EN
Back to the archive

The archive · Product Ideas · Technical decision · 2017

Broad's base editing rewrites a single DNA letter — the pencil to CRISPR's scissors

Base editing chemically swaps one DNA base for another in living cells, fixing disease point mutations without the double-strand breaks CRISPR makes.

Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard

The ideaDock CRISPR at one letter, then chemically rearrange the base — turn an A-T pair into G-C — so the mutation is rewritten without breaking either DNA strand.transformative

What it had to solve

CRISPR-Cas9 is a molecular scalpel: excellent at inserting or deleting whole genes, but it works by breaking both DNA strands. That is overkill for a point mutation, a single swapped, deleted or inserted letter — and point mutations make up 32,000 of the 50,000 changes in the human genome known to be associated with disease.

How it works

CRISPR-Cas9 had been described as a molecular scalpel for editing or deleting whole genes, and it does that by breaking both strands of DNA. But a large share of human disease is written in much smaller errors: point mutations, where one chemical base among the genome's six billion letters is swapped, deleted or inserted. Such single-letter changes account for 32,000 of the 50,000 changes in the human genome known to be associated with diseases.

On October 25, 2017, two teams from the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard published a more precise alternative called base editing. David Liu, a Harvard chemistry professor, modified CRISPR so it targeted just one base and chemically rearranged the atoms of an adenine so it read like a guanine; the cell then fixed the opposite strand to complete the change, turning an A-T pair into a G-C one. 'If CRISPR is akin to a pair of scissors, base editing is more like a pencil,' Liu said.

In cells taken from patients, Liu's team used the tool to correct the mutation behind hereditary hemochromatosis, a disorder that makes the body absorb too much iron, and to induce a mutation that suppresses sickle-cell anemia. In both studies they detected virtually no off-target effects — the unwanted insertions and deletions that worry researchers about conventional Cas9 editing. A parallel Science paper from Feng Zhang's group used a similar method to target individual letters in RNA, whose natural degradation makes the edit temporary rather than permanent.

Base editing was framed not as a replacement for CRISPR but as another option for a different job: fixing a single word instead of replacing the whole paragraph, as one Berkeley researcher put it. The A-to-G change alone could address about half of the 32,000 known disease-causing point mutations, and Liu's lab was already exploring blood disorders, neurological disorders, hereditary deafness and hereditary blindness as targets.

Why it lands

  • Point mutations outnumber structural edits — 32,000 of 50,000 disease-linked changes — so a method aimed at a single base covers most of the problem space without brute-force cuts.
  • Avoiding double-strand breaks removes the insertions, deletions and rearrangements that make blunt genome editing risky for therapeutic use.
  • Rearranging one base and letting the cell finish the swap harnesses the cell's own repair machinery instead of imposing an edit from outside.
  • Building both DNA and RNA versions gave one idea two lifetimes: a permanent fix in the genome and a temporary correction that naturally disappears.

What it did

The two studies, published October 25, 2017 in Nature and Science, reported precise single-letter edits with almost no off-target effects. The A-to-G editor alone could address about half of the 32,000 known point mutations that cause disease; Liu's lab was already exploring applications in blood disorders, neurological disorders, hereditary deafness and hereditary blindness. The MIT Technology Review report drew a 190-point Hacker News discussion the next day.

Write-upMIT Technology Review: CRISPR 2.0 Is Here

What you can take

Match the tool to the size of the defect: for a one-letter mutation, rearrange the base in place instead of cutting and replacing — precision came from doing less, not more.

Since then

The October 2017 Nature and Science papers positioned base editing as the answer to Cas9's bluntness for the most common class of disease mutation — a complement to conventional gene editing, not a replacement. Liu's lab was already exploring blood disorders, neurological disease, hereditary deafness and hereditary blindness, and weeks earlier Chinese researchers had used a similar editor in a human embryo to remove an anemia-causing mutation, as the Technology Review report noted. Coverage drew a 65-comment Hacker News thread the next day.

Sources

spotted an error? The archive wants to know.

Your turn

You just read one. Describe the brief you are staring at, and see who has been given the same problem.

Free account · 3 free questions · no card

Related cases