Abstract
CRISPR/Cas9-based tools have rapidly developed in recent years. These include CRISPR-based gene activation (CRISPRa) or inhibition (CRISPRi), for which there are libraries. CRISPR libraries for loss of function have been widely used to identify new biological mechanisms, such as drug resistance and cell survival signals. CRISPRa is highly useful in screening for gain of functions, and CRISPRi is a more powerful tool than RNA interference (RNAi) libraries in screening for loss of functions. Positive selection using a CRISPR library can detect survival cells with specific conditions, such as drug treatment, and it can easily clarify drug resistance mechanisms. Negative selection is capable of detecting dead or slow-growing cells efficiently, and it can identify survival-essential genes, which can be promising candidates for molecularly targeted drugs. In addition, negative selection can be applied for synthetic lethality interactions, where the perturbation of both genes simultaneously results in the loss of viability, but that of either gene alone does not affect viability. This mechanism is highly important to identifying the optimal combination of molecularly targeted drugs. Survival-co-essential genes in cancer cells can be identified using new methods, such as the paired guide RNA system and in combination with single-cell RNA sequencing techniques. These efficient methods can clarify interesting biological mechanisms and suggest candidates for molecularly targeted drugs. This review identifies what types of screenings were performed and suggests ideas for the next CRISPR screenings to develop new drugs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
The clustered regularly interspaced short palindrome repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 system is a new gene-editing technology that can induce double-strand breaks (DSBs), single-strand nicks, or anywhere guide ribonucleic acids (RNAs) can bind with the protospacer adjacent motif sequence. DSBs can induce cellular DNA repair, which then results in the mutations of targeted genes with non-homologous end joining or homology-directed repairs [1, 2].
Furthermore, adaptive applicants were invented with catalytically inactive Cas9 (dCas9) and other regulator co-factors, such as VP64 and KRAB. CRISPR-dCas9-VP64 (CRISPRa) can activate or increase gene expressions with transcription start site (TSS)-specific guide RNAs [3]. For the downregulation of targeted genes, CRISPR-dCas9-KRAB (CRISPRi) can interfere with or silence a transcription [4, 5]. Additional efficient modifications were developed to accelerate CRISPRa activity with other additional machineries, such as VPR, SAM (MS2/p65/HSF1), SunTag, and p300 [6,7,8,9]. The VPR, SAM, and SunTag systems were consistently superior to the previous VP64 standard in the activation of targeted genes [10].
Screenings with random mutagenesis are highly useful and widely used to identify specific genes to induce cell growth or death and to clarify the mechanisms of specific signaling pathways. Retroviral random mutagenesis was widely used to identify positive regulators, such as proto-oncogenes with random insertions of retroviruses and the activation of nearby genes through long-terminal repeat [11]. Retrovirus may not be integrated into and may not destroy both alleles of negative regulators, such as tumor suppressor genes (TSGs). This leads to the seldom identification of negative regulators using this method. Transposon mutagenesis is a much stronger mutation inducer and it is widely used to identify proto-oncogenes and TSGs, because the number of integrated transposons is much larger than that of retrovirus insertional mutagenesis. In addition, gene expressions can be terminated easily with splice acceptors [12]. However, those two methods require many steps to identify the integration site and the factor responsible for screening phenotypes.
RNAi is a widely used and well-established method to downregulate specific target genes, and the short hairpin RNA (shRNA) library is a more sophisticated method to identify a candidate gene for loss-of-function screenings, although it cannot activate any gene expressions directly. Responsible targeted shRNA can be easily identified, especially when a barcode is encoded. In addition, shRNA libraries have a powerful screening method to identify candidates in a many fields of screenings [13,14,15,16].
Molecularly targeted drugs have been widely used for many kinds of cancers, including imatinib for BCR-ABL fusion in chronic myelogenous leukemia and some kinds of acute leukemia, vemurafenib for B-Raf in malignant melanoma, olaparib for poly-ADP ribose polymerase in BRCA-mutated ovarian cancers, and so on. However, not all cancers are curable, and even molecularly targeted drugs may have a problem with drug resistance. To overcome all kinds of cancers, the identification of molecular targets is important, as well as clarifying the mechanisms of drug resistance. Therefore, screenings with random mutagenesis, such as retroviruses, transposons, and shRNA libraries, have been applied to find new drug-targetable genes [17,18,19] and recently, CRISPR libraries were applied to screenings with genome-wide loss- or gain-of-functions. This review updated what kinds of screenings were conducted, which is helpful in designing new strategies in the next step.
CRISPR libraries for identifying drug targets
CRISPR libraries were first reported in 2013 by two different groups in Science, and they exhibited more efficient screening steps than those involved in shRNA libraries according to Shalem et al. [20] and Wang et al. [21] The former group used 64,800 gRNAs for 18,080 genes and the latter used 73,000 gRNAs composed from six categorized groups, such as “ribosomal protein,” “kinase,” “cell cycle,” “nuclear,” and others. Lately, at least 13 libraries for CRISPR knockout for humans are available (Table 1), and they are applied to not only drug screenings but also viral infection resistance. Three libraries for CRISPRa in humans and two for CRISPRi have also been established (Table 2). These libraries can easily induct human cells and they are applicable to clinical research. On the other hand, seven libraries for loss of function with a murine CRISPR library, two for murine CRISPRa, and one for CRISPRi are also available (Table 3). The murine CRISPR library has a great advantage in vivo model that could be applied to carcinogenesis or metastasis. The combination of a human model and a mouse model can bring new insights to eradicate cancers.
Mainly, there are two ways to use libraries to screen for target genes. One is positive selection, a conventional selection method that can collect growth-advantage-acquired populations by random mutagenesis. For example, cells can be exposed to an anti-cancer drug after random mutagenesis with a CRISPR library and then the drug-resistant population will be harvested for analyzing the sequence of gRNAs (Fig. 1a). By collecting genomic DNA and amplified guide RNAs or a barcode-containing region for sequencing, enriched guide RNAs will be identified as candidate genes for drug resistance.
Another method is negative/dropout screening, which can identify essential genes for survival under specific conditions. If one cell is carrying one guide RNA that is targeting a survival-essential gene, a knockout cell cannot grow. Induction of a pool of gRNA can make a pool of random mutants. After several optimal passages, a pool of guide RNAs of only survived cells will be harvested. By sequencing a pool of guide RNAs between initial status and survival status using next-generation sequencing, survival-essential candidate genes will be identified (Fig. 1b).
To obtain optimal screening candidates, maintaining the diversity of guide RNAs is important. To do so, lentiviral infection efficiency is also critical. Essentially, there are two systems of a CRSIPR/Cas9 library. One is an all-in-one plasmid system that includes guide RNAs and Cas9 with optimal promoters and selection markers (Fig. 1c). It has the advantage in induction of both guide RNAs and Cas9 in one cell at once. However, infection efficiency is lower because of the huge size of the all-in-one plasmid system, and this leads to the disadvantage of maintaining diversity. The second system is a two-plasmid system that has an advantage in infection efficiency, because plasmid contains only guide RNAs with optimal promoters. Once Cas9-expressing cells are established, it is relatively easy to maintain diversity (Fig. 1d). However, two transduction steps for Cas9 are needed, as well as concern for Cas9 activity. Two-plasmid systems can be easily modified. If a tetracycline-inducible Cas9 vector is used, condition-specific random knockout is possible.
CRISPR screening for drug resistance mechanisms
The reason cancer can be fatal is uncontrollable growth with drug resistance. To overcome drug resistance, a clarification of drug resistance mechanisms is important. The creation of artificial drug resistance cells was a widely used method to clarify the mechanisms of drug resistance. Random mutations were widely used and CRISPR library easily apply to this type of screenings.
First, screening for loss of function with a CRISPR library was applied to explore the drug resistance mechanism of the BRAF protein kinase inhibitor, vemurafenib (PLX), in the melanoma cell line, A549. In this screening, NF1, MED12, NF2, CUL3, TADA1, and TADA2B were identified as PLX-resistant candidates. NF1 and MED12 were already reported, but interestingly, NF2, CUL3, TADA1, and TADA2B were not, suggesting a new drug resistance mechanism [20]. On the other hand, conventional anti-cancer drugs, such as 6-thioguianine (6-TG), etoposide, and cytarabine (Ara-C), were also tested. A DNA mismatch repair pathway (MSH2, MSH6, MLH1, and PMS2) was identified as a key molecule in 6-TG resistance, as previously reported [21]. TOP2A and CDK6 were also identified in etoposide resistance screening. Etoposide poisons DNA topoisomerase IIA, and this identification of TOP2A is quite reasonable. However, the relationship between CDK6 and etoposide is not well known and it might be helpful in understanding new drug resistance mechanisms in etoposide [21].
Cytarabine is widely used to treat cancers, such as leukemia. To clarify a new drug resistance mechanism of this conventional drug, a CRISPR library was applied to leukemia cell lines. At first, deoxycytidine kinase (DCK) was identified, as previously reported. To avoid the effects of gRNA on DCK, CRISPR library-resistant DCK with a silent mutation was induced in the targeted cell lines. After, the effect of gRNA on DCK was canceled, and SLC29A was identified as a second candidate, but it is also well known as a transporter of cytarabine into the cytoplasma [22]. Widely used drugs were well studied and strong factor like DCK could mask additional other factors.
CRISPR activation screenings of melanoma with positive selection by PLX were also performed. EGFR, PCDH7, ITGB5, ARHGFE1, BCAR3, GPR35, and TFAP2C were identified as PLX-resistant genes. The activation of those molecules might relate to the ERK pathway, resulting in PLX resistance. These candidates also suggested a new insight into a PLX-resistant pathway [8].
CRISPR inhibition overlaps potentially with RNA interference screenings and in fact, there were similar tendencies, but efficiency was higher [23].
CRISPR screening for cancer-essential genes to identify drug targets
CIRSPR library screening is capable of accurate negative selections. This screening can reveal what genes are essential for survival under specific conditions, such as cell type and oncogene status. At first, only genes essential for common survival were identified, such as ribosomal structural constituents [20]. The BCR-ABL of oncogenic fusion gene was also identified as a survival-essential gene in KBM7 cells that possess BCR-ABL [21]. This result suggests that negative selection is promising to identify a molecularly targeted drug. A comparison of different tissue types, such as brain (GBM), retina (RPE1), colon (HCT116), melanocyte (A375), and cervix (HeLa), revealed common essential genes, as well as mRNA splicing and protein folding in all kinds of tissues. Furthermore, cell type and activated signaling-specific survival-essential genes were also identified [24].
In an acute leukemic cell, specific survival genes were explored among MOLM-13, HL-60, MV-40, OCI-AML3, and OCI-AML2. In total, 492 survival-essential genes in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were identified and 227 genes were druggable. Among them, the histone acetyltransferase gene (KAT2A) and spliceosome kinase gene (SRPK1) were considered attractive druggable targets under the leukemic state with MLL-AF9 translocation. This fusion drives MOLM-13 cells. Indeed, a KAT2A inhibitor, MB-3, was strongly effective in MLOM-13 survival, and interestingly, this inhibitor is also effective for other primary AML cells with leading apoptosis [25].
To ensure the efficiency of screenings, a combination of multiple gene identification methods, such as retroviral random mutation with a splice acceptor, was more reliable. To identify cell survival-essential genes with this method, 330 unknown function genes from 1870 genes were identified. Those genes might involve RNA processing and nuclear localization. The pattern of a survival gene can reflect the cell type, and this result in the same types of cells using a similar signaling pathway for survival [26].
Some cancers already have a well-known oncogene, such as the RAS oncogene, a strong inducer of cell proliferation; however, no scientist has succeeded in creating RAS inhibitors because of the nature of RAS [27]. To overcome this problem, the identification of essential genes that target RAS synthetic lethal interactions is important. That is the perturbation of both genes simultaneously results in the loss of viability, but that of either gene alone does not affect viability. Therefore, CRISPR libraries were applied to six cell lines with a RAS mutation and six other wild-type cell lines with negative selection. Eventually, RCE1 and ICMT were identified, and these two molecular genes were involved in an RAS synthetic lethal interaction. RAF1, encoding c-Raf, and SHOC2 were also listed in this screening, and they are related to the MAPK pathway under the RAS signaling downstream. PREX1 was also identified as a key survival-essential gene in all six cell lines. Interestingly, PREX1 was able to activate MAPK pathway only in mutant RAS-driven AML cells [28].
CRISPR activation with negative selection was also performed for survival-essential genes in K562 cells. Interestingly, potential TSGs were identified, such as TP73 of the p53-related protein. In addition, CDKN1C (p57) and CDKN1A (p21) of cell cycle inhibitors, BAK1 and BCL2L11 (BIM) of apoptosis factors, ARID1A of chromatin remodeling factors, CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein (CEBP), homeobox genes, Forkhead box genes, the Ikaros family of zinc-finger proteins, and the hematopoietic differentiation factor SPL1 (PU.1) were also identified. These results were reasonable to explain how those molecules would prevent cell growth [23]. Horlbeck et al. [29] improved this library with minimal false positives and a non-specific toxicity.
CRISPR inhibition can knockdown targeted genes as shRNA. The screening of loss of function of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) by CRISPR is difficult because in/del mutations cannot affect function without transcription. A new CRISPRi library for 16,401 loci of lncRNAs was tested with negative selection, and 499 lncRNA loci as survival-essential genes were identified [30].
Modified CRISPR screens: co-essentiality and non-coding RNAs
CRISPR screenings with negative selection can develop molecularly targeted drugs; however, not all survival pathways could be identified by this method. There might be a redundant pathway for cell survival, and the knockout of two or more genes would be needed for identification in this case.
To identify the combination of molecules, a two-wise barcoded CRISPR-Cas9 library in a single plasmid system was applied to the ovarian cell line, OVCAR8-ADR. Combinations of “BRD4 + KDM4C” and “BRD4 + KDM6B” were identified as survival combinational-essential genes [31]. Furthermore, Han et al. used a “CRISPR double knockout” system to find synergistic drug combinations. In total, 700 gRNA for about 207 druggable genes were combined to make 490,000 combinations. Finally, the combination “ATM inhibitor + APEX1 inhibitor” or “MCL1 inhibitor + BCL2L1 inhibitor” was validated [32]. In theory, the combination of molecularly targeted drugs could be more effective.
Long non-coding RNAs are difficult to knock out, as previously mentioned, so a paired-guide RNA library was applied to find growth-advantage genes and survival-essential genes. LINC00176, LINC01087, LINC00882, and LINC00883 were identified in positive selection and AC004463.6, AC095067.1, HM13-AS1, RP11-128M1.1, and RP11-439K3.1 were identified in negative selections [33]. Hopefully, non-coding RNA can also be a target of drugs in the future.
CRISPR screening with single-cell RNA sequencing technology
Single-cell genomics technologies are capable of characterizing new cell types and states, transitions from normal to disease, and response therapies in exactly a single cell [34]. An integrated method for a pooled CRISPR/Cas9 library, followed by massively parallel single-cell RNA-seq, can profile the perturbation and transcriptome of all targeted genes in the exact same cell. In addition, with conventional CRISPR screenings, M.O.I. should be adjusted to less than one to control the number of copies of guide RNA in a single cell. This means only a single loss of function can be investigated. However, this combination method can analyze multiple factors and their interactions. Indeed, Datlinger et al., Atray et al., and Diego et al. revealed cell-signaling modules with actual transcriptional profiles [35,36,37]. It would be more helpful to investigate complicated survival signals and the drug-resistant mechanisms [38].
Conclusions
CRISPR library screenings are more reliable mutation inducers than other previous methods, and they make it easy to address the responsible mutations. Therefore, it is highly important to design what can be revealed by those screenings using new strategies, including what has already been performed and what should be known. Positive/negative selection with CRISPR library might reveal the complicated mechanism of cell signaling and drug resistance. By using different cell types, different contexts, and new technologies, further ideas would give us more insight into discovering the Achilles heel of all cancers and overcoming all drug resistances.
References
Mali P, Yang L, Esvelt KM, Aach J, Guell M, DiCarlo JE, et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science. 2013;339:823–6.
Cong L, Ran FA, Cox D, Lin S, Barretto R, Habib N, et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR. Science. 2013;339:819–23.
Cheng AW, Wang H, Yang H, Shi L, Katz Y, Theunissen TW, et al. Multiplexed activation of endogenous genes by CRISPR-on, an RNA-guided transcriptional activator system. Cell Res. 2013;23:1163–71.
Qi LS, Larson MH, Gilbert LA, Doudna JA, Weissman JS, Arkin AP, et al. Repurposing CRISPR as an RNA-guided platform for sequence-specific control of gene expression. Cell. 2013;152:1173–83.
Gilbert LA, Larson MH, Morsut L, Liu Z, Brar GA, Torres SE, et al. CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell. 2013;154:442–51.
Lin S, Ewen-Campen B, Ni X, Housden BE, Perrimon N. In vivo transcriptional activation using CRISPR/Cas9 in Drosophila. Genetics. 2015;201:433–42.
Konermann S, Brigham MD, Trevino AE, Joung J, Abudayyeh OO, Barcena C, et al. Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR-Cas9 complex. Nature. 2015;517:583–8.
Tanenbaum ME, Gilbert LA, Qi LS, Weissman JS, Vale RD. A protein-tagging system for signal amplification in gene expression and fluorescence imaging. Cell. 2014;159:635–46.
Hilton IB, D’Ippolito AM, Vockley CM, Thakore PI, Crawford GE, Reddy TE, et al. Epigenome editing by a CRISPR-Cas9-based acetyltransferase activates genes from promoters and enhancers. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:510–7.
Chavez A, Tuttle M, Pruitt BW, Ewen-Campen B, Chari R, Ter-Ovanesyan D, et al. Comparison of Cas9 activators in multiple species. Nat Methods. 2016;13:563–7.
Nakamura T. Retroviral insertional mutagenesis identifies oncogene cooperation. Cancer Sci. 2005;96:7–12.
Largaespada DA. Transposon-mediated mutagenesis of somatic cells in the mouse for cancer gene identification. Methods. 2009;49:282–6.
Westbrook TF, Martin ES, Schlabach MR, Leng Y, Liang AC, Feng B, et al. A genetic screen for candidate tumor suppressors identifies REST. Cell. 2005;121:837–48.
Kolfschoten IG, van Leeuwen B, Berns K, Mullenders J, Beijersbergen RL, Bernards R, et al. A genetic screen identifies PITX1 as a suppressor of RAS activity and tumorigenicity. Cell. 2005;121:849–58.
Ngo VN, Davis RE, Lamy L, Yu X, Zhao H, Lenz G, et al. A loss-of-function RNA interference screen for molecular targets in cancer. Nature. 2006;441:106–10.
Schlabach MR, Luo J, Solimini NL, Hu G, Xu Q, Li MZ, et al. Cancer proliferation gene discovery through functional genomics. Science. 2008;319:620–4.
Ranzani M, Annunziato S, Calabria A, Brasca S, Benedicenti F, Gallina P, et al. Lentiviral vector-based insertional mutagenesis identifies genes involved in the resistance to targeted anticancer therapies. Mol. Ther. 2014;22:2056–68.
Chen L, Stuart L, Ohsumi TK, Burgess S, Varshney GK, Dastur A, et al. Transposon activation mutagenesis as a screening tool for identifying resistance to cancer therapeutics. BMC Cancer. 2013;13:93
Khorashad JS, Eiring AM, Mason CC, Gantz KC, Bowler AD, Redwine HM, et al. shRNA library screening identifies nucleocytoplasmic transport as a mediator of BCR-ABL1 kinase-independent resistance. Blood. 2015;125:1772–81.
Shalem O, Sanjana NE, Hartenian E, Shi X, Scott DA, Mikkelsen TS, et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science. 2014;343:84–7.
Wang T, Wei JJ, Sabatini DM, Lander ES. Genetic screens in human cells using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Science. 2014;343:80–4.
Kurata M, Rathe SK, Bailey NJ, Aumann NK, Jones JM, Veldhuijzen GW, et al. Using genome-wide CRISPR library screening with library resistant DCK to find new sources of Ara-C drug resistance in AML. Sci Rep. 2016;6:36199.
Gilbert LA, Horlbeck MA, Adamson B, Villalta JE, Chen Y, Whitehead EH, et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-mediated control of gene repression and activation. Cell. 2014;159:647–61.
Hart T, Chandrashekhar M, Aregger M, Steinhart Z, Brown KR, MacLeod G, et al. High-resolution CRISPR screens reveal fitness genes and genotype-specific cancer liabilities. Cell. 2015;163:1515–26.
Tzelepis K, KoikeYusa H, De Braekeleer E, Li Y, Metzakopian E, Dovey OM, et al. A CRISPR dropout screen identifies genetic vulnerabilities and therapeutic targets in acute myeloid leukemia. Cell Rep. 2016;17:1193–205.
Wang T, Birsoy K, Hughes NW, Krupczak KM, Post Y, Wei JJ, et al. Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome. Science. 2015;350:1096–101.
Ledford H. Cancer: rhe Ras renaissance. Nature. 2015;520:278–80.
Wang T, Yu H, Hughes NW, Liu B, Kendirli A, Klein K, et al. Gene essentiality profiling reveals gene networks and synthetic lethal interactions with oncogenic Ras. Cell. 2017;168:890–903.e15
Horlbeck MA, Gilbert LA, Villalta JE, Adamson B, Pak RA, Chen Y, et al. Compact and highly active next-generation libraries for CRISPR-mediated gene repression and activation. Elife. 2016:5. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19760.
Liu SJ, Horlbeck MA, Cho SW, Birk HS, Malatesta M, He D, et al. CRISPRi-based genome-scale identification of functional long non-coding RNA loci in human cells. Science. 355. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah7111.
Wong AS, Choi GC, Cui CH, Pregernig G, Milani P, Adam M, et al. Multiplexed barcoded CRISPR-Cas9 screening enabled by CombiGEM. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113:2544–9.
Han K, Jeng EE, Hess GT, Morgens DW, Li A, Bassik MC. Synergistic drug combinations for cancer identified in a CRISPR screen for pairwise genetic interactions. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35:463–74.
Zhu S, Li W, Liu J, Chen CH, Liao Q, Xu P, et al. Genome-scale deletion screening of human long non-coding RNAs using a paired-guide RNA CRISPR-Cas9 library. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34:1279–86.
Junker JP, van Oudenaarden A. Every cell is special: genome-wide studies add a new dimension to single-cell biology. Cell. 2014;157:8–11.
Datlinger P, Rendeiro AF, Schmidl C, Krausgruber T, Traxler P, Klughammer J, et al. Pooled CRISPR screening with single-cell transcriptome readout. Nat Methods. 2017;14:297–301.
Dixit A, Parnas O, Li B, Chen J, Fulco CP, Jerby-Arnon L, et al. Perturb-Seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell rna profiling of pooled genetic screens. Cell. 2016;167:1853–66.e17.
Jaitin DA, Weiner A, Yofe I, Lara-Astiaso D, Keren-Shaul H, David E, et al. Dissecting immune circuits by linking CRISPR-pooled screens with single-cell RNA-Seq. Cell. 2016;167:1883–96.e15.
Sanjana NE, Shalem O, Zhang F. Improved vectors and genome-wide libraries for CRISPR screening. Nat Methods. 2014;11:783–84.
Jain IH, Zazzeron L, Goli R, Alexa K, Schatzman Bone S, Dhillon H, et al. Hypoxia as a therapy for mitochondrial disease. Science. 2016;352:54–61.
Marceau CD, Puschnik AS, Majzoub K, Ooi YS, Brewer SM, Fuchs G, et al. Genetic dissection of Flaviviridae host factors through genome-scale CRISPR screens. Nature. 2016;535:159–63.
Doench JG, Fusi N, Sullender M, Hegde M, Vaimberg EW, Donovan KF, et al. Optimized sgRNA design to maximize activity and minimize off-target effects of CRISPR-Cas9. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34:184–91.
Blondel CJ, Park JS, Hubbard TP, Pacheco AR, Kuehl CJ, Walsh MJ, et al. CRISPR/Cas9 screens reveal requirements for host cell sulfation and fucosylation in bacterial type iii secretion system-mediated cytotoxicity. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;20:226–37.
Zhou Y, Zhu S, Cai C, Yuan P, Li C, Huang Y, et al. High-throughput screening of a CRISPR. Nature. 2014;509:487–91.
Ma H, Dang Y, Wu Y, Jia G, Anaya E, Zhang J, et al. A CRISPR-based screen identifies genes essential for West Nile virus-induced cell death. Cell Rep. 2015;12:673–83.
Kim HS, Lee K, Bae S, Park J, Lee CK, Kim M, et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene-knockout screens and target identification via whole genome sequencing uncover host genes required for picornavirus infection. J Biol Chem. 2017;292:10664-71.
Park RJ, Wang T, Koundakjian D, Hultquist JF, Lamothe Molina P, Monel B, et al. A genome-wide CRISPR screen identifies a restricted set of HIV host dependency factors. Nat Genet. 2017;49:193–203.
Koike-Yusa H, Li Y, Tan EP, Velasco-Herrera Mdel C, Yusa K. Genome-wide recessive genetic screening in mammalian cells with a lentiviral CRISPR-guide RNA library. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32:267–73.
Haga K, Fujimoto A, Takai-Todaka R, Miki M, Doan YH, Murakami K, et al. Functional receptor molecules CD300lf and CD300ld within the CD300 family enable murine noroviruses to infect cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113:E6248–55.
Chen S, Sanjana NE, Zheng K, Shalem O, Lee K, Shi X, et al. Genome-wide CRISPR screen in a mouse model of tumor growth and metastasis. Cell. 2015;160:1246–60.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
D.A.L. is co-owner and advisor to NeoClone Biotechnology, Inc., B-MoGen Biotechnologies Inc., and Discovery Genomics, Inc. No resources or personnel from any company were involved in this research in any way. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kurata, M., Yamamoto, K., Moriarity, B.S. et al. CRISPR/Cas9 library screening for drug target discovery. J Hum Genet 63, 179–186 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-017-0376-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-017-0376-9
This article is cited by
-
Indirect CRISPR screening with photoconversion revealed key factors of drug resistance with cell–cell interactions
Communications Biology (2023)
-
Identification of LARS as an essential gene for osteosarcoma proliferation through large-Scale CRISPR-Cas9 screening database and experimental verification
Journal of Translational Medicine (2022)
-
CHMP2A regulates tumor sensitivity to natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity
Nature Communications (2022)
-
Identifying novel therapeutic targets in gastric cancer using genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 screening
Oncogene (2022)
-
Application of the CRISPR/Cas9-based gene editing technique in basic research, diagnosis, and therapy of cancer
Molecular Cancer (2021)