Optimization of AsCas12a for combinatorial genetic screens in human cells

Cas12a RNA-guided endonucleases are promising tools for multiplexed genetic perturbations because they can process multiple guide RNAs expressed as a single transcript, and subsequently cleave target DNA. However, their widespread adoption has lagged behind Cas9-based strategies due to low activity and the lack of a well-validated pooled screening toolkit. In the present study, we describe the optimization of enhanced Cas12a from Acidaminococcus (enAsCas12a) for pooled, combinatorial genetic screens in human cells. By assaying the activity of thousands of guides, we refine on-target design rules and develop a comprehensive set of off-target rules to predict and exclude promiscuous guides. We also identify 38 direct repeat variants that can substitute for the wild-type sequence. We validate our optimized AsCas12a toolkit by screening for synthetic lethalities in OVCAR8 and A375 cancer cells, discovering an interaction between MARCH5 and WSB2 . Finally, we show that enAsCas12a delivers similar performance to Cas9 in genome-wide dropout screens but at greatly reduced library size, which will facilitate screens in challenging models. Improved Cas12a variants and sgRNA design rules enhance genome-wide screens.

[1]  Neal K. Bennett,et al.  Mapping the Genetic Landscape of Human Cells , 2018, Cell.

[2]  Eiru Kim,et al.  A network of human functional gene interactions from knockout fitness screens in cancer cells , 2019, Life Science Alliance.

[3]  T. Golub,et al.  Genomic Copy Number Dictates a Gene-Independent Cell Response to CRISPR/Cas9 Targeting. , 2016, Cancer discovery.

[4]  Peter C. DeWeirdt,et al.  Genetic screens in isogenic mammalian cell lines without single cell cloning , 2019, Nature Communications.

[5]  A. Regev,et al.  Cpf1 Is a Single RNA-Guided Endonuclease of a Class 2 CRISPR-Cas System , 2015, Cell.

[6]  Carlo C. Campa,et al.  Multiplexed genome engineering by Cas12a and CRISPR arrays encoded on single transcripts , 2019, Nature Methods.

[7]  James M. McFarland,et al.  Computational correction of copy-number effect improves specificity of CRISPR-Cas9 essentiality screens in cancer cells , 2017, bioRxiv.

[8]  Li Yang,et al.  Base editing with a Cpf1–cytidine deaminase fusion , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[9]  Graham Dellaire,et al.  Marker-free coselection for CRISPR-driven genome editing in human cells , 2017, Nature Methods.

[10]  Martin J. Aryee,et al.  Genome-wide specificities of CRISPR-Cas Cpf1 nucleases in human cells , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[11]  Jonathan Y. Hsu,et al.  Inducible and multiplex gene regulation using CRISPR-Cpf1-based transcription factors , 2017, Nature Methods.

[12]  Michael P Snyder,et al.  Mitigation of off-target toxicity in CRISPR-Cas9 screens for essential non-coding elements , 2019, Nature Communications.

[13]  Aaron N. Chang,et al.  Combinatorial CRISPR-Cas9 screens for de novo mapping of genetic interactions , 2017, Nature Methods.

[14]  Traver Hart,et al.  Pooled library screening with multiplexed Cpf1 library , 2019, Nature Communications.

[15]  Meagan E. Sullender,et al.  Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9 , 2015, Nature Biotechnology.

[16]  Joshua M. Korn,et al.  CRISPR Screens Provide a Comprehensive Assessment of Cancer Vulnerabilities but Generate False-Positive Hits for Highly Amplified Genomic Regions. , 2016, Cancer discovery.

[17]  S. Elledge,et al.  A lentiviral microRNA-based system for single-copy polymerase II-regulated RNA interference in mammalian cells. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  Jinghong Han,et al.  Engineering cell signaling using tunable CRISPR–Cpf1-based transcription factors , 2017, Nature Communications.

[19]  Eli J. Fine,et al.  DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  Phillip G. Montgomery,et al.  Defining a Cancer Dependency Map , 2017, Cell.

[21]  C. Scott,et al.  The BH3 mimetic ABT-737 targets selective Bcl-2 proteins and efficiently induces apoptosis via Bak/Bax if Mcl-1 is neutralized. , 2006, Cancer cell.

[22]  Cole Trapnell,et al.  On the design of CRISPR-based single cell molecular screens , 2018 .

[23]  Eiru Kim,et al.  Multiplex enCas12a screens show functional buffering by paralogs is systematically absent from genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screens , 2020, bioRxiv.

[24]  A. Borsy,et al.  Mb- and FnCpf1 nucleases are active in mammalian cells: activities and PAM preferences of four wild-type Cpf1 nucleases and of their altered PAM specificity variants , 2018, Nucleic acids research.

[25]  Julio Saez-Rodriguez,et al.  A CRISPR Dropout Screen Identifies Genetic Vulnerabilities and Therapeutic Targets in Acute Myeloid Leukemia , 2016, Cell reports.

[26]  Kendall R. Sanson,et al.  Optimized libraries for CRISPR-Cas9 genetic screens with multiple modalities , 2018, Nature Communications.

[27]  John G Doench,et al.  Am I ready for CRISPR? A user's guide to genetic screens , 2017, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  Eric S. Lander,et al.  Gene Essentiality Profiling Reveals Gene Networks and Synthetic Lethal Interactions with Oncogenic Ras , 2017, Cell.

[29]  I. Koumoutsos,et al.  A Case of Mistaken Identity. , 2017, Gastroenterology.

[30]  Jin-Wu Nam,et al.  In vivo high-throughput profiling of CRISPR–Cpf1 activity , 2016, Nature Methods.

[31]  Luca Pinello,et al.  Engineered CRISPR-Cas12a variants with increased activities and improved targeting ranges for gene, epigenetic and base editing , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[32]  Kendall R. Sanson,et al.  Orthologous CRISPR-Cas9 enzymes for Combinatorial Genetic Screens , 2017, Nature Biotechnology.

[33]  Mudra Hegde,et al.  Uncoupling of sgRNAs from their associated barcodes during PCR amplification of combinatorial CRISPR screens , 2018, bioRxiv.

[34]  Gaelen T. Hess,et al.  Synergistic drug combinations for cancer identified in a CRISPR screen for pairwise genetic interactions , 2017, Nature Biotechnology.

[35]  Jing Li,et al.  Enhanced mammalian genome editing by new Cas12a orthologs with optimized crRNA scaffolds , 2019, Genome Biology.

[36]  Yuri Pritykin,et al.  GuideScan software for improved single and paired CRISPR guide RNA design , 2017, Nature Biotechnology.

[37]  Sungroh Yoon,et al.  Deep learning improves prediction of CRISPR–Cpf1 guide RNA activity , 2018, Nature Biotechnology.

[38]  D. Largaespada,et al.  Simple and Efficient Methods for Enrichment and Isolation of Endonuclease Modified Cells , 2014, PloS one.

[39]  Feng Zhang,et al.  Erratum: Multiplex gene editing by CRISPR–Cpf1 using a single crRNA array , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[40]  Jin-Soo Kim,et al.  Genome-wide analysis reveals specificities of Cpf1 endonucleases in human cells , 2016, Nature Biotechnology.

[41]  Michael M. Dubreuil,et al.  A genome-wide atlas of co-essential modules assigns function to uncharacterized genes , 2021, Nature Genetics.

[42]  Youssef Errami,et al.  In vivo profiling of metastatic double knockouts through CRISPR-Cpf1 screens , 2019, Nature Methods.

[43]  Aviad Tsherniak,et al.  Interrogation of Mammalian Protein Complex Structure, Function, and Membership Using Genome-Scale Fitness Screens. , 2018, Cell systems.

[44]  Thomas M. Norman,et al.  A Multiplexed Single-Cell CRISPR Screening Platform Enables Systematic Dissection of the Unfolded Protein Response , 2016, Cell.

[45]  Junhao Fu,et al.  A ‘new lease of life’: FnCpf1 possesses DNA cleavage activity for genome editing in human cells , 2017, Nucleic acids research.

[46]  Lihua Julie Zhu,et al.  Enhanced Cas12a editing in mammalian cells and zebrafish , 2019, Nucleic acids research.

[47]  D. Durocher,et al.  High-Resolution CRISPR Screens Reveal Fitness Genes and Genotype-Specific Cancer Liabilities , 2015, Cell.

[48]  J. Moffat,et al.  Measuring error rates in genomic perturbation screens: gold standards for human functional genomics , 2014, bioRxiv.