Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Structure-guided chemical modification of guide RNA enables potent non-viral in vivo genome editing

Nature Biotechnology volume 35, pages 1179–1187 (2017)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Efficient genome editing with Cas9–sgRNA in vivo has required the use of viral delivery systems, which have limitations for clinical applications. Translational efforts to develop other RNA therapeutics have shown that judicious chemical modification of RNAs can improve therapeutic efficacy by reducing susceptibility to nuclease degradation. Guided by the structure of the Cas9–sgRNA complex, we identify regions of sgRNA that can be modified while maintaining or enhancing genome-editing activity, and we develop an optimal set of chemical modifications for in vivo applications. Using lipid nanoparticle formulations of these enhanced sgRNAs (e-sgRNA) and mRNA encoding Cas9, we show that a single intravenous injection into mice induces >80% editing of Pcsk9 in the liver. Serum Pcsk9 is reduced to undetectable levels, and cholesterol levels are significantly lowered about 35% to 40% in animals. This strategy may enable non-viral, Cas9-based genome editing in the liver in clinical settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Chemical modifications of invariable part of sgRNA.
Figure 2: Chemical modifications of guide sequences.
Figure 3: Chemical modifications of sgRNA and its application in human cells.
Figure 4: In vivo delivery of chemically modified sgRNAs and Cas9 mRNA induced knockout of targeted gene in the mouse liver.
Figure 5: GUIDE-seq genome-wide off-target analysis of nuclease activity for SpCas9 programmed with PCSK9-1 or PCSK-2 sgRNA expressed from a U6 promoter (plasmid), unmodified, end-modified (5′&3′) or e-sgRNA.

Accession codes

Primary accessions

BioProject

References

  1. Cox, D.B., Platt, R.J. & Zhang, F. Therapeutic genome editing: prospects and challenges. Nat. Med. 21, 121–131 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819–823 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Mali, P. et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823–826 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Doudna, J.A. & Charpentier, E. Genome editing. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science 346, 1258096 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Swiech, L. et al. In vivo interrogation of gene function in the mammalian brain using CRISPR-Cas9. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 102–106 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Long, C. et al. Postnatal genome editing partially restores dystrophin expression in a mouse model of muscular dystrophy. Science 351, 400–403 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nelson, C.E. et al. In vivo genome editing improves muscle function in a mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Science 351, 403–407 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tabebordbar, M. et al. In vivo gene editing in dystrophic mouse muscle and muscle stem cells. Science 351, 407–411 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schumann, K. et al. Generation of knock-in primary human T cells using Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 10437–10442 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Ran, F.A. et al. In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature 520, 186–191 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Yin, H. et al. Therapeutic genome editing by combined viral and non-viral delivery of CRISPR system components in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 328–333 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang, D. et al. Adenovirus-mediated somatic genome editing of Pten by CRISPR/Cas9 in mouse liver in spite of Cas9-specific immune responses. Hum. Gene Ther. 26, 432–442 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kay, M.A. State-of-the-art gene-based therapies: the road ahead. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 316–328 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chew, W.L. et al. A multifunctional AAV-CRISPR-Cas9 and its host response. Nat. Methods 13, 868–874 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Zuris, J.A. et al. Cationic lipid-mediated delivery of proteins enables efficient protein-based genome editing in vitro and in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 73–80 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang, M., Glass, Z.A. & Xu, Q. Non-viral delivery of genome-editing nucleases for gene therapy. Gene Ther. 24, 144–150 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Behlke, M.A. Chemical modification of siRNAs for in vivo use. Oligonucleotides 18, 305–320 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Deleavey, G.F. & Damha, M.J. Designing chemically modified oligonucleotides for targeted gene silencing. Chem. Biol. 19, 937–954 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yin, H. et al. Non-viral vectors for gene-based therapy. Nat. Rev. Genet. 15, 541–555 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chiu, Y.-L. & Rana, T.M. rere siRNA function in RNAi: a chemical modification analysis. RNA 9, 1034–1048 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Hendel, A. et al. Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR-Cas genome editing in human primary cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 985–989 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Rahdar, M. et al. Synthetic CRISPR RNA-Cas9-guided genome editing in human cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, E7110–E7117 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Gilbert, L.A. et al. CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell 154, 442–451 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Burnett, J.C., Rossi, J.J. & Tiemann, K. Current progress of siRNA/shRNA therapeutics in clinical trials. Biotechnol. J. 6, 1130–1146 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Nishimasu, H. et al. Crystal structure of Cas9 in complex with guide RNA and target DNA. Cell 156, 935–949 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Jiang, F., Zhou, K., Ma, L., Gressel, S. & Doudna, J.A. STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY. A Cas9-guide RNA complex preorganized for target DNA recognition. Science 348, 1477–1481 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Patra, A. et al. 2′-Fluoro RNA shows increased Watson-Crick H-bonding strength and stacking relative to RNA: evidence from NMR and thermodynamic data. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51, 11863–11866 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Howard, J.A.K., Hoy, V.J., O'Hagan, D. & Smith, G.T. How good is fluorine as a hydrogen bond acceptor? Tetrahedron 52, 12613–12622 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Dong, Y. et al. Lipopeptide nanoparticles for potent and selective siRNA delivery in rodents and nonhuman primates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3955–3960 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Platt, R.J. et al. CRISPR-Cas9 knockin mice for genome editing and cancer modeling. Cell 159, 440–455 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Navarese, E.P. et al. Effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 antibodies in adults with hypercholesterolemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 163, 40–51 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yin, H., Cheng, L., Agarwal, C., Agarwal, R. & Ju, C. Lactoferrin protects against concanavalin A-induced liver injury in mice. Liver Int. 30, 623–632 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Robbins, M. et al. 2′-O-methyl-modified RNAs act as TLR7 antagonists. Mol. Ther. 15, 1663–1669 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tsai, S.Q. et al. GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 187–197 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Fu, Y. et al. High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 822–826 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Zetsche, B. et al. Cpf1 is a single RNA-guided endonuclease of a class 2 CRISPR-Cas system. Cell 163, 759–771 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Si-Tayeb, K., Lemaigre, F.P. & Duncan, S.A. Organogenesis and development of the liver. Dev. Cell 18, 175–189 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Chen, H.Z. et al. Canonical and atypical E2Fs regulate the mammalian endocycle. Nat. Cell Biol. 14, 1192–1202 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Suzuki, K. et al. In vivo genome editing via CRISPR/Cas9 mediated homology-independent targeted integration. Nature 540, 144–149 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Dominguez, A.A., Lim, W.A. & Qi, L.S. Beyond editing: repurposing CRISPR-Cas9 for precision genome regulation and interrogation. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 17, 5–15 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Chen, D. et al. Rapid discovery of potent siRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles enabled by controlled microfluidic formulation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 6948–6951 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kauffman, K.J. et al. Optimization of lipid nanoparticle formulations for mRNA delivery in vivo with fractional factorial and definitive screening designs. Nano Lett. 15, 7300–7306 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bolukbasi, M.F. et al. DNA-binding-domain fusions enhance the targeting range and precision of Cas9. Nat. Methods 12, 1150–1156 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Brinkman, E.K., Chen, T., Amendola, M. & van Steensel, B. Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, e168 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Yin, H., Cheng, L., Langenbach, R. & Ju, C. Prostaglandin I(2) and E(2) mediate the protective effects of cyclooxygenase-2 in a mouse model of immune-mediated liver injury. Hepatology 45, 159–169 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Yin, H. et al. Lactoferrin protects against acetaminophen-induced liver injury in mice. Hepatology 51, 1007–1016 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhu, L.J. et al. GUIDEseq: a bioconductor package to analyze GUIDE-Seq datasets for CRISPR-Cas nucleases. BMC Genomics 18, 379 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank T. Jacks, P. Sharp, T. Tammela, Z. Weng, G. Gao, E. Sontheimer and A. Vegas for discussions and for sharing reagents, Y. Li and A. Park for technical assistance, and K. Cormier for histology. This work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), 5R00CA169512, DP2HL137167 and P01HL131471 (to W.X.). V.K. acknowledges support from the Russian Scientific Fund, Grant number 14-34-00017. H.Y. is supported by Skoltech Center and 5-U54-CA151884-04 (NIH). This work is supported in part by Cancer Center Support (core) grant P30-CA14051 from the NIH. We thank the Swanson Biotechnology Center for technical support.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Chun-Qing Song, Sneha Suresh and Qiongqiong Wu: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Hao Yin, Sneha Suresh, Qiongqiong Wu, Stephen Walsh, Luke Hyunsik Rhym, Kevin Kauffman, Alicia Oberholzer, Junmei Ding, Roman L Bogorad, Robert Langer & Daniel G Anderson

  2. RNA Therapeutics Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Chun-Qing Song, Haiwei Mou, Suet-Yan Kwan & Wen Xue

  3. Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Luke Hyunsik Rhym, Kevin Kauffman, Robert Langer & Daniel G Anderson

  4. Department of Molecular, Cell and Cancer Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Esther Mintzer, Mehmet Fatih Bolukbasi, Lihua Julie Zhu, Scot A Wolfe & Wen Xue

  5. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Mehmet Fatih Bolukbasi & Scot A Wolfe

  6. Program in Bioinformatics and Integrative Biology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Lihua Julie Zhu

  7. Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

    Lihua Julie Zhu & Wen Xue

  8. Center of Translational Biomedicine, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Skolkovo, Moscow, Russia

    Timofei Zatsepin & Victor Koteliansky

  9. Department of Chemistry, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

    Timofei Zatsepin

  10. Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences & Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Robert Langer & Daniel G Anderson

  11. Institute of Medical Engineering and Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Robert Langer & Daniel G Anderson

Authors
  1. Hao Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chun-Qing Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sneha Suresh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Qiongqiong Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stephen Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Luke Hyunsik Rhym
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Esther Mintzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mehmet Fatih Bolukbasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Lihua Julie Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kevin Kauffman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Haiwei Mou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Alicia Oberholzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Junmei Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Suet-Yan Kwan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Roman L Bogorad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Timofei Zatsepin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Victor Koteliansky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Scot A Wolfe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Wen Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Robert Langer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Daniel G Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

H.Y. conceived of and designed the study, and directed the project. H.Y., S.S., C.-Q.S., S.W., L.H.R., K.K., H.M., Q.W., E.M., M.F.B., L.J.Z., S.-Y.K., T.Z., S.A.W., A.O., J.D., R.L.B. and W.X. performed experiments and analyzed data. C.-Q.S. made the figures with H.Y. W.X., V.K. and R.L. provided conceptual advice. H.Y. wrote the manuscript with comments from all authors. D.G.A. supervised the project.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel G Anderson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

H.Y., D.G.A. and R.L. have applied for patents related to this study. D.G.A. is a scientific co-founder of CRISPR Therapeutics.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Determine the activities of chemically modified sgRNAs in cells.

HEK293 cells stably expressing both EF1α promoter-GFP and EFs promoter-spCas9 were incubated with a GFP targeting sgRNA with various chemical modifications or without modification (unmodified, as Native Strand). a) FACS analysis was performed after 6-7 days. Indels at GFP locus in total DNA from HEK293 cells were determined by b) T7EI assay and c) TIDE analysis. n = 4.

Supplementary Figure 2 Determine the activities of unmodified, 5'&3' modified and e-sgRNA in cells.

a) HEK293 cells expressing both GFP and spCas9 were incubated with various doses of unmodified, 5'&3' modified and e-sgRNA targeting GFP. TIDE analysis was performed to determine indels at GFP locus. b) HEK293 cells expressing GFP were incubated with Cas9 mRNA and e-sgRNA, or Cas9 protein/e-sgRNA Ribonucleoproteins (RNP). TIDE analysis was performed to determine indels at GFP locus. n = 4.

Supplementary Figure 3 In vivo delivery of chemical modified sgRNAs and Cas9 mRNA induced knockout of targeted gene.

C57BL/6 mice were i.v. injected with two e-sgRNAs targeting Pcsk9 (PCSK9-1 & 2) and Cas9 mRNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (Fig. 4). PCR was performed using two pairs of primers. The size of uncut and deletion bands (red pairs) is indicated. Both primer pairs show similar level of deletion band. Gel images were cropped. See full length gels with molecular weight standard in Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 4 Determine the genome editing efficiency in hepatocytes and hepatic nonparenchymal cells.

C57BL/6 female mice were injected with lipid nanoparticles encapsulated with two e-sgRNAs targeting Pcsk9 and Cas9 mRNA. Hepatocytes enriched population and hepatic nonparenchymal cells (NPC) were isolated from the liver. Indels at Pcsk9 locus in total DNA from the liver, hepatocytes enriched population and NPC were measured by T7EI assay. Red arrow indicates PCR fragment with deletion, and blue arrow indicates cleaved fragment. n = 3. Gel images were cropped. See full length gels with molecular weight standard in Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 5 Determine the activities of unmodified, 5'&3' modified and e-sgRNA in vivo.

C57BL/6 female mice were injected with lipid nanoparticles encapsulated with two unmodified, 5'&3'sgRNAs or e-sgRNAs targeting Pcsk9 and Cas9 mRNA. Indels at Pcsk9 locus in total DNA from the liver were measured by T7EI assay. Red arrow indicates PCR fragment with deletion, and blue arrow indicates cleaved fragment. n = 4 for native sgRNA and 5'&3' sgRNA groups, n=3 for e-sgRNA group. Gel images were cropped. See full length gels with molecular weight standard in Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 6 Determine the activities of unmodified sgRNA targeting Fah in FAHmut/mut mice.

a) The unmodified sgRNA targeting Fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (Fah) was formulated into LNP (nano.sgRNA) and co-injected with Cas9 mRNA encapsulated into LNP (nano.Cas9). FAHmut/mut mice were kept on NTBC water and euthanized 7 days after treatment to estimate indels rate. b) Indels of total DNA from liver by Illumina sequencing. n = 3.

Supplementary Figure 7 Determine the toxicity in mice after CRISPR treatment.

Mice were injected with lipid nanoparticles encapsulated with two e-sgRNAs targeting Pcsk9 and Cas9 mRNA. a) H&E staining of liver 5 days after injection. b) Body weight before and 10 days after injections. c-e) Serum biomarkers c) 5 days, d) 1 day and e) 18 days after injection. f) H&E staining of liver 1 days and 18 days after injection. g) Serum cytokines and chemokines 1 day after injection. n = 4. Scale bars are 200μm.

Supplementary Figure 8 Determine the activity of genome editing in lung and spleen of mice after CRISPR treatment.

C57BL/6 or FAHmut/mut mice were injected with lipid nanoparticles encapsulated with e-sgRNAs targeting Pcsk9, or Fah (for FAHmut/mut mice) or ROSA26 and Cas9 mRNA. Indels at a) Pcsk9, b) Fah and c) ROSA26 loci in total DNA from the lung and spleen were measured by T7EI assay. n = 3. Gel images were cropped. See full length gels with molecular weight standard in Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 9 Determine the indels at the Fah sgRNA's off-target site obtained from GUIDE-seq.

FAHmut/mut mice were injected with lipid nanoparticles encapsulated with e-sgRNA targeting Fah and Cas9 mRNA. Indels at off-target site 1 (OT1) concluded from GUIDE-seq were measured by T7EI assay. n = 4. Gel images were cropped. See full length gels with molecular weight standard in Supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 10 Full-length gels and blots with molecular weight standards for Supplementary Figures.

a) Full-length gels for Supplementary Figure 3; b-c) Full-length gels for Supplementary Figures 4 and 5; d-f) Full-length gels for Supplementary Figure 8; g) Full-length gels for Supplementary Figure 9

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yin, H., Song, CQ., Suresh, S. et al. Structure-guided chemical modification of guide RNA enables potent non-viral in vivo genome editing. Nat Biotechnol 35, 1179–1187 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4005

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4005

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research