, where denaturation at 95C for 5min was followed by 12 cycles of (98C at 20s, 61C for 15s, 72C for 15s), and a final extension at 72C for 1min. PCR products were verified with 2% agarose gel electrophoresis and extracted using the Zyomoclean Gel DNA Recovery Kit (Zymo Research, USA) according to the manufacturers instructions. The barcoded PCR products were pooled and subjected to paired-end sequencing (2150bp reads) on an Illumina NovaSeq-6000 instrument (Macrogen, Korea). InDel quantification was conducted using CRISPResso225 with default parameters.

Genomic DNA was extracted from colorectal cancer cell lines using the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN) following the manufacturers instructions. Target regions were PCR-amplified with nTaq (Mg2+plus) (Enzynomics, Korea) with the following primers: sgRRP9-SNV region (Forward: 5-TCAAGGCCCTCGTTGATTCC-3, Reverse: 5-TTTTTGGGCTTTGTGGCTGC-3), sgSMG6-SNV region (Forward: 5-TCTGCATCGAAAGTGACACGA-3, Reverse: 5- CTATCAGCCTGGACGACGTTT-3). PCR products were purified with PureLink Quick PCR Purification Kit (Invitrogen). 200ng of purified PCR product were denatured at 95C for 10min, re-annealed at 2C per second temperature ramp to 85C, followed by a 1C per second ramp to 25C. 1l of T7E1 enzyme (Enzynomics) was added to the heterocomplexed PCR product and incubated at 37C for 15min. Products were electrophoresed on a 2% agarose gel using TAE buffer. Band intensities were measured with ImageJ, and the estimated non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) event was calculated with the following formula:

$$NHEJleft( % right) = 100 times left[ {1 - left( {1 - fraction; cleaved} right)^{{left( {frac{1}{2}} right)}} } right]$$

(2)

where the fraction cleaved is (frac{(Density; of; digested; products)}{(Density; of; digested; products,+,undigested; parental; band}).

All animal procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea (2021-0106). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations for the care and use of laboratory animals. Six-week-old female BALB/c-nu Slc mice were purchased from Orient Bio (Korea) and SLC Inc. (Japan). The mice were housed in individual ventilation cages equipped with a computerized environmental control system (Techniplast, Italy). The animal room temperature was maintained at 222C with a relative humidity of 5010%. Before the experiments, the animals were acclimated for seven days under a 12-h lightdark cycle.

Stable Cas9-expressing SNUC4 cells were transduced with lentivirus encoding either the control sgRNA or sgRNA targeting the RRP9 SNV in SNUC4 cells. After selection with 10g/mL puromycin for 72h, 3106 cells were subcutaneously injected into the left (control sgRNA) or right (RRP9 SNV of SNUC4 sgRNA) flanks of 10 mice. Similarly, stable Cas9-expressing SW620 cells were transduced with lentivirus encoding either the control sgRNA or sgRNA targeting the RRP9 SNV in SNUC4 cells. After selection with 2g/mL puromycin for 72h, 2106 cells were subcutaneously injected into the left (control sgRNA) and right (RRP9 SNV of SNUC4 sgRNA) flanks of 10 mice. Among the mice, we excluded those with no observable tumor growth in the left flank (control sgRNA) from further analysis.

Tumor sizes were measured using a caliper, and the volume was calculated using the formula: 0.5lengthwidth2. Mice were sacrificed when the largest tumor reached a volume of 1000 mm3. Each tumor was considered an experimental unit. The sample size was determined to be sufficient to identify statistically significant differences between groups.

Genomic DNA was extracted from colorectal cancer cell lines using the QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN) following the manufacturers instructions. Whole-exome capture was performed using the SureSelect Human All Exon V4 51Mb Kit (Agilent Technologies, USA). The captured DNA was then sequenced on the HiSeq 2500 platform (Illumina, USA), generating a minimum of 98.9 million paired-end sequencing reads of 100bp per sample.

The Burrows-Wheeler Alignment26 tool was used with the default parameters to align the paired-end reads to the UCSC human reference genome assembly (GRCh37/hg19). An average of 98.3% of the reads were successfully aligned to the human genome. Duplicate reads were removed using the Picard software package. The Genome Analysis Tool Kit (GATK) version 3.446 was used for read quality score recalibration and local realignment to identify short InDels using the HaplotypeCaller27 package. The variants were filtered using the GATK Best Practices quality control filters.

SNVs were identified using Mutect28, specifically the tumor-only option, with default parameters. Variants supported by at least five high-quality reads (Phred-scaled quality score>30) and detected with at least 20% AF were selected for further analysis. The detected SNVs and InDels were annotated using various databases, including the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) database (dbSNP29, build 147), 1000 Genomes Project30 (Phase 3), Korean dbSNP (build 20,140,512), and somatic mutations in TCGA colon adenocarcinoma (COAD), using the Variant Effect Predictor software31 (version 87). ANNOVAR32 was used to annotate regions of known germline chromosomal segmental duplications and tandem repeats.

Several steps were performed to filter variants. Patients with germline polymorphisms, chromosomal segmental duplications, or tandem repeats were excluded. The variants were then filtered to include known somatic mutations observed in at least one sample from TCGA COAD dataset. Additionally, nonsynonymous mutations observed in genes belonging to the Cancer Gene Census, as reported in at least ten samples in the COSMIC9 database (version 87), were included in the analysis.

Total RNA was extracted from colorectal cancer cell lines using the RNeasy Plus Mini Kit (QIAGEN) following the manufacturers instructions. The TruSeq RNA Sample Prep Kit v2 (Illumina) was used to generate mRNA-focused libraries. Libraries were sequenced on the HiSeq 2500 platform, generating at least 40 million paired-end reads of 100bp per sample.

The TopHat-Cufflinks33 pipeline was employed to align the reads to the reference genome and calculate normalized gene expression values in FPKM. TopHat was used to align and map the reads to the reference genome. The resulting alignments were then processed using Cufflinks, which estimates transcript abundance and calculates FPKM values, providing a measure of gene expression levels that takes the length of exons and the total number of mapped reads into account.

R (ver. 4.2.1) (R Foundation, Austria) and the ImageJ software were used to analyze the data.

The figures were generated using the R software, and statistical analyses were performed using RStudio software (version 2022.07.2+576). Specific statistical tests are identified in the figure legends for each experiment.

The study design, animal use and all experimental methods were conducted and reported in accordance with ARRIVE guidelines (https://arriveguidelines.org).

Go here to read the rest:
CRISPR/Cas9 targeting of passenger single nucleotide variants in haploinsufficient or essential genes expands cancer ... - Nature.com