CRISPR off-target detection with DISCOVER-seq

DISCOVER-seq (discovery of in situ Cas off-targets and verification by sequencing) is a broadly applicable approach for unbiased CRISPR–Cas off-target identification in cells and tissues. It leverages the recruitment of DNA repair factors to double-strand breaks (DSBs) after genome editing with CRISPR nucleases. Here, we describe a detailed experimental protocol and analysis pipeline with which to perform DISCOVER-seq. The principle of this method is to track the precise recruitment of MRE11 to DSBs by chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by next-generation sequencing. A customized open-source bioinformatics pipeline, BLENDER (blunt end finder), then identifies off-target sequences genome wide. DISCOVER-seq is capable of finding and measuring off-targets in primary cells and in situ. The two main advantages of DISCOVER-seq are (i) low false-positive rates because DNA repair enzyme binding is required for genome edits to occur and (ii) its applicability to a wide variety of systems, including patient-derived cells and animal models. The whole protocol, including the analysis, can be completed within 2 weeks. The authors describe DISCOVER-seq, a method to detect off-targets of CRISPR–Cas genome editing based on ChIP-seq analysis of MRE11 recruitment to DSBs, and subsequent bioinformatics analysis of sequencing data using the BLENDER pipeline.

[1]  J. Kobayashi,et al.  Molecular mechanism of the recruitment of NBS1/hMRE11/hRAD50 complex to DNA double-strand breaks: NBS1 binds to gamma-H2AX through FHA/BRCT domain. , 2004, Journal of radiation research.

[2]  John A Tainer,et al.  Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 is a keystone complex connecting DNA repair machinery, double-strand break signaling, and the chromatin template. , 2007, Biochemistry and cell biology = Biochimie et biologie cellulaire.

[3]  D. Ferguson,et al.  Multiple functions of MRN in end-joining pathways during isotype class switching , 2009, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[4]  Ralph Scully,et al.  Role of mammalian Mre11 in classical and alternative non-homologous end joining , 2009, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[5]  Jean Gautier,et al.  Role of Mre11 in chromosomal nonhomologous end joining in mammalian cells , 2009, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[6]  J. Petrini,et al.  The MRE11 complex: starting from the ends , 2011, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[7]  Data production leads,et al.  An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome , 2012 .

[8]  ENCODEConsortium,et al.  An Integrated Encyclopedia of DNA Elements in the Human Genome , 2012, Nature.

[9]  M. Rowicka,et al.  Nucleotide-resolution DNA double-strand breaks mapping by next-generation sequencing , 2013, Nature Methods.

[10]  Martin J. Aryee,et al.  GUIDE-Seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas nucleases , 2014, Nature Biotechnology.

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

[12]  Richard L. Frock,et al.  Genome-wide detection of DNA double-stranded breaks induced by engineered nucleases , 2014, Nature Biotechnology.

[13]  Jong-il Kim,et al.  Digenome-seq: genome-wide profiling of CRISPR-Cas9 off-target effects in human cells , 2015, Nature Methods.

[14]  David A. Scott,et al.  Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity , 2015, Science.

[15]  J. Joung,et al.  High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 variants with undetectable genome-wide off-targets , 2015, Nature.

[16]  J. Kent,et al.  Evaluation of off-target and on-target scoring algorithms and integration into the guide RNA selection tool CRISPOR , 2016, Genome Biology.

[17]  Jennifer A. Doudna,et al.  Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR-Cas9 targeting accuracy , 2017, Nature.

[18]  J. Joung,et al.  CIRCLE-seq: a highly sensitive in vitro screen for genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 nuclease off-targets , 2017, Nature Methods.

[19]  Erik L. G. Wernersson,et al.  BLISS is a versatile and quantitative method for genome-wide profiling of DNA double-strand breaks , 2017, Nature Communications.

[20]  Leslie S. Edwards,et al.  Mapping the genomic landscape of CRISPR–Cas9 cleavage , 2017, Nature Methods.

[21]  Jennifer A. Doudna,et al.  Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR-Cas9 targeting accuracy , 2017, Nature.

[22]  Shengdar Q Tsai,et al.  Illuminating the genome-wide activity of genome editors for safe and effective therapeutics , 2018, Genome Biology.

[23]  Martin J. Aryee,et al.  Defining CRISPR–Cas9 genome-wide nuclease activities with CIRCLE-seq , 2018, Nature Protocols.

[24]  Morgan L. Maeder,et al.  UDiTaS™, a genome editing detection method for indels and genome rearrangements , 2018, BMC Genomics.

[25]  Jacob E Corn,et al.  In vitro–transcribed guide RNAs trigger an innate immune response via the RIG-I pathway , 2018, PLoS biology.

[26]  Jacob E. Corn,et al.  CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing in human cells occurs via the Fanconi anemia pathway , 2018, Nature Genetics.

[27]  Martin J. Aryee,et al.  In vivo CRISPR editing with no detectable genome-wide off-target mutations , 2018, Nature.

[28]  Gang Bao,et al.  A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human haematopoietic stem and progenitor cells , 2018, Nature Medicine.

[29]  Charles D. Yeh,et al.  Unbiased detection of CRISPR off-targets in vivo using DISCOVER-Seq , 2018, Science.

[30]  Anshul Kundaje,et al.  The ENCODE Blacklist: Identification of Problematic Regions of the Genome , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[31]  Dana Carroll.  Collateral damage: benchmarking off-target effects in genome editing , 2019, Genome Biology.