Back

Mechanism of delayed cell death following simultaneous CRISPR-Cas9 targeting in pancreatic cancers

Teh, S. S. K.; Halper-Stromberg, E.; Morsberger, L.; Bennett, A.; Bowland, K.; Skaist, A.; Cai, F.; Liang, H.; Hruban, R. H.; Roberts, N. J.; Scharpf, R. B.; Zou, Y. S.; Eshleman, J. R.

2023-04-05 cancer biology
10.1101/2023.04.03.535384 bioRxiv
Show abstract

While radiation is an effective oncologic therapy, killing cancer by inducing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), it lacks specificity for neoplastic cells. We have previously adapted the CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology as a cancer-specific treatment modality targeting somatic mutations in pancreatic cancer (PC). However, its tumoricidal potential remains unclear, especially in comparison to therapeutic doses of radiation. Here, we demonstrate that CRISPR-Cas9-induced DSBs are more cytotoxic in PCs than a comparable number of radiation-induced DSBs. We observed >90% tumor growth inhibition by targeting 9 sites with cancer-specific single-guide RNAs (sgRNAs). Through both bioinformatics and cytogenetics analyses, we found that CRISPR-Cas9-induced DSBs triggered ongoing chromosomal rearrangements, with 87% of structural variants not directly produced from the initial CRISPR-Cas9-induced DSBs, and chromosomal instability (CIN) peaking before cell death. By comparing the cytotoxicity of CRISPR-Cas9- to radiation-induced DSBs, we demonstrate that the number of DSBs required to achieve equitoxic effects was [~]3 times higher for radiation than CRISPR-Cas9. Finally, we show that PC cells that had survived CRISPR-Cas9 targeting retained susceptibility to subsequent CRISPR-Cas9-induced DSBs at different genomic sites with >87% growth inhibition. Together, our data support the therapeutic potential of CRISPR-Cas9 as an anti-cancer strategy.

Published in Journal of Clinical Investigation (predicted rank #20) · training set

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.