Customizable virus-like particles deliver CRISPR–Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for effective ocular neovascular and Huntington’s disease gene therapy
Source abstract
Abstract
In vivo CRISPR gene editing holds enormous potential for various diseases. Ideally, CRISPR delivery should be cell type-specific and time-restricted for optimal efficacy and safety, but customizable methods are lacking. Here we develop a cell-tropism programmable CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoprotein delivery system (RIDE) based on virus-like particles. The efficiency of RIDE was comparable to that of adeno-associated virus and lentiviral vectors and higher than lipid nanoparticles. RIDE could be readily reprogrammed to target dendritic cells, T cells and neurons, and significantly ameliorated the disease symptoms in both ocular neovascular and Huntington's disease models via cell-specific gene editing. In addition, RIDE could efficiently edit the huntingtin gene in patients' induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neurons and was tolerated in non-human primates. This study is expected to facilitate the development of in vivo CRISPR therapeutics.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: CRISPR and Genetic Engineering · Retinal Development and Disorders · Virus-based gene therapy research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (69)
Show source-provided references
1. Gillmore, J. D. et al. CRISPR–Cas9 in vivo gene editing for transthyretin amyloidosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 1721–1722 (2021).10.1056/NEJMoa2107454 ↗
2. Wei, A. et al. In vivo CRISPR gene editing in patients with herpetic stromal keratitis. Mol. Ther. 31, 3163–3175 (2023).10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.08.021 ↗
3. Pierce, E. A. et al. Gene editing for CEP290-associated retinal degeneration. N. Engl. J. Med. 390, 1972–1984 (2024).10.1056/NEJMoa2309915 ↗
4. Becker, S. et al. Targeted knockdown of overexpressed VEGFA or VEGF164 in Muller cells maintains retinal function by triggering different signaling mechanisms. Sci. Rep. 8, 2003 (2018).10.1038/s41598-018-20278-4 ↗
5. Qian, H. et al. Reversing a model of Parkinson’s disease with in situ converted nigral neurons. Nature 582, 550–556 (2020).10.1038/s41586-020-2388-4 ↗
6. Leibowitz, M. L. et al. Chromothripsis as an on-target consequence of CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing. Nat. Genet. 53, 895–905 (2021).10.1038/s41588-021-00838-7 ↗
7. Shirley, J. L., de Jong, Y. P., Terhorst, C. & Herzog, R. W. Immune responses to viral gene therapy vectors. Mol. Ther. 28, 709–722 (2020).10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.01.001 ↗
8. Milani, M. et al. Phagocytosis-shielded lentiviral vectors improve liver gene therapy in nonhuman primates. Sci. Transl. Med. 11, eaav7325 (2019).10.1126/scitranslmed.aav7325 ↗
9. Kim, S. et al. CRISPR RNAs trigger innate immune responses in human cells. Genome Res. 28, 367–373 (2018).10.1101/gr.231936.117 ↗
10. Wienert, B., Shin, J., Zelin, E., Pestal, K. & Corn, J. E. In vitro-transcribed guide RNAs trigger an innate immune response via the RIG-I pathway. PLoS Biol. 16, e2005840 (2018).10.1371/journal.pbio.2005840 ↗
11. Crudele, J. M. & Chamberlain, J. S. Cas9 immunity creates challenges for CRISPR gene editing therapies. Nat. Commun. 9, 3497 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-05843-9 ↗
12. Charlesworth, C. T. et al. Identification of preexisting adaptive immunity to Cas9 proteins in humans. Nat. Med. 25, 249–254 (2019).10.1038/s41591-018-0326-x ↗
13. Wagner, D. L. et al. High prevalence of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9-reactive T cells within the adult human population. Nat. Med. 25, 242–248 (2019).10.1038/s41591-018-0204-6 ↗
14. Wagner, D. L., Peter, L. & Schmueck-Henneresse, M. Cas9-directed immune tolerance in humans—a model to evaluate regulatory T cells in gene therapy? Gene Ther. 28, 549–559 (2021).10.1038/s41434-021-00232-2 ↗
15. Chew, W. L. et al. A multifunctional AAV–CRISPR–Cas9 and its host response. Nat. Methods 13, 868–874 (2016).10.1038/nmeth.3993 ↗
16. van Haasteren, J., Li, J., Scheideler, O. J., Murthy, N. & Schaffer, D. V. The delivery challenge: fulfilling the promise of therapeutic genome editing. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 845–855 (2020).10.1038/s41587-020-0565-5 ↗
17. Zhang, S., Shen, J., Li, D. & Cheng, Y. Strategies in the delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing. Theranostics 11, 614–648 (2021).10.7150/thno.47007 ↗
18. Staahl, B. T. et al. Efficient genome editing in the mouse brain by local delivery of engineered Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 431–434 (2017).10.1038/nbt.3806 ↗
19. Chen, G. et al. A biodegradable nanocapsule delivers a Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complex for in vivo genome editing. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 974–980 (2019).10.1038/s41565-019-0539-2 ↗
20. Lee, K. et al. Nanoparticle delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein and donor DNA in vivo induces homology-directed DNA repair. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 889–901 (2017).10.1038/s41551-017-0137-2 ↗
21. Gao, X. et al. Treatment of autosomal dominant hearing loss by in vivo delivery of genome editing agents. Nature 553, 217–221 (2018).10.1038/nature25164 ↗
22. Lee, B. et al. Nanoparticle delivery of CRISPR into the brain rescues a mouse model of fragile X syndrome from exaggerated repetitive behaviours. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2, 497–507 (2018).10.1038/s41551-018-0252-8 ↗
23. Holmgaard, A. B. et al. Targeted knockout of the Vegfa gene in the retina by subretinal injection of RNP complexes containing Cas9 protein and modified sgRNAs. Mol. Ther. 29, 191–207 (2021).10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.09.032 ↗
24. Gumerson, J. D. et al. Restoration of RPGR expression in vivo using CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing. Gene Ther. 29, 81–93 (2022).10.1038/s41434-021-00258-6 ↗
25. Kim, K. et al. Genome surgery using Cas9 ribonucleoproteins for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration. Genome Res. 27, 419–426 (2017).10.1101/gr.219089.116 ↗
26. Igyarto, B. Z., Jacobsen, S. & Ndeupen, S. Future considerations for the mRNA–lipid nanoparticle vaccine platform. Curr. Opin. Virol. 48, 65–72 (2021).10.1016/j.coviro.2021.03.008 ↗
27. Yang, Q. & Lai, S. K. Anti-PEG immunity: emergence, characteristics, and unaddressed questions. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 7, 655–677 (2015).10.1002/wnan.1339 ↗
28. Cai, Y. et al. Targeted, homology-driven gene insertion in stem cells by ZFN-loaded ‘all-in-one’ lentiviral vectors. eLife 5, e12213 (2016).10.7554/eLife.12213 ↗
29. Cai, Y., Bak, R. O. & Mikkelsen, J. G. Targeted genome editing by lentiviral protein transduction of zinc-finger and TAL-effector nucleases. eLife 3, e01911 (2014).10.7554/eLife.01911 ↗
30. Izmiryan, A., Basmaciogullari, S., Henry, A., Paques, F. & Danos, O. Efficient gene targeting mediated by a lentiviral vector-associated meganuclease. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, 7610–7619 (2011).10.1093/nar/gkr524 ↗
31. Choi, J. G. et al. Lentivirus pre-packed with Cas9 protein for safer gene editing. Gene Ther. 23, 627–633 (2016).10.1038/gt.2016.27 ↗
32. Lyu, P., Javidi-Parsijani, P., Atala, A. & Lu, B. Delivering Cas9/sgRNA ribonucleoprotein (RNP) by lentiviral capsid-based bionanoparticles for efficient ‘hit-and-run’ genome editing. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, e99 (2019).10.1093/nar/gkz605 ↗
33. Haldrup, J. et al. Engineered lentivirus-derived nanoparticles (LVNPs) for delivery of CRISPR/Cas ribonucleoprotein complexes supporting base editing, prime editing and in vivo gene modification. Nucleic Acids Res. 51, 10059–10074 (2023).10.1093/nar/gkad676 ↗
34. Mangeot, P. E. et al. Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived nanoblades loaded with Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins. Nat. Commun. 10, 45 (2019).10.1038/s41467-018-07845-z ↗
35. Hamilton, J. R. et al. Targeted delivery of CRISPR–Cas9 and transgenes enables complex immune cell engineering. Cell Rep. 35, 109207 (2021).10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109207 ↗
36. Knopp, Y. et al. Transient retrovirus-based CRISPR/Cas9 all-in-one particles for efficient, targeted gene knockout. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 13, 256–274 (2018).10.1016/j.omtn.2018.09.006 ↗
37. Yin, D. et al. Targeting herpes simplex virus with CRISPR–Cas9 cures herpetic stromal keratitis in mice. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 567–577 (2021).10.1038/s41587-020-00781-8 ↗
38. Ling, S. et al. Lentiviral delivery of co-packaged Cas9 mRNA and a Vegfa-targeting guide RNA prevents wet age-related macular degeneration in mice. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 144–156 (2021).10.1038/s41551-020-00656-y ↗
39. Segel, M. et al. Mammalian retrovirus-like protein PEG10 packages its own mRNA and can be pseudotyped for mRNA delivery. Science 373, 882 (2021).10.1126/science.abg6155 ↗
40. Ma, H. et al. CRISPR–Cas9 nuclear dynamics and target recognition in living cells. J. Cell Biol. 214, 529–537 (2016).10.1083/jcb.201604115 ↗
41. Koblan, L. W. et al. Improving cytidine and adenine base editors by expression optimization and ancestral reconstruction. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 843–846 (2018).10.1038/nbt.4172 ↗
42. Lyu, P. et al. Adenine base editor ribonucleoproteins delivered by lentivirus-like particles show high on-target base editing and undetectable RNA off-target activities. CRISPR J. 4, 69–81 (2021).10.1089/crispr.2020.0095 ↗
43. Banskota, S. et al. Engineered virus-like particles for efficient in vivo delivery of therapeutic proteins. Cell 185, 250–265.e16 (2022).10.1016/j.cell.2021.12.021 ↗
44. Apte, R. S. Reducing treatment burden in AMD. Cell 180, 1033 (2020).10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.028 ↗
45. Chung, S. H., Sin, T.-N., Ngo, T. & Yiu, G. CRISPR technology for ocular angiogenesis. Front. Genome Ed. 2, 29 (2020).10.3389/fgeed.2020.594984 ↗
46. Koponen, S., Kokki, E., Kinnunen, K. & Yla-Herttuala, S. Viral-vector-delivered anti-angiogenic therapies to the eye. Pharmaceutics 13, 219 (2021).10.3390/pharmaceutics13020219 ↗
47. Grüter, O. et al. Lentiviral vector-mediated gene transfer in adult mouse photoreceptors is impaired by the presence of a physical barrier. Gene Ther. 12, 942–947 (2005).10.1038/sj.gt.3302485 ↗
48. Kwon, W. & Freeman, S. A. Phagocytosis by the retinal pigment epithelium: recognition, resolution, recycling. Front. Immunol. 11, 604205 (2020).10.3389/fimmu.2020.604205 ↗
49. Yin, D. et al. Dendritic-cell-targeting virus-like particles as potent mRNA vaccine carriers. Nat. Biomed. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-024-01208-4 (2024).10.1038/s41551-024-01208-4 ↗
50. Kato, S. et al. A lentiviral strategy for highly efficient retrograde gene transfer by pseudotyping with fusion envelope glycoprotein. Hum. Gene Ther. 22, 197–206 (2011).10.1089/hum.2009.179 ↗
51. Kim, E. J., Jacobs, M. W., Ito-Cole, T. & Callaway, E. M. Improved monosynaptic neural circuit tracing using engineered rabies virus glycoproteins. Cell Rep. 15, 692–699 (2016).10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.067 ↗
52. Bae, S., Park, J. & Kim, J.-S. Cas-OFFinder: a fast and versatile algorithm that searches for potential off-target sites of Cas9 RNA-guided endonucleases. Bioinformatics 30, 1473–1475 (2014).10.1093/bioinformatics/btu048 ↗
53. Hsu, P. D. et al. DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 827–832 (2013).10.1038/nbt.2647 ↗
54. Grossman, Z. Immunological paradigms, mechanisms, and models: conceptual understanding is a prerequisite to effective modeling. Front. Immunol. 10, 2522 (2019).10.3389/fimmu.2019.02522 ↗
55. Benhar, I., London, A. & Schwartz, M. The privileged immunity of immune privileged organs: the case of the eye. Front. Immunol. 3, 296 (2012).10.3389/fimmu.2012.00296 ↗
56. Yang, J. et al. Guidelines and definitions for research on epithelial–mesenchymal transition. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 341–352 (2020).10.1038/s41580-020-0237-9 ↗
57. Hamilton, J. R. et al. In vivo human T cell engineering with enveloped delivery vehicles. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 1684–1692 (2024).10.1038/s41587-023-02085-z ↗
58. Gutierrez-Guerrero, A., Cosset, F. L. & Verhoeyen, E. Lentiviral vector pseudotypes: precious tools to improve gene modification of hematopoietic cells for research and gene therapy. Viruses 12, 1016 (2020).10.3390/v12091016 ↗
59. Frank, A. M. et al. Combining T-cell-specific activation and in vivo gene delivery through CD3-targeted lentiviral vectors. Blood Adv. 4, 5702–5715 (2020).
60. Agarwal, S. et al. In vivo generation of CAR T cells selectively in human CD4+ lymphocytes. Mol. Ther. 28, 1783–1794 (2020).10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.05.005 ↗
61. Weidner, T. et al. Genetic in vivo engineering of human T lymphocytes in mouse models. Nat. Protoc. 16, 3210–3240 (2021).10.1038/s41596-021-00510-8 ↗
62. Chen, S., Zhou, Y., Chen, Y. & Gu, J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics 34, i884–i890 (2018).10.1093/bioinformatics/bty560 ↗
63. Smith, T., Heger, A. & Sudbery, I. UMI-tools: modeling sequencing errors in unique molecular identifiers to improve quantification accuracy. Genome Res. 27, 491–499 (2017).10.1101/gr.209601.116 ↗
64. Lundin, A. et al. Development of an ObLiGaRe doxycycline inducible Cas9 system for pre-clinical cancer drug discovery. Nat. Commun. 11, 4903 (2020).10.1038/s41467-020-18548-9 ↗
65. Zhang, Y. et al. Rapid single-step induction of functional neurons from human pluripotent stem cells. Neuron 78, 785–798 (2013).10.1016/j.neuron.2013.05.029 ↗
66. Bestas, B. et al. A type II-B Cas9 nuclease with minimized off-targets and reduced chromosomal translocations in vivo. Nat. Commun. 14, 5474 (2023).10.1038/s41467-023-41240-7 ↗
67. Clement, K. et al. CRISPResso2 provides accurate and rapid genome editing sequence analysis. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 224–226 (2019).10.1038/s41587-019-0032-3 ↗
68. Jacobi, A. M. et al. Simplified CRISPR tools for efficient genome editing and streamlined protocols for their delivery into mammalian cells and mouse zygotes. Methods 121–122, 16–28 (2017).10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.03.021 ↗
69. Zabulica, M. et al. Correction of a urea cycle defect after ex vivo gene editing of human hepatocytes. Mol. Ther. 29, 1903–1917 (2021).10.1016/j.ymthe.2021.01.024 ↗