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.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Response to “Unexpected mutations after CRISPR–Cas9 editing in vivo”

Nature Methods volume 15, pages 235–236 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

To the Editor:

We challenge the assertion of Schaefer et al.1 that Cas9 RNA-guided nuclease (RGN) genome editing results in widespread off-target mutagenesis, and question the authors' interpretation that Cas9 RGN possesses sequence-independent base-editing or indel-generating activity. We contend that the experimental design in Schaefer et al. was so significantly flawed that the conclusions presented are not supported by the data.

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

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

References

  1. Schaefer, K.A. et al. Nat. Methods 14, 547–548 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jiang, F. & Doudna, J.A. Annu. Rev. Biophys. 46, 505–529 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Li, D. et al. Nat. Biotech. 31, 681–683 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hwang, W.Y. et al. PLoS ONE 8, e68708 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Uchimura, A. et al. Genome Res. 25, 1125–1134 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mianne, J. et al. Genome Med. 8, 16 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Iyer, V. et al. Nat. Methods 12, 479 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Nakajima, K. et al. Sci. Rep. 6, 34703 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Anonymous. Nat. Methods 14, 541 (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are funded to produce mouse models using Cas9 as part of the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium from Genome Canada and Ontario Genomics OGI-051 (L.M.J.N.), the National Human Genome Research Institute, the NIH Common Fund, through the Office of Strategic Coordination/Office of the NIH Director, National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute of Drug Abuse and the Office of Research on Women's Health awards UM1HG006348 (J.D.H., J.R.S., L.T., S.D.M.B.), UM1OD023321 (L.M.J.N., K.C.L.) and UM1OD023222 (S.D.M.) and MRC IMPC Strategic Award 53658 (L.T., S.D.M.B.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. chairs of the IMPC Cas9 Working Group and the IMPC Steering Committee and executive director of the IMPC (),

    Lauryl M J Nutter, Steve D M Brown & Mark Moore

  2. The Centre for Phenogenomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

    Lauryl M J Nutter

  3. Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

    Jason D Heaney & John R Seavitt

  4. Mouse Biology Program, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, USA

    K C Kent Lloyd

  5. The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, Maine, USA

    Stephen A Murray

  6. The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA

    William C Skarnes

  7. Mammalian Genetics Unit, Medical Research Center (MRC) Harwell Institute, Harwell, UK

    Lydia Teboul

  8. Mammalian Genetics Unit, Medical Research Center (MRC) Harwell Institute, Harwell, UK

    Steve D M Brown

Authors
  1. Lauryl M J Nutter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jason D Heaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K C Kent Lloyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephen A Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John R Seavitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. William C Skarnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lydia Teboul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Steve D M Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mark Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lauryl M J Nutter.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nutter, L., Heaney, J., Lloyd, K. et al. Response to “Unexpected mutations after CRISPR–Cas9 editing in vivo”. Nat Methods 15, 235–236 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4559

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4559

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