Back

Optimized sgRNA design by deep learning to balance the off-target effects and on-target activity of CRISPR/Cas9

Lan, J.; Cui, Y.; Wang, X.; Song, G.; Lou, J.

2020-03-05 bioinformatics
10.1101/2020.03.04.976340 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The CRISPR/Cas9 system derived from bacteria especially Streptococcus pyogenes (SpyCas9) is currently considered as the most advanced tool used for numerous areas of biological study in which it is useful to target or modify specific DNA sequences. However, low on-target cleavage efficiency and off-target effects impede its wide application. Several different sgRNA design tools for SpyCas9 by using various algorithms have been developed, including linear regression model, support vector machine (SVM) model and convolutional neuron network model. While the deep insight into the sgRNA features contributing for both on-target activity and off-target still remains to be determined. Here, with public large-scale CRISPR screen data, we evaluated contribution of different features influence sgRNA activity and off-target effects, and developed models for sgRNA off-target evaluation and on-target activity prediction. In addition, we combined both activity and off-target prediction models and packaged them as an online sgRNA design tool, OPT-sgRNA.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 1%
15.0%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Molecular Therapy Nucleic Acids
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
○ 25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
5
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
6
The CRISPR Journal
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
7
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
9
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 32%
3.2%
10
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.2%
11
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
12
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
13
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
188 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.6%
14
RNA Biology
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.4%
15
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.1%
16
Frontiers in Genetics
○ 230 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
17
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
18
Horticulture Research
◐ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
19
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
20
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
21
Journal of Genetics and Genomics
○ 38 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
22
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
23
Synthetic and Systems Biotechnology
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
24
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 67%
0.8%
25
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 41%
0.6%
26
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
27
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.