FRITAH, Sabrina ; NorLux Neuro-Oncology Laboratory, Department of Oncology, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Luxembourg
Nazarov, PetrV.
van Dyck, Eric
NICLOU, Simone P. ; NorLux Neuro-Oncology Laboratory, Department of Oncology, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Luxembourg KG Jebsen Brain Tumour Research Center, Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
GOLEBIEWSKA, Anna ; NorLux Neuro-Oncology Laboratory, Department of Oncology, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Luxembourg
Horn, T., et al. Mapping of signaling networks through synthetic genetic interaction analysis by RNAi. Nat. Methods 8 (2011), 341–346.
Du, D., et al. Genetic interaction mapping in mammalian cells using CRISPR interference. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 577–580.
Shen, J.P., et al. Combinatorial CRISPR-Cas9 screens for de novo mapping of genetic interactions. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 573–576.
Han, K., et al. Synergistic drug combinations for cancer identified in a CRISPR screen for pairwise genetic interactions. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 463–474.
Zalatan, J.G., et al. Engineering complex synthetic transcriptional programs with CRISPR RNA scaffolds. Cell 160 (2015), 339–350.
Horlbeck, M.A., et al. Mapping the genetic landscape of human cells. Cell. 174 (2018), 953–967.e22.
Parnas, O., et al. A Genome-wide CRISPR screen in primary immune cells to dissect regulatory networks. Cell 162 (2015), 675–686.
Wang, G., et al. Mapping a functional cancer genome atlas of tumor suppressors in mouse liver using AAV-CRISPR-mediated direct in vivo screening. Sci. Adv., 4, 2018 eaao5508.
Chow, R.D., et al. AAV-mediated direct in vivo CRISPR screen identifies functional suppressors in glioblastoma. Nat. Neurosci. 20 (2017), 1329–1341.
Katigbak, A., et al. A CRISPR/Cas9 Functional screen identifies rare tumor suppressors. Sci. Rep., 6, 2016 38968.
Miller, T.E., et al. Transcription elongation factors represent in vivo cancer dependencies in glioblastoma. Nature 547 (2017), 355–359.
Doench, J.G., et al. Rational design of highly active sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9-mediated gene inactivation. Nat. Biotechnol. 32 (2014), 1262–1267.
Klann, T.S., et al. CRISPR-Cas9 epigenome editing enables high-throughput screening for functional regulatory elements in the human genome. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 561–568.
Seo, M., et al. RNAi-based functional selection identifies novel cell migration determinants dependent on PI3K and AKT pathways. Nat. Commun., 5, 2014, 5217.
Dixit, A., et al. Perturb-Seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell RNA profiling of pooled genetic screens. Cell, 167, 2016 1853–1866 e17.
Adamson, B., et al. A multiplexed single-cell CRISPR screening platform enables systematic dissection of the unfolded protein response. Cell, 167, 2016 1867–1882 e21.
Jaitin, D.A., et al. Dissecting immune circuits by linking CRISPR-pooled screens with single-cell RNA-Seq. Cell, 167, 2016 1883–1896 e15.
Datlinger, P., et al. Pooled CRISPR screening with single-cell transcriptome readout. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 297–301.
Michlits, G., et al. CRISPR-UMI: single-cell lineage tracing of pooled CRISPR-Cas9 screens. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 1191–1197.
Cowley, G.S., et al. Parallel genome-scale loss of function screens in 216 cancer cell lines for the identification of context-specific genetic dependencies. Sci. Data, 1, 2014 140035.
Schmidt, E.E., et al. GenomeRNAi: a database for cell-based and in vivo RNAi phenotypes, 2013 update. Nucleic Acids Res., 41, 2013 D1021–1026.
Kampmann, M., et al. Next-generation libraries for robust RNA interference-based genome-wide screens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 112, 2015 E3384-3391.
Hart, T., et al. High-resolution CRISPR screens reveal fitness genes and genotype-specific cancer liabilities. Cell 163 (2015), 1515–1526.
Franceschini, A., et al. Specific inhibition of diverse pathogens in human cells by synthetic microRNA-like oligonucleotides inferred from RNAi screens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 111 (2014), 4548–4553.
Rauscher, B., et al. GenomeCRISPR – a database for high-throughput CRISPR/Cas9 screens. Nucleic Acids Res. 45 (2017), D679–D686.
Mitsunobu, H., et al. Beyond native Cas9: manipulating genomic information and function. Trends Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 983–996.
Canver, M.C., et al. BCL11A enhancer dissection by Cas9-mediated in situ saturating mutagenesis. Nature 527 (2015), 192–197.
Korkmaz, G., et al. Functional genetic screens for enhancer elements in the human genome using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 192–198.
Chen, S., et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screen in a mouse model of tumor growth and metastasis. Cell 160 (2015), 1246–1260.
Munoz, D.M., et al. CRISPR screens provide a comprehensive assessment of cancer vulnerabilities but generate false-positive hits for highly amplified genomic regions. Cancer Discov. 6 (2016), 900–913.
Yuen, G., et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene knockout is insensitive to target copy number but is dependent on guide RNA potency and Cas9/sgRNA threshold expression level. Nucleic Acids Res. 45 (2017), 12039–12053.
Kuscu, C., et al. Genome-wide analysis reveals characteristics of off-target sites bound by the Cas9 endonuclease. Nat. Biotechnol. 32 (2014), 677–683.
Tycko, J., et al. methods for optimizing CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing specificity. Mol. Cell 63 (2016), 355–370.
Cui, Y. et al. (in press) Review of CRISPR/Cas9 sgRNA design tools. Interdiscip. Sci.
Kosicki, M.K., et al. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (2018), 765–771.
Aguirre, A.J., et al. Genomic copy number dictates a gene-independent cell response to CRISPR/Cas9 targeting. Cancer Discov. 6 (2016), 914–929.
Radzisheuskaya, A., et al. Optimizing sgRNA position markedly improves the efficiency of CRISPR/dCas9-mediated transcriptional repression. Nucleic Acids Res., 44, 2016 e141.
Fulco, C.P., et al. Systematic mapping of functional enhancer-promoter connections with CRISPR interference. Science 354 (2016), 769–773.
Liu, S.J., et al. CRISPRi-based genome-scale identification of functional long noncoding RNA loci in human cells. Science, 355, 2017.
Gilbert, L.A., et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-mediated control of gene repression and activation. Cell 159 (2014), 647–661.
Rosenbluh, J., et al. Complementary information derived from CRISPR Cas9 mediated gene deletion and suppression. Nat. Commun., 8, 2017 15403.
Sack, L.M., et al. Profound tissue specificity in proliferation control underlies cancer drivers and aneuploidy patterns. Cell, 173, 2018 499–514 e23.
Joung, J., et al. Genome-scale activation screen identifies a lncRNA locus regulating a gene neighbourhood. Nature 548 (2017), 343–346.
Bester, A.C., et al. An integrated genome-wide CRISPRa approach to functionalize lncRNAs in drug resistance. Cell, 173, 2018 649-664 e20.
Tanenbaum, M.E., et al. A protein-tagging system for signal amplification in gene expression and fluorescence imaging. Cell 159 (2014), 635–646.
Chavez, A., et al. Highly efficient Cas9-mediated transcriptional programming. Nat. Methods 12 (2015), 326–328.
Konermann, S., et al. Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR-Cas9 complex. Nature 517 (2015), 583–588.
Chavez, A., et al. Comparison of Cas9 activators in multiple species. Nat. Methods 13 (2016), 563–567.
Heaton, B.E., et al. A CRISPR activation screen identifies a pan-avian influenza virus inhibitory host factor. Cell Rep. 20 (2017), 1503–1512.
Morita, S., et al. Targeted DNA demethylation in vivo using dCas9-peptide repeat and scFv-TET1 catalytic domain fusions. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 1060–1065.
Berger, A.H., et al. High-throughput phenotyping of lung cancer somatic mutations. Cancer Cell 30 (2016), 214–228.
Joung, J., et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout and transcriptional activation screening. Nat. Protoc. 12 (2017), 828–863.
Komor, A.C., et al. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533 (2016), 420–424.
Kuscu, C., et al. CRISPR-STOP: gene silencing through base-editing-induced nonsense mutations. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 710–712.
Hess, G.T., et al. Directed evolution using dCas9-targeted somatic hypermutation in mammalian cells. Nat. Methods 13 (2016), 1036–1042.
Kuscu, C., Adli, M., CRISPR-Cas9-AID base editor is a powerful gain-of-function screening tool. Nat. Methods 13 (2016), 983–984.
Ma, Y., et al. Targeted AID-mediated mutagenesis (TAM) enables efficient genomic diversification in mammalian cells. Nat. Methods 13 (2016), 1029–1035.
Kim, Y.B., et al. Increasing the genome-targeting scope and precision of base editing with engineered Cas9-cytidine deaminase fusions. Nat. Biotechnol. 35 (2017), 371–376.
Gaudelli, N.M., et al. Programmable base editing of A*T to G*C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature 551 (2017), 464–471.
Boettcher, M., et al. Decoding pooled RNAi screens by means of barcode tiling arrays. BMC Genomics, 11, 2010, 7.
Boettcher, M., Hoheisel, J.D., Pooled RNAi Screens – technical and biological aspects. Curr. Genomics 11 (2010), 162–167.
Doench, J.G., Am I ready for CRISPR? A user's guide to genetic screens. Nat. Rev. Genet. 19 (2018), 67–80.
Mohr, S.E., et al. RNAi screening comes of age: improved techniques and complementary approaches. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15 (2014), 591–600.
Hart, T., et al. Evaluation and design of genome-wide CRISPR/SpCas9 knockout screens. G3 (Bethesda) 7 (2017), 2719–2727.
Kampmann, M., et al. Next-generation libraries for robust RNA interference-based genome-wide screens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112 (2015), E3384–E3391.
Sanjana, N.E., et al. High-resolution interrogation of functional elements in the noncoding genome. Science 353 (2016), 1545–1549.
Strezoska, Z., et al. Optimized PCR conditions and increased shRNA fold representation improve reproducibility of pooled shRNA screens. PLoS One, 7, 2012, e42341.
Herkert, B., et al. Maximizing the efficacy of MAPK-targeted treatment in PTENLOF/BRAFMUT melanoma through PI3K and IGF1R inhibition. Cancer Res. 76 (2016), 390–402.
Taxman, D.J., et al. Criteria for effective design, construction, and gene knockdown by shRNA vectors. BMC Biotechnol., 6, 2006, 7.
Wang, T., et al. Gene essentiality profiling reveals gene networks and synthetic lethal interactions with oncogenic Ras. Cell, 168, 2017 890–903 e15.
Morgens, D.W., et al. Systematic comparison of CRISPR/Cas9 and RNAi screens for essential genes. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 634–636.
Rosenbluh, J., et al. Genetic and proteomic interrogation of lower confidence candidate genes reveals signaling networks in beta-catenin-active cancers. Cell Syst., 3, 2016 302-316 e4.
Shalem, O., et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science 343 (2014), 84–87.
Evers, B., et al. CRISPR knockout screening outperforms shRNA and CRISPRi in identifying essential genes. Nat. Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 631–633.
Tsherniak, A., et al. Defining a cancer dependency map. Cell, 170, 2017 564–576 e16.
Pan, J., et al. Interrogation of mammalian protein complex structure, function, and membership using genome-scale fitness screens. Cell Syst., 6, 2018 555–568 e7.
Rauscher, B., et al. Toward an integrated map of genetic interactions in cancer cells. Mol. Syst. Biol., 14, 2018, e7656.
Hart, T., et al. Evaluation and design of genome-wide CRISPR/SpCas9 knockout screens. G3 (Bethesda) 7 (2017), 2719–2727.
Zhong, R., et al. Computational detection and suppression of sequence-specific off-target phenotypes from whole genome RNAi screens. Nucleic Acids Res. 42 (2014), 8214–8222.
Roy, K.R., et al. Multiplexed precision genome editing with trackable genomic barcodes in yeast. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (2018), 512–520.
Bao, Z., et al. Genome-scale engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with single-nucleotide precision. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (2018), 505–518.
Abudayyeh, O.O., et al. RNA targeting with CRISPR-Cas13. Nature 550 (2017), 280–284.
Cox, D.B.T., et al. RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13. Science 358 (2017), 1019–1027.
Tak, Y.E., et al. Inducible and multiplex gene regulation using CRISPR-Cpf1-based transcription factors. Nat. Methods 14 (2017), 1163–1166.
Kweon, J., et al. Fusion guide RNAs for orthogonal gene manipulation with Cas9 and Cpf1. Nat. Commun., 8, 2017, 1723.
Najm, F.J., et al. Orthologous CRISPR-Cas9 enzymes for combinatorial genetic screens. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (2018), 179–189.
Boettcher, M., et al. Dual gene activation and knockout screen reveals directional dependencies in genetic networks. Nat. Biotechnol. 36 (2018), 170–178.
Galonska, C., et al. Genome-wide tracking of dCas9-methyltransferase footprints. Nat. Commun., 9, 2018, 597.
Hu, G., Luo, J., A primer on using pooled shRNA libraries for functional genomic screens. Acta Biochim. Biophys. Sin. (Shanghai) 44 (2012), 103–112.
Platt, R.J., et al. CRISPR-Cas9 knockin mice for genome editing and cancer modeling. Cell 159 (2014), 440–455.
Hart, T., et al. Measuring error rates in genomic perturbation screens: gold standards for human functional genomics. Mol. Syst. Biol., 10, 2014, 733.
Winter, J., et al. CRISPRAnalyzeR: Interactive analysis, annotation and documentation of pooled CRISPR screens. bioRxiv, 2017, 10.1101/109967 Published online February 20, 2018.
Winter, J., et al. caRpools: an R package for exploratory data analysis and documentation of pooled CRISPR/Cas9 screens. Bioinformatics 32 (2016), 632–634.
Spahn, P.N., et al. PinAPL-Py: a comprehensive web-application for the analysis of CRISPR/Cas9 screens. Sci. Rep., 7, 2017 15854.
Meyers, R.M., et al. Computational correction of copy number effect improves specificity of CRISPR-Cas9 essentiality screens in cancer cells. Nat. Genet. 49 (2017), 1779–1784.
Canver, M.C., et al. Integrated design: execution, and analysis of arrayed and pooled CRISPR genome-editing experiments. Nat. Protoc. 13 (2018), 946–986.
Allen, F., et al. JACKS: joint analysis of CRISPR/Cas9 knock-out screens. bioRxiv, 2018.
Jia, G., Wang, X., Xiao, G., A permutation-based non-parametric analysis of CRISPR screen data. BMC Genomics, 18, 2017, 545.
Trumbach, D., et al. ENCoRE: an efficient software for CRISPR screens identifies new players in extrinsic apoptosis. BMC Genomics, 18, 2017, 905.
Hart, T., Moffat, J., BAGEL: a computational framework for identifying essential genes from pooled library screens. BMC Bioinformatics, 17, 2016, 164.
Yu, J., et al. ScreenBEAM: a novel meta-analysis algorithm for functional genomics screens via Bayesian hierarchical modeling. Bioinformatics 32 (2016), 260–267.
Li, W., et al. Quality control, modeling, and visualization of CRISPR screens with MAGeCK-VISPR. Genome Biol., 16, 2015, 281.
Diaz, A.A., et al. HiTSelect: a comprehensive tool for high-complexity-pooled screen analysis. Nucleic Acids Res., 43, 2015, e16.
Luo, B., et al. Highly parallel identification of essential genes in cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105 (2008), 20380–20385.
Konig, R., et al. A probability-based approach for the analysis of large-scale RNAi screens. Nat. Methods 4 (2007), 847–849.
Love, M.I., Huber, W., Anders, S., Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol., 15, 2014, 550.
Dai, Z., et al. edgeR: a versatile tool for the analysis of shRNA-seq and CRISPR-Cas9 genetic screens. F1000Res, 3, 2014, 95.
