==== Front J Biomed Sci J Biomed Sci Journal of Biomedical Science 1021-7770 1423-0127 BioMed Central London 37393268 943 10.1186/s12929-023-00943-1 Review Enrichment strategies to enhance genome editing Mikkelsen Nanna S. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7383-0297 Bak Rasmus O. bak@biomed.au.dk grid.7048.b 0000 0001 1956 2722 Department of Biomedicine, Aarhus University, Høegh-Guldbergsgade 10, Bldg. 1115, 8000 Aarhus C., Denmark 1 7 2023 1 7 2023 2023 30 516 5 2023 26 6 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Genome editing technologies hold great promise for numerous applications including the understanding of cellular and disease mechanisms and the development of gene and cellular therapies. Achieving high editing frequencies is critical to these research areas and to achieve the overall goal of being able to manipulate any target with any desired genetic outcome. However, gene editing technologies sometimes suffer from low editing efficiencies due to several challenges. This is often the case for emerging gene editing technologies, which require assistance for translation into broader applications. Enrichment strategies can support this goal by selecting gene edited cells from non-edited cells. In this review, we elucidate the different enrichment strategies, their many applications in non-clinical and clinical settings, and the remaining need for novel strategies to further improve genome research and gene and cellular therapy studies. Keywords CRISPR/Cas Enrichment Selection Reporter Integration INDELs HDR NHEJ FACS MACS Surrogate reporter Genetically modified cells Genome editing Co-editing http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007324 Sundhedsstyrelsen 4-1612-391/1 Bak Rasmus O. HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council, ERC starting grant101041231 Bak Rasmus O. HORIZON EUROPE Research and Innovation Actions101057438 Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003554 Lundbeckfonden R238-2016-3349 Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004836 Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond 0134-00113B 0242-00009B 9144-00001B Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002739 Aarhus Universitets Forskningsfond 609033 Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100009708 Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF19OC0058238 NNF17OC0028894 Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012774 Innovationsfonden 8056-00010B Bak Rasmus O. http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002808 Carlsbergfondet CF20-0424 CF17-0129 Bak Rasmus O. Slagtermester Max Wørzner og Hustru Inger Wørzners Mindelegathttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100020035 Den A. P. Møllerske Støttefond http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100006309 Riisfort Fonden http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100009512 Agnes og Poul Friis Fond Genome Engineer Innovation Grant, Synthegoissue-copyright-statement© National Science Council of the Republic of China (Taiwan) 2023 ==== Body pmcIntroduction The development and widespread use of gene editing technologies such as zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), Meganucleases, and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated (Cas) systems and derivatives hereof have provided great opportunities for site-specific genome editing [1, 2]. Especially the simplicity of the CRISPR/Cas system has made it the preferred choice for genome editing. The RNA-guided type II CRISPR/Cas system consists of a Cas9 nuclease, which is guided to a specific target site by a chimeric single guide RNA (sgRNA) [1]. Site-specific genome editing is achieved by introducing a nuclease-induced double-strand break (DSB) to the DNA and relying on the endogenous cellular repair mechanisms to alter the genome [3]. The most prevalent repair mechanism is the error-prone non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), which is active throughout the cell cycle by direct ligation of DNA ends, often resulting in small insertions or deletions (INDELs) at the site of the break due to end-processing during repair [4]. If a DSB lies between two homologous repeat sequences in the same direction, the single-strand annealing (SSA) pathway can anneal these sequences and mediate deletion of one repeat and the intervening sequence to seal the DSB [5]. In contrast, homology-directed repair (HDR) uses an exogenous DNA template for targeted integration of transgenes facilitated by homology arms identical to the DSB flanking sequence [6]. The bottlenecks of genome editing Despite the great potential of gene editing technologies, not all exhibit high activity and efficiency. Gene editing efficiency can vary widely between genomic target loci and among cell types. Particularly, integration of transgenes into the genome relying on HDR-mediated integration (“knock in”) is an inefficient process suffering from low editing rates compared to gene disruptions mediated by NHEJ (“knock out”). HDR-mediated site-specific integration can in some scenarios be achieved with high efficiency in cell types and loci particularly permissive to gene editing [7], but is generally restricted to < 30% of cells obtaining a targeted integration in most cases [8–10]. Furthermore, HDR activity is largely restricted to the S and G2 mitotic phases of the cell cycle, where homologous sister chromatids are present for natural DNA repair. Therefore, HDR can display limited efficiency in quiescent or slowly cycling cells [11]. Depending on the desired edit and target locus, numerous factors and challenges can impair genome modification efficiencies, some of which include: (1) inefficient delivery of the gene editing system [12, 13], (2) toxicity caused by delivery modality and exposure to gene editing components [14–16], (3) restriction to a narrow target sequence window with inefficient nuclease target sites, which could be caused by complex target sequences with repetitive elements, unusual GC content, or a dense chromatin state [17, 18], and (4) quiescent cells without an active endogenous repair machinery [11, 19]. Consequently, suboptimal gene editing efficiencies may hamper the use of gene editing technologies for some applications [1, 20]. More recent genome editing technologies like base editing [21, 22] and prime editing [23] do not rely on the formation of a DSB, and are thus not restricted by inactive endogenous repair machinery. However, other challenges for these technologies persist. Base editing has recently shown great editing efficiencies and a potential for treating various monogenic diseases [24, 25]. Unfortunately, base editing is limited to point mutations only, and the purity of the editing outcome with base editors is a concern when there is more than one target base in the editing window, thereby limiting the potential of base editors [26, 27]. Reducing the size of the editing window with newer base editors to increase specificity might in turn reduce editing efficiency and limit the genomic sites that can be targeted because of PAM constraints. Instead, enrichment of base edited cells may be an alternative to improve editing efficiencies. Prime editing exhibits a high rate of precise editing to unwanted INDEL formation [28]. However, prime editing efficiencies can be very low, suffer from impure edits, is restricted to small edits, and often requires extensive optimization [20, 28, 29]. Any approach that can substantially increase editing outcomes is critical for its forthcoming use. Other gene editing technologies for the integration of larger DNA sequences into the genome without reliance on endogenous repair pathways have emerged. These include CRISPR-associated transposon (CAST) systems, which are transposons that have co-opted Cas proteins for precise RNA-guided DNA insertion. CAST-mediated editing has been demonstrated in prokaryotes [30–33] and recently in mammalian cells albeit with very low integration efficiencies (< 0.1%) [34], which can be increased with enrichment [35]. Similarly, Cas nucleases combined with site-specific recombinases have enabled integration of larger DNA segments into human cellular genomes. The platform termed Programmable Addition via Site-specific Targeting Elements (PASTE) facilitated multiplexed insertions of large DNA cargo at multiple genomic loci in both human cell lines, primary human T cells, and non-dividing primary human hepatocytes with high precision. [36] Another approach based on a twin prime editing strategy (TwinPE) yielded 9% efficiency of correcting a large sequence inversion associated with Hunter syndrome in human cells [37]. Despite great potential of these novel DSB-free gene editing technologies, further improvements are required to generalize these genome editing modalities and achieve robust editing across all desired target sites. Figure 1A summarizes some of the bottlenecks affecting genome editing efficiencies including cell type, cell and gene state, and the selected genome editing tool.Fig. 1 Enrichment rationale and applications. A Different conditions and choice of gene editing technology influence gene editing efficiencies. These are ordered based on their approximate impact on genome editing efficiency, but can be subject to high variability. B Applications for enrichment of gene edited cells include engineering of cell and animal models, engineering and isolation of single cell clones, editing of hard-to-edit cell types, making new gene editing tools more applicable, and facilitating the use of gene editing in gene and cellular therapies Improving gene editing efficiencies Various strategies have been developed to improve the yield and accuracy of correctly edited cells. These include approaches to improve activity and/or specificity by engineered Cas enzymes [38–44], sgRNA design optimizations [45, 46], improved design and delivery of the nuclease and HDR templates [7, 47, 48], manipulation of repair pathways to adjust NHEJ:HDR ratio [49, 50], cell cycle control [19, 51–53], retargeting undesired INDELs by recursive editing for a subsequent opportunity to perform the desired HDR-mediated integration [54], introducing non-cleavable Cas9 target sequences (CTSs) in the HDR template to facilitate Cas9-mediated nuclear import of the template [55], or recruitment of the HDR template to the target site by direct fusion to the nuclease [56]. Several strategies have been investigated, which are reviewed extensively elsewhere [20]. Selection of gene edited cells A different overall strategy to improve the frequency of gene edited cells in a population aims to select edited cells from unedited cells. There are various means to do this based on negative or positive selection and using physical or biological separation methods. Some approaches may enable close to 100% selection efficiency while others merely enable a small enrichment. Enrichment may find various uses within basic biological studies as well as in clinical applications. CRISPR/Cas has democratized the generation of genetically engineered cell lines for studies of genotype–phenotype relationships, but generating a clonal cell line with the desired genotype may require labor-intensive screening of hundreds of clones to identify a correct one. Enrichment may facilitate the direct identification and isolation of very infrequent genotypes in a population or at least vastly increase the likelihood of identifying a correct clone, thereby reducing the labor intensity [57, 58]. Enrichment strategies can also prove valuable in a clinical setting. For some applications, large inter-patient variability in gene editing efficiency can be a limiting factor. Enrichment of correctly gene edited cells for therapies could reduce this issue and potentially assure a product for all patients. In other cases, gene editing efficiencies are not high enough to provide a therapeutic effect. One example is hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) therapies where edited and unedited cells compete during engraftment and hematopoiesis. For some therapies like x-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (X-SCID), there is a large survival benefit during lymphopoiesis for correctly edited cells, which means that a very small fraction of edited HSC is believed to suffice to provide a therapeutic benefit. For other hematopoietic disorders like chronic granulomatous disease (CGD), such enhanced survival advantage does not exist, and low editing rates would not provide a therapeutic effect [59]. New treatment modalities for Cystic Fibrosis also investigate genome editing strategies. Previous studies have shown that the presence of 10–25% CFTR-expressing cells is sufficient to restore CFTR function [60, 61]. Implementing enrichment of CRISPR/Cas edited cells increased the frequency of CFTR edited cells from 15 to 80%, thereby greatly exceeding the desired minimum editing level [60]. Cellular immunotherapies have revolutionized treatment of especially difficult-to-treat CD19 + hematological malignancies, and anti-CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cell therapies are commercially available from several companies. Here, the patient’s own T cells are engineered to express the CAR using lentiviral vectors, and notably, the inter-trial and inter-patient variabilities are significant regarding CAR expressing cells. Different clinical trials have reported 5 to > 90% of T cells expressing the CAR following manufacturing [62–66], and with a desired release criteria of > 10–20% CAR T cells, improvements are necessary [67, 68]. This might prove particularly important when using CRISPR/Cas approaches to insert the CAR gene as efficiencies may be inferior to lentiviral delivery. The possibility to enrich engineered CAR T cells before infusion into patients might generate more successful CAR T cell therapies and potentially facilitate the transition into allogeneic cell products [69]. Furthermore, for such kind of cell therapy with in vitro expansion of the engineered cells, there might be a benefit in manufacturing costs since undesired therapeutically irrelevant cells are not included during the expansion process. Strategies to enrich gene edited cells would facilitate the further use of programmable nucleases for many applications including engineering of cell and animal models, engineering and isolation of single cell clones, engineering hard-to-edit cell types, making new gene editing tools more applicable, and facilitate the use of gene editing in gene and cellular therapies (Fig. 1B). In this review we describe different enrichment strategies developed for the selection and isolation of gene modified cells from unmodified cells. Enrichment of transfection- or transduction-positive cells The first hurdle to overcome for genome editing is the delivery of the genome editing system into cells. A simple obvious approach is to enrich for cells that have efficiently taken up the genome editing system. This can be done for example through linkage with a selectable reporter such as fluorescent, antibiotic, or antigenic reporters, which allows for selection of cells efficiently transfected with the genome editing system. Introducing a reporter can be achieved by simple co-transfection of the reporter only allowing for enrichment of transfection-competent cells or by coupling the selectable reporter to the sgRNA or the nuclease for example via a self-cleaving 2A sequence (T2A) allowing for enrichment of nuclease- or sgRNA- expressing cells (Fig. 2A) [70–81].Fig. 2 Different enrichment strategies. A Enrichment of transfection-positive cells with selectable reporter genes. B Enrichment of nuclease-active cells using surrogate reporters based on NHEJ-, SSA-, or HDR-mediated restoration of a reporter gene. C Enrichment by co-targeting. D Co-integration of a selectable reporter gene to enrich for HDR-mediated transgene integration events. The reporter gene can subsequently stay permanently in the genome, be excised, or become silent due to induced, transient reporter expression. Constructs are not to scale. GOI (gene of interest) This strategy proved especially valuable for multiplexed gene editing in primary CD34 + HSPCs. Here lentiviral sgRNA vectors containing fluorescent markers allowed for traceable and selectable multiplexed editing. Robust double knock outs of cell surface molecules CD45 and CD44 with an efficiency of ~ 70% was achieved in HSPCs. Multiplexed knockouts were also demonstrated for STAG1 and STAG2 genes as well as for the AHR and LSD1 or RCOR1 genes resulting in marked CD34+ HSPC expansion [82]. Enrichment of nuclease-active cells using exogenous surrogate reporters Another way of not only selecting for transfected cells, but also nuclease-active cells involves the use of surrogate reporters that report on NHEJ [83–88], SSA [84, 85, 89–92], or HDR activity [83, 84, 90, 92, 93]. The use of surrogate reporter systems to enrich for genome edited cells is based on the premise that engineered nucleases able to edit the co-delivered surrogate reporter have a higher probability of also editing the genomic target site, since cells proficient for genome editing at one locus are more likely to be proficient for editing at another locus, called co-targeting or co-selection [94, 95]. These surrogate reporter systems show improved enrichment of gene edited cells compared to simple selection of transfection-positive cells [96, 97]. Various exogenous surrogate reporters based on NHEJ-, SSA-, or HDR-mediated editing by engineered nucleases have been developed for the enrichment of genome editing events. An overview of the three surrogate reporter types are presented in Fig. 2B. NHEJ-based exogenous surrogate reporters NHEJ-based exogenous surrogate reporters for enrichment of gene edited cells are based on a nuclease target sequence inserted to shift the reading frame of a selectable reporter gene. Only new INDEL events can restore the reading frame and the expression of the selectable reporter. Kim et al. were the first to develop an NHEJ-based surrogate reporter system with a frameshifted GFP reporter to enrich for gene edited cells demonstrating up to 39-fold enrichment of INDELs (from 0.62 to 24%) in the TP53 gene in the sorted GFP + cell population versus the unsorted population [98]. Enrichment of gene edited cells was also achieved using similar surrogate reporter systems relying on enrichment by magnetic selection of a truncated mouse MHC class I molecule (H2-kk) antigen or antibiotic selection using a hygromycin resistance gene (hygroR) as selectable frame-shifted genes [99]. Even though high numbers of reporter-positive cells can be observed with this strategy, perhaps due to excess reporter plasmids in the cells [97], NHEJ-mediated INDEL formation occurs with an uncontrollable outcome, which means that on average only 1/3 of the surrogate reporters would generate an in-frame selection gene. Additional changes have been implemented to increase the sensitivity of the reporter to 2/3 by including two different out-of-frame reporter genes (3n + 1 and 3n + 2). The new NHEJ-based surrogate reporter system was also developed to enrich for CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing events by both FACS, immunomagnetic selection, and antibiotic selection. Up to 11-fold enrichment (from 2.8 to 31%) of nuclease-induced mutations at the target site was observed compared to the unselected cell population [96]. Similar enrichment efficiencies have been achieved in other studies using this and similar surrogate reporters. [100–103]. Despite the ease of using surrogate reporters, a new reporter needs to be cloned for each nuclease target site to be edited, since the most efficient enrichment is achieved if the nuclease targets the same sequence as the genomic sequence. To solve this issue, NHEJ-based surrogate reporters have been developed with the target sequence flanked by restriction sites allowing for easy exchange of the target sequence [97]. More advanced approaches have also been developed that include 17 target sites in a row generating a single reporter able to enrich for edits at any of the 17 target sites [104]. However, this strategy increases the challenge of arranging all target sites so that a premature stop codon does not occur in the reporter, which would otherwise compromise the functionality of the reporter as it is required to be able to be turned on upon the right frameshifting INDELs. Nonetheless, this surrogate reporter achieved enrichment so 80% of reporter-positive cells contained the desired edit compared to < 10% in the reporter negative population [104]. SSA-based exogenous surrogate reporters Unlike the NHEJ-based surrogate reporter systems, avoidance of in-frame premature stop codons at the target sequence is not required for the SSA-based surrogate reporter system, thus simplifying its in silico design and broadening its applications. Instead, the selection reporter is disrupted by a nuclease target site flanked by direct repeats (DRs), which allows for restoration of the reporter upon SSA-mediated intramolecular repair of the DSB introduced at the nuclease target site by deleting one of the DRs along the region in between. Several SSA-based surrogate reporter systems have been described using both fluorescence [91, 103] and antibiotic resistance [103, 105], achieving increased INDEL rates from 8.7 to 97.9% in the reporter positive population [91]. A dual surrogate reporter system containing two different reporter cassettes was designed to also act as repair template for HDR, thereby potentially allowing enrichment of both INDELs and integration events. One reporter cassette can function as surrogate reporter for nuclease-activity and enrichment and the second reporter for knock-in and screening of biallelically targeted cells based on dual antibiotic selection yielding 6.7-fold enrichment (from 2.70 to 18.18%) of biallelic integrations compared to the use of only one reporter [8]. Comparison of NHEJ- and SSA-based surrogate reporter systems in one study revealed superior enrichment when utilizing an SSA-based surrogate reporter system achieving up to 34.8-fold enrichment (from 2.1 to 72.7%) of INDELs compared to non-selected cells with an optimal DR length of 200 bp [103]. However, one study has demonstrated the opposite, that the NHEJ-based reporter is most efficient [106]. HDR-based exogenous surrogate reporters HDR-based exogenous surrogate reporters enrich for cells that have both nuclease activity and an active HDR machinery, thereby potentially enriching for integration events. Different HDR-based surrogate reporter systems have been described, but all rely on restoration of a reporter gene by HDR-mediated repair of a DSB [107–110]. One system contains a truncated N-terminal part of a reporter gene (puromycin resistance (PuroR) or eGFP) followed by the nuclease target site and next a full length reporter gene with a stop codon instead of a start codon. Upon nuclease-induced DSB formation at the nuclease target site, the full-length reporter can be repaired by recombination with the N-terminal homologous part, thereby replacing the stop codon with a start codon and mediating reporter expression [107]. Similarly, disrupting the reporter by a nuclease expression cassette flanked by nuclease target sites mediated restoration of the reporter gene and simultaneous self-inactivation upon removal of the nuclease expression cassette to restore the reporter gene by HDR [108]. Another system restores a truncated puromycin resistance gene by intra-molecular HDR using a “universal” sgRNA target site not present in the human genome for introducing the DSB in the surrogate reporter. This identifies cells with HDR activity and a potential simultaneous integration in the genome if another sgRNA and matching HDR template was supplied. HDR-mediated editing of precise point mutations was increased up to 20.7-fold (from 2.22 to 45.93%) and HDR-mediated integration of an eGFP gene was enriched up to 8.9-fold (from 1.34 to 11.93%) with only 50 bp homology arms [109]. Most surrogate reporters enrich for both transfection-positive cells and nuclease-active cells if an additional reporter is included for assessing transfection efficiency (dual surrogate reporters). NHEJ and SSA-based reporters are best at enriching for knock out events, but all reporters can also be used to enrich for HDR events, since they enrich for nuclease activity [97]. However, these strategies are not able to directly enrich for specific editing events since they are only able to enrich for nuclease activity. The biggest advantage of these episomal surrogate reporters is that they are transiently transfected and do not intentionally alter the genome, thereby constituting a scarless enrichment strategy. On the other hand, relying on plasmid surrogate reporters can potentially be a limitation since random integration of plasmid DNA into the genome can occur [111]. Furthermore, the introduction of a DSB both in the episomal reporter and in a genomic locus of interest, increases the risk of interference between the two sites and integration of the episomal reporter into the genomic locus. Absence of such unintended outcomes related to this enrichment strategy should be verified especially for clinically relevant applications. Another potential issue with surrogate reporters is an overestimation of editing efficiencies if relying on reporter expression for example to screen sgRNA efficiencies due to differences in chromatin state at the genomic loci versus the targeting site in the reporter [112]. Enrichment of nuclease-active cells using endogenous reporters The premise of co-targeting is also the foundation of another group of enrichment strategies. Contrary to the use of exogenous surrogate reporters, these strategies rely on inconsequential mutations made to endogenous genes to create a selectable phenotype (for example drug resistance). Hence, enrichment of cells is facilitated through a modification at a second unrelated endogenous locus (Fig. 2C). Avoiding the use of exogenous surrogate reporters makes this category of enrichment strategies more compatible with therapeutic applications, depending on the selection edit made to the genome, since no exogenous reporter DNA is introduced into the cells [113]. This co-targeting strategy was originally described in C. elegans [114, 115] and later applied to mammalian cells as well. Moriarity et al. used this strategy to co-target the HPRT gene in CD34+ HSPCs. Cells lacking endogenous HPRT expression become resistant to the cytotoxic drug 6-thioguanine (6-TG) thereby allowing for enrichment of cells with a simultaneous knock out of either the CCR5 or ARTEMIS gene by NHEJ. Up to 64.1% of the 6-TG resistant HSPCs presented were co-edited at the desired target site. [116] Another study applied the same co-targeting strategy and achieved enrichment of NHEJ-mediated AAVS1 editing events to over 80% with co-targeting [117]. However, since HPRT is X-linked, 6-TG resistant cells arise from modification of only a single active allele, which may not provide an adequate selection pressure if biallelic co-targeting knockouts are desired [116, 118].Another endogenous co-targeting strategy for enrichment of NHEJ or HDR modifications at a second locus utilizes mutations in the Na+ /K+ ATPase gene ATP1A1 that renders cells resistant to the inhibitor Ouabain (a cardiac glycoside). The authors achieved successful enrichment for CRISPR-induced INDELs and HDR events in both cell lines and in CD34+ HSPCs [113]. This strategy was further developed for induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). Here they improved INDEL rates, whereas HDR rates were improved only at some loci, which could be attributed to differences in chromatin accessibility [119]. Other selectable targets for co-targeted enrichment of human primary cells include disruption of the SLC35F2 gene making hPSCs insensitive to the anti-cancer drug YM155 [100], disruption of the HBEGF gene encoding the receptor for Diphtheria Toxin (DT) making iPSCs and primary human T cells insensitive to DT, which improved INDEL formation up to 14-fold (from ~ 5 to ~ 70%) and HDR-mediated integration at a second locus more than 35-fold (from ~ 0.2 to 6%) [120], disruption of the B2M gene followed by negative selection by for example FACS [118], or disruption of a pre-introduced temperature-sensitive (ts) mutation in the essential TAF1 gene in cell lines rendering only edited cells temperature-resistant [121]. In a few cases a co-targeting-based enrichment strategy has been based on integration of a selection cassette at one genomic locus by HDR, thereby also enriching for HDR-mediated integration of another repair template at another independent locus. This has achieved up to 50-fold increased integration frequency at a second locus [122, 123]. These endogenous co-targeting strategies are in most cases more therapeutically applicable since no exogenous material is required to be introduced to the target cell population and the strategy might thereby be more suitable for use in primary cells. However, introducing two simultaneous DSBs to the genome can cause chromosomal translocations which is a primary driver of many cancers [124, 125]. Additionally, modifying an endogenous gene to create a selectable phenotype can also be problematic in some cases if it alters an essential or required gene function. Assuring that all desired target cells express the endogenous selection gene and checking for random escape from the selectable mutation should also be considered to confirm the enrichment potential of the strategy. Enrichment following reporter integration A straightforward strategy to directly enrich for a specific genomic modification is to introduce a selectable reporter gene into the target locus possibly along a desired gene or cDNA to be integrated. This strategy has been applied in different variations. An overview can be seen in Fig. 2D. Reporter integration with permanent expression Several studies have integrated reporter genes at specific genomic loci to track genome modification outcomes or to track endogenous genes and protein activity, localization, and dynamics [126–134]. This approach can be used for targeted disruption of a gene by integration of a reporter gene into the open reading frame of the target gene. The reporter gene enables direct tracking of cells with the disrupted target gene. It also enables enrichment for the integration of a target gene’s cDNA by utilizing a reporter tagged to this cDNA. Some reporter genes derived from endogenous genes can be clinically relevant since no foreign protein is introduced into cells. Especially, truncated signaling-inert membrane proteins, including tNGFR (truncated nerve growth factor receptor) and tEGFR (truncated epidermal growth factor receptor), have been used as reporters in clinical trials and shown to be safe [135–138]. However, constitutive overexpression and enrichment of a reporter like tEGFR in HSPCs would preclude patients from receiving anti-EGFR antibodies (e.g. cetuximab) for cancer treatment should the need arise. Thus, considering future clinical implications and choosing suitable reporter genes is important. Another way to circumvent this challenge could be to utilize an enrichment strategy relying on transiently expressed reporter genes, thereby allowing treatment with anti-reporter antibodies when expression of the reporter gene is silenced [139]. Integration of two different reporter genes at the HBB locus in HSPCs constituted a strategy for enrichment of cells with a biallelic targeted integration in more than 85% of cells. Furthermore, integrating an HBB cDNA correcting the sickle cell disease mutation followed by a clinically relevant EF1a-tNGFR cassette for enrichment of anti-sickling HSPCs, confirmed the potential to enrich functionally corrected HSPCs which expressed mRNA from the integrated anti-sickling cDNA driven by the endogenous promoter [140–142]. Similar results were obtained from HDR-mediated integrations at other loci where 99%, 92%, and 100% of reporter-positive HSPCs had at least monoallelic targeted integration at CCR5, IL2RG, and RUNX1 respectively [143]. Integrating various cDNAs from genes of interest fused to a fluorescent reporter through an internal ribosome entry site (IRES) has also been demonstrated to be greatly enriched upon selection based on the reporter expression [144]. Also, including an additional reporter gene in the HDR template outside the homology arms further allows for exclusion of cells with random integration events and cells with only episomal HDR template expression by negative selection [145]. Vaidyanathan et al. developed a gene-corrected airway stem cell therapy against Cystic Fibrosis (CF) by targeted replacement of full-length CFTR and enrichment by co-integration of a tCD19 reporter. Enrichment of modified cells by immunomagnetic selection obtained 60–80% tCD19 + upper airway basal stem cells (UABCs) and human bronchial epithelial cells (HBECs) from 11 different CF donors. Integration of the full-length CFTR cDNA and tCD19 enrichment cassette was confirmed into at least one allele per tCD19+ cell and the corrected airway basal stem cells were able to differentiate to produce epithelial sheets with restored CFTR-mediated chloride transport at an average of 70–80% of the levels seen for non-CF controls [60]. So far, the most promising cellular therapies include chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies, which are rapidly emerging as very promising cellular therapies especially for use as cancer immunotherapies, and site-specific gene editing technologies like the CRISPR/Cas system are increasingly used for next-generation engineering and production of CAR T cells [146]. A certain level of site-specific CAR integration is required to meet clinical release criteria to assure proficiency. Therefore, enrichment strategies have also been applied to specifically enrich for the engineering of CAR T cells. Integration of a multi-epitope molecule harboring a CD34 epitope and two CD20 mimotopes (RQR8) along a CD19-targeting CAR into the CD52 locus resulted in 60% of genome-edited T cells being CAR+ /CD20+ /CD34+ /CD52-, which could be increased to > 95% after CD34-based positive selection. A dual functionality of the RQR8 as both a selectable reporter and as a suicide switch sensitive to rituximab (anti-CD20) further advances this type of enrichment strategy for use in CAR T cell engineering [147]. Reporter genes such as tEGFR has also been coupled to CD19-targeting CARs for enrichment of CAR T cells [148]. A more refined approach may be to incorporate a selectable gene fragment within the CAR coding sequence itself. Strep-tag II and NGFR sequences have been introduced within the CAR N-terminus, enabling enrichment of CAR T cells to > 90% purity [69, 148]. Abrogating the need for a reporter gene has also been demonstrated by choosing essential genes as integration sites [149]. Here, the reading frame of the essential gene from the location of the target site to the stop codon is included in the repair template to restore the reading frame of the essential gene upon integration. This partial cDNA is followed by the desired transgene to be expressed, and only cells with restored expression of the target gene survives the editing process. Targeting the GAPDH locus achieved > 90% transgene integration efficiency into the GAPDH locus in primary cells. Furthermore, this strategy also reduces undesired INDELs and incorrect integrations since precise HDR is required for survival of edited cells [149]. Integration of an excisable reporter Permanent expression of a selectable reporter gene integrated along a gene of interest to enrich for gene edited cells may interfere with neighboring genes, may be immunogenic, or perturb cell function and homeostasis, which can be especially troublesome in a therapeutic context. To solve this issue, a common strategy is to first integrate a GOI and reporter gene for positive selection of cells with an integration, then subsequently excise the reporter gene using recombinases or transposon systems and a negative selection marker. Only cells with successful removal of the enrichment cassette are included in the final enrichment step. The excision step can be performed by either Flp/FRT or Cre/loxP recombinase systems or an excision-only piggyBac transposon system by surrounding the enrichment cassette with relevant excision target sites [57]. This combined enrichment and excision strategy aims to minimize the impact at the target site since only the intended edit remains. The Cre/loxP recombinase system can excise fragments flanked by two loxP sites, leaving a single 34 bp loxP “scar” behind [150]. Numerous enrichment strategies have relied on subsequent excision of the enrichment cassette following integration [131, 151–153]. A few studies even demonstrated that expression of the integration transgene increased following excision of the co-integrated enrichment cassette [152, 154]. Since both the Cre/loxP and the Flp/FRT systems leave behind a footprint in the form of a single loxP or FRT site after excision, an alternative method is the piggyBac transposon system which mediates “scarless” excision by removing transgenes flanked by piggyBac-specific inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) if the genetic sequence already contains a simple TTAA site, otherwise this will be left behind [155]. Furthermore, cytotoxicity and genotoxicity caused by prolonged expression of the Cre recombinase is well documented. The same has not been documented for the piggyBac transposase [156, 157]. The piggyBac transposon system has been the preferred choice for excision of enrichment cassettes following enrichment and has been described in numerous studies [122, 145, 157–160]. With the ambition to modify the genome as little as possible, these strategies do require multiple genomic manipulations and enrichment processes which in return can introduce additional risks of cellular- and genotoxicities. PiggyBac excision from heterochromatic regions has also been demonstrated to be far less efficient [157, 161]. Thus, if an integration, enrichment, and excision strategy is performed at a non-expressed genetic locus, then the transposon can be difficult to remove [157]. Another approach could be to excise the enrichment cassette by CRISPR/Cas-mediated excision. However, additive off-target risks and genomic translocations are associated with multiple DSBs. [153, 162] Reporter integration with transient expression As an alternative to enrichment cassette excision following integration, we have recently developed a strategy for enrichment of CRISPR/Cas-mediated transgene integration by transient CRISPR activation (CRISPRa) of an otherwise silent reporter gene. CRISPRa is a fusion complex consisting of catalytically deactivated Cas9 (dCas9) fused to transcriptional activators, for example the tripartite transactivator VP64-p65-Rta (VPR). The CRISPRa complex is directed to the region immediately upstream of the transcriptional start site (TSS) of a target gene by a sgRNA where it activates expression of the target gene [163, 164]. An enrichment cassette consisting of a silent miniCMV promoter driving a therapeutically relevant reporter gene is integrated along a GOI enabling a short transient burst in reporter expression allowing enrichment of cells with targeted integration. Up to 3.6-fold enrichment (from 17.7 to 66.8%) of cells with transgene integration was achieved at various loci (HBB, AAVS1, CCR5) using various reporter genes (tNGFR, tEGFR, tCD19, tCD8) in both primary human T cells and HSPCs. Furthermore, enriched CAR T cells displayed improved cytotoxicity over non-enriched cells [139]. This transient enrichment strategy constitutes a novel strategy for enrichment without the risks associated with permanent reporter expression or excision of reporter genes. A similar approach based on transient reporter expression by a Tet-On-driven system instead of CRISPRa has also been developed [165]. However, several Tet-On systems remain compromised by low inducibility and leaky promoter expression. Leaky expression was also observed in our strategy, so additional optimizations may be required for the further use of this type of enrichment strategy [139, 166]. Despite being superior due to the direct enrichment approach, these strategies also face challenges related to the more extensive genome modifications or promoter interference between transgene and reporter promoters. However, all enrichment strategies described in this review are dependent on strong reporter expression for selection to occur. One excision strategy was unable to counter-select for reporter-excised cells after piggyBac transfection, most likely due to silencing of the cassette since a transcriptionally inactive genomic locus was targeted, demonstrating the importance of reporter expression [160]. A comparison of different promoters driving reporter expression did not demonstrate any difference between the percentages of alleles that underwent HDR between any of the different promoter constructs tested, concluding that the promoter choice only affects expression levels and enrichment possibility [142]. Specialized enrichment strategies Enrichment of biallelic editing Genome modification at low frequencies often occur on only one allele, but for applications such as correction of disease-causing genetic mutations, gene therapies, and development of transgenic cellular or animal models it is highly desired to be able to enrich for cells with biallelic genome modifications. Since biallelic editing efficiencies are even lower than monoallelic editing efficiencies on a per-cell basis, especially for HDR-mediated editing, screening for cells with biallelic editing can be very cumbersome. Instead, specialized enrichment strategies for the enrichment of biallelic genome modifications have been developed (Table 1).Table 1 Biallelic enrichment strategies Cells Target locus Transgenes Selection Editing pre-enrichment Editing post-enrichment Fold increase Ref. HEK293T APP/PSEN1 Introduction of restriction site/reporter genes Antibiotic resistance N.A  < 82% N.A [167] HEK293T CCR5 Reporter genes Antibiotic resistance N.A 34.1% N.A [8] HSPC ASXL1/RUNX1/ HBB/CCR5 Fluorescent genes FACS 10.4% 94% 9-fold [143] HSPC ASXL1 and RUNX1 Fluorescent genes FACS 1.1% 78% 70.9-fold [143] iPSC SNCAe2 Mutation in HA/ Fluorescent genes FACS 2.1% 100% 46.5-fold [145] iPSC SNCAe3 Mutation in HA/ Fluorescent genes FACS 3.4% 100% 29.4-fold [145] iPSC PINK1e5 Mutation in HA/ Fluorescent genes FACS 3.7% 100% 26.6-fold [145] iPSC SERPINA1 Correction of E342K missense point mutation/Reporter genes Antibiotic resistance N.A 40% NA [160] N.A. not available, HA homology arm A co-targeting approach to impair sensitivity towards Diphtheria Toxin (DT) has been used for enrichment of biallelic integration events at another locus [120]. Sequential targeting of each allele of a gene of interest to directly integrate different reporters allows for enrichment of cells with integrations at both alleles. However, this approach is only able to enrich for cells where different reporter HDR templates are integrated at each allele, thereby overlooking cases where the same HDR template is integrated at both alleles (Fig. 3). Nonetheless, implementing a dual reporter system containing different reporter genes has resulted in highly efficient enrichment of biallelic integration events compared to using only one reporter for enrichment [8, 167]. Enrichment of biallelic editing using two fluorescent reporters were obtained in human iPSCs with either regular CRISPR/Cas HDR-mediated integration [145] or with two opposite-strand nicks by Cas nickase (nCas9) followed by HDR-mediated integration [160], and obtained in human primary T cells and HSPCs as well [143].Furthermore, Bak et al. demonstrated both biallelic, targeted integration of fluorescent reporters for a number of loci (ASXL1, RUNX1, HBB, CCR5) as well as di-genic editing, targeted integration at two loci simultaneously (HBB and IL2RG, HHB and AAVS1), yielding ~ 10% double positive HSPCs in both cases. Combining both di-genic and biallelic targeted integration, they succeeded in simultaneously targeting both alleles of ASXL1 or HBB and both alleles of RUNX1 with on-targeted integration at both alleles at both loci in 78% of HSPC clones. This approach allows for a total of six simultaneous genetic modifications: two endogenous genes inactivated (both alleles of each gene) plus the addition of four different transgenes. Furthermore, multi-genic HDR-mediated targeted integration was demonstrated in HSPCs targeting three (HBB/CCR5/IL2RG or RUNX1/HBB/ASXL1) or four (HBB/CCR5/ASXL1/RUNX1) loci at once showing successful triple- and quadruple-positive cells with 78% of HSPC clones obtaining the targeted tri-genic integrations at most alleles. These studies demonstrate tracking and enrichment of targeted integration events with both wild type and/or knock out alleles. Integrating a cDNA along the fluorescent reporter thereby allows for widespread applications [143]. This multiplexed HDR approach has been applied to model severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) with biallelic knockouts of relevant genes and subsequently for gene correction of RAG2-SCID patient-derived CD34 + HSPCs by biallelic integration of a complete RAG2 cDNA. Cells were sorted based on one of the reporters and revealed successful cDNA integration at ~ 50% of all targeted alleles [9]. Other specific heterozygous mutations have also been modeled in HSPCs with this cDNA and fluorescent reporter integration approach [168, 169].Fig. 3 HDR editing outcomes. Constructs with different transgenes, for example specific cDNA variants, can be coupled to different reporter genes to allow for enrichment of different editing events and discrimination between heterozygous and homozygous alleles if different cDNA variants or transgenes are combined. The different possible editing outcomes are depicted. Cells with a desired genotype can be enriched by FACS Enrichment of base editing As an alternative to standard gene editing approaches that require formation of a DSB, base editors and prime editors, introducing small nucleotide changes independently of HDR, are emerging tools for creating specific genome modifications. The lack of requirement for DSBs and HDR pathway activity results in reduced INDEL rates and potentially higher editing efficiencies in a broader range of cellular contexts. Although base editing efficiencies can be really high, some loci and some cell types can still be challenging to edit, which has led to the development of several strategies for enrichment of base edited cells. Various surrogate reporters to reveal base editing activity has been described based on disruption of a premature stop codon [170–173], resolving a disruptive codon [174], inducing restoration of reporter expression by base excision repair [175], formation of a start codon for reporter expression [171], conversion of one fluorescence to another by a single base edit (BFP to GFP conversion) [176–178], or formation of an endogenous selectable phenotype for co-selection of base editing events [120]. An overview of base editing enrichment strategies is combined in Table 2.Table 2 Base editing enrichment strategies Strategy Cells Target locus Selection Editing pre-enrichment Editing post-enrichment Fold increase Ref. BE-FLARE PC9 BRAF (T57I) FACS (BFP to GFP) 9% 55% 6.1-fold [176] BE-FLARE PC9 BRAF (Q58*) FACS (BFP to GFP) 4% 20% 5-fold [176] BE-FLARE PC9 EGFR (T790) FACS (BFP to GFP) 1% 18% 18-fold [176] TREE HEK293T APOE (R158C) FACS (BFP to GFP) 9% 26% 2.9-fold [177] TREE hPSCs APOE (R158C) FACS (BFP to GFP) 6% 23% 3.8-fold [177] BIG-TREE hPSCs APOE (R158C) FACS (BFP to GFP) 10% 80–90%  > 8-fold [178] GO DLD1 EMX1/FANCF/CTNNB1 Antibiotic resistance  < 1%  ~ 30–60% 10- to 120-fold [171] GO Pancreatic organoid Intergenic region Chr8/APC Antibiotic resistance  < 1% 44%  > 44-fold [171] Universal toxin-based selection HEK293T DPM2/EGFR/EMX1/PCSK9/ DNMT3B Drug selection N.A N.A 4 to 7-fold [120] Universal toxin-based selection HEK293T EMX1/CTLA4/IL2RA/ AAVS1 Drug selection N.A N.A 6 to 13-fold [120] Universal toxin-based selection HCT116 PCSK9 Drug selection N.A N.A 13-fold [120] ACE HEK293T FANCF FACS 0.2% 15% 58% 78% 290-fold and 5.2-fold [175] BEAR HEK293T HEK/CCR5/FANCF/SCN5a FACS 3–10% 20–25% 2.8 to 4.8-fold [179] BEAR HEK293T HEK/CCR5/FANCF/SCN5a FACS 5–40% 12–60% 1.3 to 2.9-fold [179] BEON HEK293T Human site 1 (S1) FACS 9.5% ± 4.9% 70.6% ± 7.3% 2.4-fold [172] BEON HEK293T CAR FACS N.A 37.54% (± 1.27%) NA [172] BEON Neuro2A mTmem5 FACS N.A  ~ 60% NA [172] N.A. not available Several strategies describe a BFP to GFP conversion upon a C-to-T substitution allowing for enrichment of cells with base editing activity. These strategies have shown up to 45-fold increase (in one experiment from ~ 1 to ~ 45%) in the desired base edit and reaching up to 85% editing (in another experiment from 20 to 85% corresponding to a 4.25-fold increase) in primary cells at multiple independent loci with increased multiplexed base editing frequencies as well [176–178]. A system able to enrich for both adenine and cytosine base edits utilizes a split fluorescent gene disrupted by the last intron of the mouse Vim gene that can be restored by correcting a splice donor site by either adenine or cytosine base editors as it allows variable target sequences corresponding to different PAMs and editing windows due to the intronic sequence which can be varied without restrictions. Up to 4.8-fold enrichment and up to 2.9-fold enrichment was achieved on five independent base editing target sites for cytosine and adenine base editors, respectively, based on the less efficient but more precise nuclease deficient Cas9 (dCas9) compared to a nicking Cas9 (nCas9) [179]. Some of the caveats of all base editing approaches are the potential formation of INDELs when using a nicking Cas9 (nCas9) and the potential editing of non-target, bystander bases that are located within the editing window of the sgRNA protospacer. Consequently, this could limit the application of base editing reporters where formation of INDELs or conversion of non-target bases result in mutations disturbing the specificity of the reporter. Thereby, caution should be used when designing these base editing reporters. Enrichment of prime editing Prime editing enables the introduction of short insertions, deletions, and nucleotide substitutions into the genome without requiring a DSB. Prime editors consist of an nCas9 fused to a reverse transcriptase (RT) enzyme. The RT extends the nicked DNA strand using a primer binding site (PBS) and an RNA template embedded in the 3’ terminus of a prime editing sgRNA (pegRNA). pegRNA design is complex since several PBS and RT template combinations are functional in a broad range of cell types and extensive optimization can be required [23]. Despite the great flexibility to modify the genome in almost any possible way, editing efficiency of prime editing is generally low achieving editing rates of around 10–30% [29]. To circumvent these limitations different enrichment approaches have been implemented. An overview of prime editing enrichment strategies is provided in Table 3.Table 3 Prime editing enrichment strategies Strategy Cells Target locus Selection Editing pre-enrichment Editing post-enrichment Fold increase Ref. PEAR HEK293T FANCF FACS N.A 76% N.A [183] PEAR K562 FANCF FACS N.A 62% N.A [183] PEAR U2OS EMX1 FACS  ~ 15%  ~ 40% 2.67-fold [183] PEAR HUES9 FANCF FACS 28% 7.8-fold [183] PEAR HEK293T HEK3/RUNX1/HEXA/ EMX1/DNMT/FANCF/ HBB/PRNP FACS N.A Up to 84% 2.1- to 4.6-fold [183] Marker-free co-selection K562 RNF2/RUNX1/FANCF/ EMX1 Drug selection N.A 83% N.A [184] Marker-free co-selection HeLa RNF2/RUNX1/FANCF/ EMX1 Drug selection  < 1% 26–59%  > 26-fold [184] Marker-free co-selection K562 RUNX1 and FANCF Drug selection N.A 81% (RUNX1) and 64% (FANCF) N.A [184] Marker-free co-selection K562 EMX1 and RUNX1 Drug selection N.A 63% (EMX1) and 78% (RUNX1) N.A [184] Marker-free co-selection HeLa MTOR Drug selection 4–17% 30–78% 4- to 8-fold [184] Marker-free co-selection U2OS MTOR Drug selection N.A 74–89% N.A [184] N.A. not available Several of the base editing enrichment strategies could be repurposed for enrichment of prime editing events, which in one study was demonstrated to be less efficient as expected but still succeeded in generating reporter positive cells for enrichment [171]. Also strategies based on transfection-positive cells [28, 180] or conversion of fluorescence-based reporters could be used for enrichment of prime edited cells [181, 182]. Simon et al. were the first to develop a prime editor activity reporter (PEAR), relying on a surrogate reporter-based approach to enrich for prime editing based on their previous flexible base editing reporter [179]. The reporter contains an inactive splice site activated by prime editing enabling expression of GFP. Enrichment of nine different endogenous targets with single-nucleotide substitutions, insertions, or deletions achieved co-targeting of the surrogate reporter and an endogenous target editing frequency reaching up to 82% and achieved up to 7.8-fold enrichment of prime editing at the FANCF gene [183]. Next, Levesque et al. developed a prime editing enrichment strategy based on co-targeting the endogenous ATP1A1 gene encoding Na/K ATPase, also repurposed from a previous enrichment strategy. Various loci and modifications were co-selected for in K562 and HeLa S3 cells, and the frequencies of alleles harboring precise modifications markedly increased after enrichment at all tested loci. Furthermore, the enrichment strategy was advanced by identifying multiple ATP1A1 selectable mutations that allows for sequential enrichment steps by increasing the dose of Ouabain at each step. Successive rounds of enrichment yielded highly modified cells with multiple modifications reaching cells with two different modifications on 88% and 58% of alleles at the MTOR locus, respectively [184]. An overview of prime editing enrichment strategies is combined in Table 2. For both base editing and prime editing, enrichment can alter the purity of the editing product, defined as % intended editing events / % all editing events, as the incidence of unintended edits like INDELs or incorporation of the sgRNA scaffold at the target site will also be enriched. A compromise is to use the less effective dCas9 to avoid nicks resulting in INDEL formation [179, 183, 184]. One base editing enrichment strategy using dCas9 demonstrated up to 30.1-fold increase in product purity compared to using a nCas9 and was able to enrich for base edited cells to achieve the same level of desired modifications as with the dCas9 [179]. In vivo enrichment Several of the enrichment reporters described for CAR integrations could also be utilized for depletion of CAR-positive cells in vivo as a safety switch to rapidly remove the immunotherapeutic cells if toxicity is observed [147]. However, only a few studies describe enrichment of gene modified cells in vivo. Selection of gene modified cells in vivo has been reported based on a mutant O6‐methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMTP140K) gene that confers resistance to O6‐BG/BCNU (O6‐Benzylguanine/Carmustine) given at doses lower than those used for cancer chemotherapy [185–187]. Efficient selection of genome modified HSCs was demonstrated using both gammaretrovirus and HIV-derived lentivirus vectors in both macaque and baboon nonhuman primate models. Genome modified cells were stable more than 14 months after the last drug treatment, resulting in increased frequencies of transgene-expressing cells from 11.3 to 76.9% for granulocytes, from 15.3 to 49.0% for lymphocytes, from 5.6% to 15.2% for erythrocytes, and from 6.7 to 64.0% for platelets [188]. Recently, MGMTP140K-mediated in vivo selection of prime edited cells was reported for correction of the sickle cell disease (SCD) mutation by introducing a T > A conversion. A helper‐dependent adenoviral vector (HDAd5/35++) was used for in vivo delivery of prime editors to target mobilized HSCs in the peripheral blood to correct the SCD mutation in a SCD mouse model (CD46/Townes mice). A MGMTP140K selection cassette was included for selection of transduced cells to confer resistance to O6‐BG/BCNU. Transduced cells were enriched for at days 6, 19, and 33 following vector injection to select for cells with the T > A conversion. The conversion efficiency reached an average of 43.6% at week 16 and was consistently detected in differentiated progeny cells [189]. Enrichment of base editing based on bacterial toxin resistance (DT resistance) was also demonstrated in vivo in a humanized mouse model expressing hHBEGF under the liver cell-specific albumin promoter. The base editing system and sgRNAs for hHBEGF and another endogenous target were delivered using adenoviral vectors (AdV8) and edited cells were enriched by DT treatment two weeks later. This approach resulted in 2.5-fold increase in base editing efficiency at the mouse Pcsk9 gene compared to control mice [120]. Discussion and future enrichment strategies Despite several advancements for genome editing technologies, improvement of quality, safety, and efficiency is still required, particularly for clinical use. Many genome editing technologies are relatively new and their precise mechanisms of action are still being unraveled. While continuously subject to optimization, genome editing frequencies can still be so low that some kind of enrichment strategy is warranted. Enrichment of edited cells might help elucidate and consequently avoid some of the unintended outcomes of genome modification, as improvements to detection methods for gene editing outcomes will also help the engineering of safer and more precise genome modification technologies. It is possible that the combined efforts in improving the gene editing technologies themselves and improving enrichment strategies will aid future enhancements of gene editing efficiencies. An ideal enrichment strategy would entail a direct selection of precisely edited cells while still being completely “scarless” and only having the desired precise modification at the specified target site. Both unedited cells and cells with unintended edits at on-target or off-target loci should be sorted away. No unintended genomic impact or off-target editing should be introduced, no adverse effects related to the editing or enrichment process should occur, and gentle and scalable selection applicable in all cellular contexts should be possible. An enrichment strategy able to deselect cells or kill cells with unintended editing outcomes or abnormal DNA damage responses would be advantageous, yet still sought-after. One strategy approaches this by targeted integration into an essential gene, however unedited cells still remains [149]. Other strategies to approach this could include inducible reporter genes that would only be expressed if a specific repair mechanism is active in the cell or a fusion molecule (e.g. dCas9 fusion complex) scanning the genome and inducing cell death if an unintended edit was identified. Development of such strategies would enable implementation of a safety switch in all gene and cellular therapy products allowing for improved safety and control of therapeutic outcomes. Another strategy specifically for in vivo enrichment could be to integrate a unique receptor that signals cell division or cell survival followed by supplying a ligand specific for only that receptor in vivo after editing. As an alternative to selectable reporter genes for enrichment, smaller structures like RNA aptamers could replace reporter genes to create less of an impact on the cellular genome when integrated due to their small size and simplicity. Fluorescent light‐up aptamers (FLAPs) are RNA sequences that can bind nontoxic cell‐permeable small‐molecule fluorogens thereby aiding visualization and allowing for selection of gene modified cells [190]. The most frequently used fluorogens are derived from 4-hydroxybenzlidene imidazolinone (HBI), the fluorogen moiety in GFP able to bind various FLAPs coupled to mRNA for detection purposes [191]. No enrichment strategy has so far been developed based on FLAPs, which could be due to associated challenges including relatively low brightness, limited thermostability or photostability, scaffold requirement, and detection challenges. However, as FLAPs have been developed in a multitude of colors they pose an interesting approach for enrichment of multiple simultaneous edits if potential challenges can be overcome. Enrichment of gene modified cells provides a huge potential in basic life science research where engineered cell lines are extensively used. Development and engineering of specific cell lines can in some cases be very inefficient, especially introducing multiple edits for example to study co-dependence of specific proteins can be challenging. In addition, it can be very cumbersome to screen hundreds of clonal cells before finding a clone with the desired edit(s). Enrichment strategies can drastically reduce the number of clones to be screened or completely abrogate it and thereby simplify the engineering process. If the enrichment process is efficient enough, this might enable working with a pool of cells instead of a clone. Several enrichment strategies, spread across all the categories mentioned in this review, have also been specifically developed and used for enrichment of gene edited cells from other organisms and plants [17, 106, 192–195]. Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) are another example of a technology spread across a large number of research areas. iPSCs are used in many research areas including disease modeling, developmental biology, drug screening and development, regenerative medicine, and for generating patient-specific differentiated cells for personalized therapy. Yet, obtaining efficient genetic engineering of iPSCs and maintaining quality is challenging due to infrequent HDR, time-consuming clonal expansion, and low cell viability upon manipulation resulting in generally low editing efficiencies [196]. As a solution, a large number of studies have described enrichment of modified iPSCs [77, 78, 80, 100, 119, 120, 123, 126, 127, 131, 145, 149, 158–160]. Efficient CRISPR/Cas-mediated editing of iPSCs would prove a valuable step towards new therapies against a huge number of diseases and enrichment strategies might help facilitate this goal. Enrichment of various cell types have already been applied to the clinic. Examples include CD34 enrichment of HSPCs which can boost graft function after allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and deplete T cells from the donor graft to limit graft versus host disease (GvHD) [197–199], or CD3+ T cell enrichment before viral transduction for CAR T cell therapies [200]. The most common enrichment methods rely on fluorescent activated cell sorting (FACS) or immunomagnetic enrichment / magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS) through direct (primary antibody-conjugated microbeads) or indirect (primary antibody plus secondary antibody-conjugated microbeads) sorting. FACS has the highest level of purity, however suffer from low throughput and yield compared to immunomagnetic enrichment, which in one study resulted in only 7–9% cell loss compared to ~ 70% cell loss for FACS [201]. Furthermore, immunomagnetic enrichment is cheaper and faster for low proportion samples and faster for enrichment of multiple samples due to parallel handling. During FACS, cells are subjected to strong lasers and hydrostatic pressure which might influence cell viability. Nonetheless, cell viability remains high (> 83%) with both methods, however slightly higher for immunomagnetically enriched cells [201]. Devices for clinical grade enrichment in a closed and sterile system have been developed including the CliniMACS Prodigy device (Miltenyi) and the MACSQuant Tyto (Miltenyi) for FACS and immunomagnetic selection, respectively [202], as well as the CellCelector (Sautorius) based on imaging. Both the CliniMACS Prodigy and the MACSQuant Tyto have been extensively used in clinical trials [198, 199, 203–205]. Future enrichment devices might be developed based on levitation of cells between magnets where the position of the cell depends on density, so different cells can be separated using this technique. Similar approaches could be based on cellular weight [206]. Enrichment of gene modified cells have also been used in a number of clinical trials. Neomycin resistance (NeoR) has been used for enrichment of cells transduced with a retroviral vectors, however strong immunogenicity of transduced cells was observed in one trial [197, 207]. Instead tNGFR has been used to magnetically immune-select transduced cells based on tNGFR to enrich for gene modified cells before transplantation into patients in a number of clinical trials [136, 138, 207]. Other clinical studies focusing on the ability to eliminate reactive T cells in the case of graft GvHD have enriched for genetically engineered donor lymphocytes expressing the herpes-simplex thymidine kinase suicide gene fused to CD34 or truncated CD34 (tCD34) before infusion into patients. Enrichment of CD34-TK75- or tCD34-TK75-positive cells yielded an almost pure infusion product and also allowed for tracking of modified cells in the patients. Circulating modified T cells persisted in the patients for over 12 months [205, 208]. Similarly, the use of inducible caspase 9 (iCasp9) as a suicide marker for a safety switch in T cell therapy have been demonstrated by transducing peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with a retroviral vector containing iCasp9 coupled to truncated CD19 (tCD19) through a 2A self-cleaving peptide. The cells were enriched for CD19 by immunomagnetic selection before infusion. iCasp9-transduced T cells were readily detectable 4 weeks post-infusion in all patients and remained at high level (11% of T cells) in one patient alive at 3.6 years [198, 204]. These trials demonstrate the potential to use clinically relevant selection markers for enrichment before infusion and for tracking modified cells post-infusion in patients. Conclusion Enrichment strategies constitute helpful tools to enhance all types of gene modification efficiencies and can be considered in many laboratory and clinical contexts, as they are able to offer high frequencies of genome edited cells, up to 100%, depending on the strategy. Most of the strategies mentioned in this review employ surrogate reporters or selectable transgenes for enrichment, of which the latter option has tried to transition into more clinically appropriate strategies, however not without limitations. Thus, the best enrichment choice depends on the individual situation since each enrichment strategy has both advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, enrichment strategies still play an important part in making gene editing technologies applicable, especially when new, exciting, but non-optimized technologies emerge. Abbreviations 6-TG 6-Thioguanine BCNU N,N′-bis(2-chloroethyl)-N-nitroso-urea (Carmustine) CAR Chimeric antigen receptor Cas CRISPR-associated CAST CRISPR-associated transposon CF Cystic fibrosis CGD Chronic granulomatous disease CRISPR Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats CRISPRa CRISPR activation CTS Cas9 target sequence dCas9 Deficient Cas9 DR Direct repeats (DRs) DSB Double strand break DT Diphtheria toxin FACS Fluorescent activated cell sorting FLAP Fluorescent light‐up aptamer GOI Gene of interest GvHD Graft versus host disease HBEC Human bronchial epithelial cell HBI 4-Hydroxybenzlidene imidazolinone HDR Homology-directed repair hiPSC Human induced pluripotent stem cell HSC Hematopoietic stem cell HSPC Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell HygroR Hygromycin resistance iCasp9 Inducible caspase 9 INDEL Insertion and deletions iPSC Induced pluripotent stem cell iPSC Induced pluripotent stem cell IRES Internal ribosome entry site ITR Inverted terminal repeat MACS Magnetic activated cell sorting MGMT O6‐methylguanine DNA methyltransferase nCas9 Cas9 nickase NeoR Neomycin resistance NHEJ Non-homologous end joining O6‐BG O6‐benzylguanine PASTE Programmable addition via site-specific targeting elements PBMC Peripheral blood mononuclear cell PBS Primer binding site PEAR Prime editor activity reporter pegRNA Prime editing sgRNA PuroR Puromycin resistance RT Reverse transcriptase SCD Sickle cell disease SCID Severe combined immunodeficiency sgRNA Single guide RNA SSA Single-strand annealing TALEN Transcription activator-like effector nucleases tCD19 Truncated CD19 tEGFR Truncated epidermal growth factor receptor tNGFR Truncated nerve growth factor receptor TSS Transcriptional start site TwinPE Twin prime editing UABC Upper airway basal stem cell VPR VP64-p65-Rta X-SCID X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency ZFN Zinc finger nuclease Acknowledgements Figures were created using Biorender.com. Author contributions NSM took the lead in writing the manuscript with input and supervision from ROB. Funding Funding in the Bak Lab is supported by grants from the Danish health authorities (SST) (4-1612-391/1), the EU Commission in the form of an ERC Starting Grant (project 101041231, Horizon Europe Pillar I) and a grant from the Horizon Research and Innovation Actions (project 101057438, Horizon Europe Pillar II), a Lundbeck Foundation Fellowship (R238-2016-3349), the Independent Research Fund Denmark (0134-00113B, 0242-00009B, and 9144-00001B), an AIAS-COFUND (Marie Curie) fellowship from Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies (AIAS) co-funded by Aarhus University’s Research Foundation and the European Union’s seventh Framework Program under grant agreement no 609033, the Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF19OC0058238 and NNF17OC0028894), Innovation Fund Denmark (8056-00010B), the Carlsberg Foundation (CF20-0424 and CF17-0129), Slagtermester Max Wørzner og Hustru Inger Wørzners Mindelegat, the AP Møller Foundation, the Riisfort Foundation, the Agnes and Poul Friis’ Foundation, and a Genome Engineer Innovation Grant from Synthego. Availability of data and materials Not applicable. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests ROB holds equity in Graphite Bio and UNIKUM Tx and is part-time employee of UNIKUM Therapeutics. NSM declare no competing interests. Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. ==== Refs References 1. Bak RO Gomez-Ospina N Porteus MH Gene editing on center stage Trends Genet 2018 34 600 611 10.1016/j.tig.2018.05.004 29908711 2. Hendel A Bak RO Editorial: CRISPR and beyond: cutting-edge technologies for gene correction in therapeutic applications Front Genome Ed 2023 5 1203864 10.3389/fgeed.2023.1203864 37153079 3. Doudna JA The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing Nature 2020 578 229 236 10.1038/s41586-020-1978-5 32051598 4. Lieber MR The mechanism of double-strand DNA break repair by the nonhomologous DNA end-joining pathway Annu Rev Biochem 2010 79 181 211 10.1146/annurev.biochem.052308.093131 20192759 5. Chang HHY Pannunzio NR Adachi N Lieber MR Non-homologous DNA end joining and alternative pathways to double-strand break repair Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2017 18 495 506 10.1038/nrm.2017.48 28512351 6. Jasin M Rothstein R Repair of strand breaks by homologous recombination Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2013 5 a012740 10.1101/cshperspect.a012740 24097900 7. Ferrari S Jacob A Cesana D Laugel M Beretta S Varesi A Unali G Conti A Canarutto D Albano L Choice of template delivery mitigates the genotoxic risk and adverse impact of editing in human hematopoietic stem cells Cell Stem Cell 2022 29 1428 1444.e1429 10.1016/j.stem.2022.09.001 36206730 8. Wu Y Xu K Ren C Li X Lv H Han F Wei Z Wang X Zhang Z Enhanced CRISPR/Cas9-mediated biallelic genome targeting with dual surrogate reporter-integrated donors FEBS Lett 2017 591 903 913 10.1002/1873-3468.12599 28214366 9. Iancu O Allen D Knop O Zehavi Y Breier D Arbiv A Lev A Lee YN Beider K Nagler A Multiplex HDR for disease and correction modeling of SCID by CRISPR genome editing in human HSPCs Mol Ther Nucleic Acids 2023 31 105 121 10.1016/j.omtn.2022.12.006 36618262 10. Tasca F Brescia M Wang Q Liu J Janssen JM Szuhai K Gonçalves M Large-scale genome editing based on high-capacity adenovectors and CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases rescues full-length dystrophin synthesis in DMD muscle cells Nucleic Acids Res 2022 50 7761 7782 10.1093/nar/gkac567 35776127 11. Mohrin M Bourke E Alexander D Warr MR Barry-Holson K Le Beau MM Morrison CG Passegué E Hematopoietic stem cell quiescence promotes error-prone DNA repair and mutagenesis Cell Stem Cell 2010 7 174 185 10.1016/j.stem.2010.06.014 20619762 12. Lino CA Harper JC Carney JP Timlin JA Delivering CRISPR: a review of the challenges and approaches Drug Deliv 2018 25 1234 1257 10.1080/10717544.2018.1474964 29801422 13. van Haasteren J Li J Scheideler OJ Murthy N Schaffer DV The delivery challenge: fulfilling the promise of therapeutic genome editing Nat Biotechnol 2020 38 845 855 10.1038/s41587-020-0565-5 32601435 14. Álvarez MM Biayna J Supek F TP53-dependent toxicity of CRISPR/Cas9 cuts is differential across genomic loci and can confound genetic screening Nat Commun 2022 13 4520 10.1038/s41467-022-32285-1 35927263 15. Haapaniemi E Botla S Persson J Schmierer B Taipale J CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing induces a p53-mediated DNA damage response Nat Med 2018 24 927 930 10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z 29892067 16. Dorset SR Bak RO The p53 challenge of hematopoietic stem cell gene editing Mol Therapy Methods Clin Dev 2023 30 83 89 10.1016/j.omtm.2023.06.003 17. Antonova E Glazova O Gaponova A Eremyan A Zvereva S Grebenkina N Volkova N Volchkov P Successful CRISPR/Cas9 mediated homologous recombination in a chicken cell line F1000Res 2018 7 238 10.12688/f1000research.13457.2 29946437 18. Liu X Homma A Sayadi J Yang S Ohashi J Takumi T Sequence features associated with the cleavage efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 system Sci Rep 2016 6 19675 10.1038/srep19675 26813419 19. Lin S Staahl BT Alla RK Doudna JA Enhanced homology-directed human genome engineering by controlled timing of CRISPR/Cas9 delivery Elife 2014 3 e04766 10.7554/eLife.04766 25497837 20. Wang JY Doudna JA CRISPR technology: a decade of genome editing is only the beginning Science 2023 379 eadd8643 10.1126/science.add8643 36656942 21. Komor AC Kim YB Packer MS Zuris JA Liu DR Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage Nature 2016 533 420 424 10.1038/nature17946 27096365 22. Gaudelli NM Komor AC Rees HA Packer MS Badran AH Bryson DI Liu DR Programmable base editing of A•T to G•C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage Nature 2017 551 464 471 10.1038/nature24644 29160308 23. Anzalone AV Randolph PB Davis JR Sousa AA Koblan LW Levy JM Chen PJ Wilson C Newby GA Raguram A Liu DR Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA Nature 2019 576 149 157 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 31634902 24. Rothgangl T Dennis MK Lin PJC Oka R Witzigmann D Villiger L Qi W Hruzova M Kissling L Lenggenhager D In vivo adenine base editing of PCSK9 in macaques reduces LDL cholesterol levels Nat Biotechnol 2021 39 949 957 10.1038/s41587-021-00933-4 34012094 25. Arbab M Matuszek Z Kray KM Du A Newby GA Blatnik AJ Raguram A Richter MF Zhao KT Levy JM Base editing rescue of spinal muscular atrophy in cells and in mice Science 2023 10.1126/science.adg6518 36996170 26. Arbab M Shen MW Mok B Wilson C Matuszek Ż Cassa CA Liu DR Determinants of base editing outcomes from target library analysis and machine learning Cell 2020 182 463 480.e430 10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.037 32533916 27. Lavrov AV Varenikov GG Skoblov MY Genome scale analysis of pathogenic variants targetable for single base editing BMC Med Genomics 2020 13 80 10.1186/s12920-020-00735-8 32948190 28. Schene IF Joore IP Oka R Mokry M van Vugt AHM van Boxtel R van der Doef HPJ van der Laan LJW Verstegen MMA van Hasselt PM Prime editing for functional repair in patient-derived disease models Nat Commun 2020 11 5352 10.1038/s41467-020-19136-7 33097693 29. Gao Z Ravendran S Mikkelsen NS Haldrup J Cai H Ding X Paludan SR Thomsen MK Mikkelsen JG Bak RO A truncated reverse transcriptase enhances prime editing by split AAV vectors Mol Ther 2022 30 2942 2951 10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.07.001 35808824 30. Tou CJ, Orr B, Kleinstiver BP: Cut-and-paste DNA insertion with engineered type V-K CRISPR-associated transposases. bioRxiv 2022:2022.2001.2007.475005. 31. Klompe SE Vo PLH Halpin-Healy TS Sternberg SH Transposon-encoded CRISPR-Cas systems direct RNA-guided DNA integration Nature 2019 571 219 225 10.1038/s41586-019-1323-z 31189177 32. Strecker J Ladha A Gardner Z Schmid-Burgk JL Makarova KS Koonin EV Zhang F RNA-guided DNA insertion with CRISPR-associated transposases Science 2019 365 48 53 10.1126/science.aax9181 31171706 33. Vo PLH Ronda C Klompe SE Chen EE Acree C Wang HH Sternberg SH CRISPR RNA-guided integrases for high-efficiency, multiplexed bacterial genome engineering Nat Biotechnol 2021 39 480 489 10.1038/s41587-020-00745-y 33230293 34. Tou CJ Orr B Kleinstiver BP Precise cut-and-paste DNA insertion using engineered type V-K CRISPR-associated transposases Nat Biotechnol 2023 10.1038/s41587-022-01574-x 36593413 35. Lampe GD King RT Halpin-Healy TS Klompe SE Hogan MI Vo PLH Tang S Chavez A Sternberg SH Targeted DNA integration in human cells without double-strand breaks using CRISPR-associated transposases Nat Biotechnol 2023 10.1038/s41587-023-01748-1 36991112 36. Yarnall MTN Ioannidi EI Schmitt-Ulms C Krajeski RN Lim J Villiger L Zhou W Jiang K Garushyants SK Roberts N Drag-and-drop genome insertion of large sequences without double-strand DNA cleavage using CRISPR-directed integrases Nat Biotechnol 2022 10.1038/s41587-022-01527-4 36424489 37. Anzalone AV Gao XD Podracky CJ Nelson AT Koblan LW Raguram A Levy JM Mercer JAM Liu DR Programmable deletion, replacement, integration and inversion of large DNA sequences with twin prime editing Nat Biotechnol 2022 40 731 740 10.1038/s41587-021-01133-w 34887556 38. Vakulskas CA Dever DP Rettig GR Turk R Jacobi AM Collingwood MA Bode NM McNeill MS Yan S Camarena J A high-fidelity Cas9 mutant delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex enables efficient gene editing in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells Nat Med 2018 24 1216 1224 10.1038/s41591-018-0137-0 30082871 39. Casini A Olivieri M Petris G Montagna C Reginato G Maule G Lorenzin F Prandi D Romanel A Demichelis F A highly specific SpCas9 variant is identified by in vivo screening in yeast Nat Biotechnol 2018 36 265 271 10.1038/nbt.4066 29431739 40. Kleinstiver BP Pattanayak V Prew MS Tsai SQ Nguyen NT Zheng Z Joung JK High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects Nature 2016 529 490 495 10.1038/nature16526 26735016 41. Zhang L Zuris JA Viswanathan R Edelstein JN Turk R Thommandru B Rube HT Glenn SE Collingwood MA Bode NM AsCas12a ultra nuclease facilitates the rapid generation of therapeutic cell medicines Nat Commun 2021 12 3908 10.1038/s41467-021-24017-8 34162850 42. Xu X Chemparathy A Zeng L Kempton HR Shang S Nakamura M Qi LS Engineered miniature CRISPR-Cas system for mammalian genome regulation and editing Mol Cell 2021 81 4333 4345.e4334 10.1016/j.molcel.2021.08.008 34480847 43. Pedrazzoli E Bianchi A Umbach A Amistadi S Brusson M Frati G Ciciani M Badowska KA Arosio D Miccio A An optimized SpCas9 high-fidelity variant for direct protein delivery Mol Ther 2023 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.03.007 36905119 44. Kim YH Kim N Okafor I Choi S Min S Lee J Bae SM Choi K Choi J Harihar V Sniper2L is a high-fidelity Cas9 variant with high activity Nat Chem Biol 2023 10.1038/s41589-023-01279-5 37322156 45. Hendel A Bak RO Clark JT Kennedy AB Ryan DE Roy S Steinfeld I Lunstad BD Kaiser RJ Wilkens AB Chemically modified guide RNAs enhance CRISPR-Cas genome editing in human primary cells Nat Biotechnol 2015 33 985 989 10.1038/nbt.3290 26121415 46. Yin H Song CQ Suresh S Wu Q Walsh S Rhym LH Mintzer E Bolukbasi MF Zhu LJ Kauffman K Structure-guided chemical modification of guide RNA enables potent non-viral in vivo genome editing Nat Biotechnol 2017 35 1179 1187 10.1038/nbt.4005 29131148 47. Yao X Zhang M Wang X Ying W Hu X Dai P Meng F Shi L Sun Y Yao N Tild-CRISPR allows for efficient and precise gene knockin in mouse and human cells Dev Cell 2018 45 526 536.e525 10.1016/j.devcel.2018.04.021 29787711 48. Shui S Wang S Liu J Systematic investigation of the effects of multiple SV40 nuclear localization signal fusion on the genome editing activity of purified SpCas9 Bioengineering (Basel). 2022 10.3390/bioengineering9020083 35200436 49. Liu M Rehman S Tang X Gu K Fan Q Chen D Ma W Methodologies for improving HDR efficiency Front Genet 2018 9 691 10.3389/fgene.2018.00691 30687381 50. Chu VT Weber T Wefers B Wurst W Sander S Rajewsky K Kühn R Increasing the efficiency of homology-directed repair for CRISPR-Cas9-induced precise gene editing in mammalian cells Nat Biotechnol 2015 33 543 548 10.1038/nbt.3198 25803306 51. Lomova A Clark DN Campo-Fernandez B Flores-Bjurstrom C Kaufman ML Fitz-Gibbon S Wang X Miyahira EY Brown D DeWitt MA Improving gene editing outcomes in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells by temporal control of DNA repair Stem Cells 2019 37 284 294 10.1002/stem.2935 30372555 52. Shin JJ Schroder MS Caiado F Wyman SK Bray NL Bordi M Dewitt MA Vu JT Kim WT Hockemeyer D Controlled cycling and quiescence enables efficient HDR in engraftment-enriched adult hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells Cell Rep 2020 32 108093 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108093 32877675 53. Wienert B Nguyen DN Guenther A Feng SJ Locke MN Wyman SK Shin J Kazane KR Gregory GL Carter MAM Timed inhibition of CDC7 increases CRISPR-Cas9 mediated templated repair Nat Commun 2020 11 2109 10.1038/s41467-020-15845-1 32355159 54. Möller L Aird EJ Schröder MS Kobel L Kissling L van de Venn L Corn JE Recursive Editing improves homology-directed repair through retargeting of undesired outcomes Nat Commun 2022 13 4550 10.1038/s41467-022-31944-7 35931681 55. Shy BR, Vykunta V, Ha A, Roth TL, Talbot A, Nguyen DN, Chen YY, Blaeschke F, Vedova S, Mamedov MR, et al. Hybrid ssDNA repair templates enable high yield genome engineering in primary cells for disease modeling and cell therapy manufacturing. bioRxiv. 2021:2021.2009.2002.458799. 56. Ling X Xie B Gao X Chang L Zheng W Chen H Huang Y Tan L Li M Liu T Improving the efficiency of precise genome editing with site-specific Cas9-oligonucleotide conjugates Sci Adv 2020 6 eaaz0051 10.1126/sciadv.aaz0051 32494588 57. Ren C Xu K Segal DJ Zhang Z Strategies for the enrichment and selection of genetically modified cells Trends Biotechnol 2019 37 56 71 10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.07.017 30135027 58. Reuven N Shaul Y Selecting for CRISPR-edited knock-in cells Int J Mol Sci 2022 10.3390/ijms231911919 36233222 59. Jensen TI Axelgaard E Bak RO Therapeutic gene editing in haematological disorders with CRISPR/Cas9 Br J Haematol 2019 185 821 835 10.1111/bjh.15851 30864164 60. Vaidyanathan S Baik R Chen L Bravo DT Suarez CJ Abazari SM Salahudeen AA Dudek AM Teran CA Davis TH Targeted replacement of full-length CFTR in human airway stem cells by CRISPR/Cas9 for pan-mutation correction in the endogenous locus Mol Ther 2021 10.1016/j.ymthe.2021.03.023 33794364 61. Vaidyanathan S Salahudeen AA Sellers ZM Bravo DT Choi SS Batish A Le W Baik R de la Sean O Kaushik MP High-efficiency, selection-free gene repair in airway stem cells from cystic fibrosis patients rescues CFTR function in differentiated epithelia Cell Stem Cell 2020 26 161 171.e164 10.1016/j.stem.2019.11.002 31839569 62. Davila ML Riviere I Wang X Bartido S Park J Curran K Chung SS Stefanski J Borquez-Ojeda O Olszewska M Efficacy and toxicity management of 19–28z CAR T cell therapy in B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia Sci Transl Med 2014 6 224ra225 10.1126/scitranslmed.3008226 63. Kochenderfer JN Dudley ME Kassim SH Somerville RP Carpenter RO Stetler-Stevenson M Yang JC Phan GQ Hughes MS Sherry RM Chemotherapy-refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and indolent B-cell malignancies can be effectively treated with autologous T cells expressing an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor J Clin Oncol 2015 33 540 549 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.2025 25154820 64. Maude SL Frey N Shaw PA Aplenc R Barrett DM Bunin NJ Chew A Gonzalez VE Zheng Z Lacey SF Chimeric antigen receptor T cells for sustained remissions in leukemia N Engl J Med 2014 371 1507 1517 10.1056/NEJMoa1407222 25317870 65. Porter DL Hwang WT Frey NV Lacey SF Shaw PA Loren AW Bagg A Marcucci KT Shen A Gonzalez V Chimeric antigen receptor T cells persist and induce sustained remissions in relapsed refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia Sci Transl Med 2015 7 303ra139 10.1126/scitranslmed.aac5415 26333935 66. Hartmann J Schüßler-Lenz M Bondanza A Buchholz CJ Clinical development of CAR T cells-challenges and opportunities in translating innovative treatment concepts EMBO Mol Med 2017 9 1183 1197 10.15252/emmm.201607485 28765140 67. Zhang C He J Liu L Wang J Wang S Liu L Ge J Gao L Gao L Kong P Novel CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells manufactured next-day for acute lymphoblastic leukemia Blood Cancer J 2022 12 96 10.1038/s41408-022-00688-4 35750687 68. Talleur AC Qudeimat A Métais JY Langfitt D Mamcarz E Crawford JC Huang S Cheng C Hurley C Madden R Preferential expansion of CD8+ CD19-CAR T cells postinfusion and the role of disease burden on outcome in pediatric B-ALL Blood Adv 2022 6 5737 5749 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021006293 35446934 69. Casucci M Falcone L Camisa B Norelli M Porcellini S Stornaiuolo A Ciceri F Traversari C Bordignon C Bonini C Bondanza A Extracellular NGFR spacers allow efficient tracking and enrichment of fully functional CAR-T Cells co-expressing a suicide gene Front Immunol 2018 9 507 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00507 29619024 70. Fehse B Uhde A Fehse N Eckert HG Clausen J Rüger R Koch S Ostertag W Zander AR Stockschläder M Selective immunoaffinity-based enrichment of CD34+ cells transduced with retroviral vectors containing an intracytoplasmatically truncated version of the human low-affinity nerve growth factor receptor (deltaLNGFR) gene Hum Gene Ther 1997 8 1815 1824 10.1089/hum.1997.8.15-1815 9358031 71. Ding Q Regan SN Xia Y Oostrom LA Cowan CA Musunuru K Enhanced efficiency of human pluripotent stem cell genome editing through replacing TALENs with CRISPRs Cell Stem Cell 2013 12 393 394 10.1016/j.stem.2013.03.006 23561441 72. Duda K Lonowski LA Kofoed-Nielsen M Ibarra A Delay CM Kang Q Yang Z Pruett-Miller SM Bennett EP Wandall HH High-efficiency genome editing via 2A-coupled co-expression of fluorescent proteins and zinc finger nucleases or CRISPR/Cas9 nickase pairs Nucleic Acids Res 2014 42 e84 10.1093/nar/gku251 24753413 73. Grav LM Lee JS Gerling S Kallehauge TB Hansen AH Kol S Lee GM Pedersen LE Kildegaard HF One-step generation of triple knockout CHO cell lines using CRISPR/Cas9 and fluorescent enrichment Biotechnol J 2015 10 1446 1456 10.1002/biot.201500027 25864574 74. Gu Y Hou W Xu C Li S Shih JW Xia N The enhancement of RNAi against HIV in vitro and in vivo using H-2K(k) protein as a sorting method J Virol Methods 2012 182 9 17 10.1016/j.jviromet.2012.02.007 22401802 75. Lee K Mackley VA Rao A Chong AT Dewitt MA Corn JE Murthy N Synthetically modified guide RNA and donor DNA are a versatile platform for CRISPR-Cas9 engineering Elife 2017 10.7554/eLife.25312 29286281 76. Li K Wang G Andersen T Zhou P Pu WT Optimization of genome engineering approaches with the CRISPR/Cas9 system PLoS ONE 2014 9 e105779 10.1371/journal.pone.0105779 25166277 77. Nasri M Mir P Dannenmann B Amend D Skroblyn T Xu Y Schulze-Osthoff K Klimiankou M Welte K Skokowa J Fluorescent labeling of CRISPR/Cas9 RNP for gene knockout in HSPCs and iPSCs reveals an essential role for GADD45b in stress response Blood Adv 2019 3 63 71 10.1182/bloodadvances.2017015511 30622144 78. Ramachandran H Martins S Kontarakis Z Krutmann J Rossi A Fast but not furious: a streamlined selection method for genome-edited cells Life Sci Alliance. 2021 10.26508/lsa.202101051 33903218 79. Ran FA Hsu PD Wright J Agarwala V Scott DA Zhang F Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system Nat Protoc 2013 8 2281 2308 10.1038/nprot.2013.143 24157548 80. Steyer B Bu Q Cory E Jiang K Duong S Sinha D Steltzer S Gamm D Chang Q Saha K Scarless genome editing of human pluripotent stem cells via transient puromycin selection Stem Cell Rep 2018 10 642 654 10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.12.004 81. Wei Q Croy BA Etches RJ Selection of genetically modified chicken blastodermal cells by magnetic-activated cell sorting Poult Sci 2001 80 1671 1678 10.1093/ps/80.12.1671 11771880 82. Bäckström A Yudovich D Žemaitis K Nilsén Falck L Subramaniam A Larsson J Combinatorial gene targeting in primary human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells Sci Rep 2022 12 18169 10.1038/s41598-022-23118-8 36307542 83. Certo MT Ryu BY Annis JE Garibov M Jarjour J Rawlings DJ Scharenberg AM Tracking genome engineering outcome at individual DNA breakpoints Nat Methods 2011 8 671 676 10.1038/nmeth.1648 21743461 84. Kuhar R Gwiazda KS Humbert O Mandt T Pangallo J Brault M Khan I Maizels N Rawlings DJ Scharenberg AM Certo MT Novel fluorescent genome editing reporters for monitoring DNA repair pathway utilization at endonuclease-induced breaks Nucleic Acids Res 2014 42 e4 10.1093/nar/gkt872 24121685 85. Sun N Bao Z Xiong X Zhao H SunnyTALEN: a second-generation TALEN system for human genome editing Biotechnol Bioeng 2014 111 683 691 10.1002/bit.25154 24255022 86. Kumar A Birnbaum MD Moorthy BT Singh J Palovcak A Patel DM Zhang F Insertion/deletion-activated frame-shift fluorescence protein is a sensitive reporter for genomic DNA editing BMC Genomics 2019 20 609 10.1186/s12864-019-5963-z 31340764 87. Zhang H Zhou Y Wang Y Zhao Y Qiu Y Zhang X Yue D Zhou Z Wei W A surrogate reporter system for multiplexable evaluation of CRISPR/Cas9 in targeted mutagenesis Sci Rep 2018 8 1042 10.1038/s41598-018-19317-x 29348585 88. Zhang H Zhang X Fan C Xie Q Xu C Zhao Q Liu Y Wu X Zhang H A novel sgRNA selection system for CRISPR-Cas9 in mammalian cells Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2016 471 528 532 10.1016/j.bbrc.2016.02.041 26879140 89. Xu K Ren C Liu Z Zhang T Zhang T Li D Wang L Yan Q Guo L Shen J Zhang Z Efficient genome engineering in eukaryotes using Cas9 from Streptococcus thermophilus Cell Mol Life Sci 2015 72 383 399 10.1007/s00018-014-1679-z 25038777 90. Yang Y Liu S Cheng Y Nie L Lv C Wang G Zhang Y Hao L Highly efficient and rapid detection of the cleavage activity of Cas9/gRNA via a fluorescent reporter Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2016 180 655 667 10.1007/s12010-016-2122-8 27209600 91. Zhou Y Liu Y Hussmann D Brøgger P Al-Saaidi RA Tan S Lin L Petersen TS Zhou GQ Bross P Enhanced genome editing in mammalian cells with a modified dual-fluorescent surrogate system Cell Mol Life Sci 2016 73 2543 2563 10.1007/s00018-015-2128-3 26755436 92. Stark JM Pierce AJ Oh J Pastink A Jasin M Genetic steps of mammalian homologous repair with distinct mutagenic consequences Mol Cell Biol 2004 24 9305 9316 10.1128/MCB.24.21.9305-9316.2004 15485900 93. Porteus MH Baltimore D Chimeric nucleases stimulate gene targeting in human cells Science 2003 300 763 10.1126/science.1078395 12730593 94. Perez EE Wang J Miller JC Jouvenot Y Kim KA Liu O Wang N Lee G Bartsevich VV Lee YL Establishment of HIV-1 resistance in CD4+ T cells by genome editing using zinc-finger nucleases Nat Biotechnol 2008 26 808 816 10.1038/nbt1410 18587387 95. Kim HJ Lee HJ Kim H Cho SW Kim JS Targeted genome editing in human cells with zinc finger nucleases constructed via modular assembly Genome Res 2009 19 1279 1288 10.1101/gr.089417.108 19470664 96. Ramakrishna S Cho SW Kim S Song M Gopalappa R Kim JS Kim H Surrogate reporter-based enrichment of cells containing RNA-guided Cas9 nuclease-induced mutations Nat Commun 2014 5 3378 10.1038/ncomms4378 24569644 97. Niccheri F Pecori R Conticello SG An efficient method to enrich for knock-out and knock-in cellular clones using the CRISPR/Cas9 system Cell Mol Life Sci 2017 74 3413 3423 10.1007/s00018-017-2524-y 28421278 98. Kim H Um E Cho SR Jung C Kim H Kim JS Surrogate reporters for enrichment of cells with nuclease-induced mutations Nat Methods 2011 8 941 943 10.1038/nmeth.1733 21983922 99. Kim H Kim MS Wee G Lee CI Kim H Kim JS Magnetic separation and antibiotics selection enable enrichment of cells with ZFN/TALEN-induced mutations PLoS ONE 2013 8 e56476 10.1371/journal.pone.0056476 23441197 100. Kim KT Park JC Jang HK Lee H Park S Kim J Kwon OS Go YH Jin Y Kim W Safe scarless cassette-free selection of genome-edited human pluripotent stem cells using temporary drug resistance Biomaterials 2020 262 120295 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120295 32916603 101. Koo OJ Park SJ Lee C Kang JT Kim S Moon JH Choi JY Kim H Jang G Kim JS Production of mutated porcine embryos using zinc finger nucleases and a reporter-based cell enrichment system Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2014 27 324 329 10.5713/ajas.2013.13481 25049958 102. Kim YH Ramakrishna S Kim H Kim JS Enrichment of cells with TALEN-induced mutations using surrogate reporters Methods 2014 69 108 117 10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.04.012 24780521 103. Ren C Xu K Liu Z Shen J Han F Chen Z Zhang Z Dual-reporter surrogate systems for efficient enrichment of genetically modified cells Cell Mol Life Sci 2015 72 2763 2772 10.1007/s00018-015-1874-6 25725802 104. Liu WH Völse K Senft D Jeremias I A reporter system for enriching CRISPR/Cas9 knockout cells in technically challenging settings like patient models Sci Rep 2021 11 12649 10.1038/s41598-021-91760-9 34135367 105. Yasuda H Kim E Reza AM Kim JH A highly efficient method for enriching TALEN or CRISPR/Cas9-edited mutant cells J Genet Genomics 2016 43 705 708 10.1016/j.jgg.2016.10.006 27916442 106. He Z Shi X Liu M Sun G Proudfoot C Whitelaw CB Lillico SG Chen Y Comparison of surrogate reporter systems for enrichment of cells with mutations induced by genome editors J Biotechnol 2016 221 49 54 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2016.01.009 26778541 107. Flemr M Bühler M Single-step generation of conditional knockout mouse embryonic stem cells Cell Rep 2015 12 709 716 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.06.051 26190102 108. Zhang C Xu K Hu L Wang L Zhang T Ren C Zhang Z A suicidal zinc finger nuclease expression coupled with a surrogate reporter for efficient genome engineering Biotechnol Lett 2015 37 299 305 10.1007/s10529-014-1690-3 25280729 109. Yan N Sun Y Fang Y Deng J Mu L Xu K Mymryk JS Zhang Z A universal surrogate reporter for efficient enrichment of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated homology-directed repair in mammalian cells Mol Ther Nucleic Acids 2020 19 775 789 10.1016/j.omtn.2019.12.021 31955009 110. Wen Y Liao G Pritchard T Zhao TT Connelly JP Pruett-Miller SM Blanc V Davidson NO Madison BB A stable but reversible integrated surrogate reporter for assaying CRISPR/Cas9-stimulated homology-directed repair J Biol Chem 2017 292 6148 6162 10.1074/jbc.M117.777722 28228480 111. Peng R Lin G Li J Potential pitfalls of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing FEBS J 2016 283 1218 1231 10.1111/febs.13586 26535798 112. Verkuijl SA Rots MG The influence of eukaryotic chromatin state on CRISPR-Cas9 editing efficiencies Curr Opin Biotechnol 2019 55 68 73 10.1016/j.copbio.2018.07.005 30189348 113. Agudelo D Duringer A Bozoyan L Huard CC Carter S Loehr J Synodinou D Drouin M Salsman J Dellaire G Marker-free coselection for CRISPR-driven genome editing in human cells Nat Methods 2017 14 615 10.1038/nmeth.4265 28417998 114. Arribere JA Bell RT Fu BX Artiles KL Hartman PS Fire AZ Efficient marker-free recovery of custom genetic modifications with CRISPR/Cas9 in Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics 2014 198 837 846 10.1534/genetics.114.169730 25161212 115. Kim H Ishidate T Ghanta KS Seth M Conte D Jr Shirayama M Mello CC A co-CRISPR strategy for efficient genome editing in Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics 2014 197 1069 1080 10.1534/genetics.114.166389 24879462 116. Moriarity BS Rahrmann EP Beckmann DA Conboy CB Watson AL Carlson DF Olson ER Hyland KA Fahrenkrug SC McIvor RS Largaespada DA Simple and efficient methods for enrichment and isolation of endonuclease modified cells PLoS ONE 2014 9 e96114 10.1371/journal.pone.0096114 24798371 117. Liao S Tammaro M Yan H Enriching CRISPR-Cas9 targeted cells by co-targeting the HPRT gene Nucleic Acids Res 2015 43 e134 26130722 118. Hansen M Cai X Bowen S Largaespada DA Li MV Flow assisted mutation enrichment (FAME): a highly efficacious and efficient method to enrich Double Knockouts (DKO) after gene editing PLoS ONE 2021 16 e0247375 10.1371/journal.pone.0247375 33661977 119. Liu JT Corbett JL Heslop JA Duncan SA Enhanced genome editing in human iPSCs with CRISPR-CAS9 by co-targeting ATP1a1 PeerJ 2020 8 e9060 10.7717/peerj.9060 32391204 120. Li S Akrap N Cerboni S Porritt MJ Wimberger S Lundin A Möller C Firth M Gordon E Lazovic B Universal toxin-based selection for precise genome engineering in human cells Nat Commun 2021 12 497 10.1038/s41467-020-20810-z 33479216 121. Reuven N, Adler J, Myers N, Shaul Y. CRISPR co-editing strategy for scarless homology-directed genome editing. Int J Mol Sci. 2021. 10.3390/ijms22073741. 122. Shy BR MacDougall MS Clarke R Merrill BJ Co-incident insertion enables high efficiency genome engineering in mouse embryonic stem cells Nucleic Acids Res 2016 44 7997 8010 10.1093/nar/gkw685 27484482 123. Mitzelfelt KA McDermott-Roe C Grzybowski MN Marquez M Kuo CT Riedel M Lai S Choi MJ Kolander KD Helbling D Efficient precision genome editing in iPSCs via genetic co-targeting with selection Stem Cell Rep 2017 8 491 499 10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.01.021 124. Brunet E Jasin M Induction of chromosomal translocations with CRISPR-Cas9 and other nucleases: understanding the repair mechanisms that give rise to translocations Adv Exp Med Biol 2018 1044 15 25 10.1007/978-981-13-0593-1_2 29956288 125. Rabbitts TH Chromosomal translocations in human cancer Nature 1994 372 143 149 10.1038/372143a0 7969446 126. Haupt A Grancharova T Arakaki J Fuqua MA Roberts B Gunawardane RN Endogenous protein tagging in human induced pluripotent stem cells using CRISPR/Cas9 J Vis Exp 2018 10.3791/58130 30199041 127. Roberts B Haupt A Tucker A Grancharova T Arakaki J Fuqua MA Nelson A Hookway C Ludmann SA Mueller IA Systematic gene tagging using CRISPR/Cas9 in human stem cells to illuminate cell organization Mol Biol Cell 2017 28 2854 2874 10.1091/mbc.e17-03-0209 28814507 128. Merkle FT Neuhausser WM Santos D Valen E Gagnon JA Maas K Sandoe J Schier AF Eggan K Efficient CRISPR-Cas9-mediated generation of knockin human pluripotent stem cells lacking undesired mutations at the targeted locus Cell Rep 2015 11 875 883 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.04.007 25937281 129. Kamiyama D Sekine S Barsi-Rhyne B Hu J Chen B Gilbert LA Ishikawa H Leonetti MD Marshall WF Weissman JS Huang B Versatile protein tagging in cells with split fluorescent protein Nat Commun 2016 7 11046 10.1038/ncomms11046 26988139 130. Leonetti MD Sekine S Kamiyama D Weissman JS Huang B A scalable strategy for high-throughput GFP tagging of endogenous human proteins Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016 113 E3501 3508 10.1073/pnas.1606731113 27274053 131. Hockemeyer D Soldner F Beard C Gao Q Mitalipova M DeKelver RC Katibah GE Amora R Boydston EA Zeitler B Efficient targeting of expressed and silent genes in human ESCs and iPSCs using zinc-finger nucleases Nat Biotechnol 2009 27 851 857 10.1038/nbt.1562 19680244 132. Cho NH Cheveralls KC Brunner AD Kim K Michaelis AC Raghavan P Kobayashi H Savy L Li JY Canaj H OpenCell: endogenous tagging for the cartography of human cellular organization Science 2022 375 eabi6983 10.1126/science.abi6983 35271311 133. Wang S Li Y Zhong L Wu K Zhang R Kang T Wu S Wu Y Efficient gene editing through an intronic selection marker in cells Cell Mol Life Sci 2022 79 111 10.1007/s00018-022-04152-1 35098362 134. Dever DP Scharenberg SG Camarena J Kildebeck EJ Clark JT Martin RM Bak RO Tang Y Dohse M Birgmeier JA CRISPR/Cas9 genome engineering in engraftable human brain-derived neural stem cells iScience 2019 15 524 535 10.1016/j.isci.2019.04.036 31132746 135. Bonini C Grez M Traversari C Ciceri F Marktel S Ferrari G Dinauer M Sadat M Aiuti A Deola S Safety of retroviral gene marking with a truncated NGF receptor Nat Med 2003 9 367 369 10.1038/nm0403-367 12669036 136. Ciceri F Bonini C Stanghellini MT Bondanza A Traversari C Salomoni M Turchetto L Colombi S Bernardi M Peccatori J Infusion of suicide-gene-engineered donor lymphocytes after family haploidentical haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation for leukaemia (the TK007 trial): a non-randomised phase I-II study Lancet Oncol 2009 10 489 500 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70074-9 19345145 137. Bordignon C Bonini C Verzeletti S Nobili N Maggioni D Traversari C Giavazzi R Servida P Zappone E Benazzi E Transfer of the HSV-tk gene into donor peripheral blood lymphocytes for in vivo modulation of donor anti-tumor immunity after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation Hum Gene Ther 1995 6 813 819 10.1089/hum.1995.6.6-813 7548281 138. Bonini C Ferrari G Verzeletti S Servida P Zappone E Ruggieri L Ponzoni M Rossini S Mavilio F Traversari C Bordignon C HSV-TK gene transfer into donor lymphocytes for control of allogeneic graft-versus-leukemia Science 1997 276 1719 1724 10.1126/science.276.5319.1719 9180086 139. Mikkelsen NS Hernandez SS Jensen TI Schneller JL Bak RO Enrichment of transgene integrations by transient CRISPR activation of a silent reporter gene Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev 2023 29 1 16 10.1016/j.omtm.2023.02.010 36922985 140. Dever DP Bak RO Reinisch A Camarena J Washington G Nicolas CE Pavel-Dinu M Saxena N Wilkens AB Mantri S CRISPR/Cas9 β-globin gene targeting in human haematopoietic stem cells Nature 2016 539 384 389 10.1038/nature20134 27820943 141. Bak RO Dever DP Porteus MH CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in human hematopoietic stem cells Nat Protoc 2018 13 358 376 10.1038/nprot.2017.143 29370156 142. Charlesworth CT Camarena J Cromer MK Vaidyanathan S Bak RO Carte JM Potter J Dever DP Porteus MH Priming human repopulating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells for Cas9/sgRNA gene targeting Mol Ther Nucleic Acids 2018 12 89 104 10.1016/j.omtn.2018.04.017 30195800 143. Bak RO Dever DP Reinisch A Cruz Hernandez D Majeti R Porteus MH Multiplexed genetic engineering of human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells using CRISPR/Cas9 and AAV6 Elife 2017 6 e27873 10.7554/eLife.27873 28956530 144. Zhang L Huang R Lu L Fu R Guo G Gu Y Liu Z He L Malissen M Liang Y Gene knock-in by CRISPR/Cas9 and cell sorting in macrophage and T cell lines J Vis Exp 2021 10.3791/62328 35037651 145. Arias-Fuenzalida J Jarazo J Qing X Walter J Gomez-Giro G Nickels SL Zaehres H Schöler HR Schwamborn JC FACS-assisted CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing facilitates Parkinson's disease modeling Stem Cell Rep 2017 9 1423 1431 10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.08.026 146. Wagner DL Koehl U Chmielewski M Scheid C Stripecke R Review: sustainable clinical development of CAR-T Cells—switching from viral transduction towards CRISPR-Cas gene editing Front Immunol 2022 13 865424 10.3389/fimmu.2022.865424 35784280 147. Mosti L Langner LM Chmielewski KO Arbuthnot P Alzubi J Cathomen T Targeted multi-epitope switching enables straightforward positive/negative selection of CAR T cells Gene Ther 2021 10.1038/s41434-021-00220-6 33526841 148. Liu L Sommermeyer D Cabanov A Kosasih P Hill T Riddell SR Inclusion of Strep-tag II in design of antigen receptors for T-cell immunotherapy Nat Biotechnol 2016 34 430 434 10.1038/nbt.3461 26900664 149. Allen AG Khan SQ Margulies CM Viswanathan R Lele S Blaha L Scott SN Izzo KM Gerew A Pattali R A highly efficient transgene knock-in technology in clinically relevant cell types Nat Biotechnol 2023 10.1038/s41587-023-01779-8 37349522 150. Van Duyne GD Cre recombinase Microbiol Spectr. 2015 3 Mdna3-0014-2014 26104563 151. Ho TT Zhou N Huang J Koirala P Xu M Fung R Wu F Mo YY Targeting non-coding RNAs with the CRISPR/Cas9 system in human cell lines Nucleic Acids Res 2015 43 e17 10.1093/nar/gku1198 25414344 152. Zhu Z Verma N González F Shi ZD Huangfu D A CRISPR/Cas-mediated selection-free knockin strategy in human embryonic stem cells Stem Cell Rep 2015 4 1103 1111 10.1016/j.stemcr.2015.04.016 153. Xi L Schmidt JC Zaug AJ Ascarrunz DR Cech TR A novel two-step genome editing strategy with CRISPR-Cas9 provides new insights into telomerase action and TERT gene expression Genome Biol 2015 16 231 10.1186/s13059-015-0791-1 26553065 154. Pham CT MacIvor DM Hug BA Heusel JW Ley TJ Long-range disruption of gene expression by a selectable marker cassette Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996 93 13090 13095 10.1073/pnas.93.23.13090 8917549 155. Yusa K piggyBac Transposon Microbiol Spectr 2015 3 Mdna3-0028-2014 10.1128/microbiolspec.MDNA3-0028-2014 26104701 156. Loonstra A Vooijs M Beverloo HB Allak BA van Drunen E Kanaar R Berns A Jonkers J Growth inhibition and DNA damage induced by Cre recombinase in mammalian cells Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001 98 9209 9214 10.1073/pnas.161269798 11481484 157. Yusa K Seamless genome editing in human pluripotent stem cells using custom endonuclease-based gene targeting and the piggyBac transposon Nat Protoc 2013 8 2061 2078 10.1038/nprot.2013.126 24071911 158. Yusa K Rashid ST Strick-Marchand H Varela I Liu PQ Paschon DE Miranda E Ordóñez A Hannan NR Rouhani FJ Targeted gene correction of α1-antitrypsin deficiency in induced pluripotent stem cells Nature 2011 478 391 394 10.1038/nature10424 21993621 159. Wang G Yang L Grishin D Rios X Ye LY Hu Y Li K Zhang D Church GM Pu WT Efficient, footprint-free human iPSC genome editing by consolidation of Cas9/CRISPR and piggyBac technologies Nat Protoc 2017 12 88 103 10.1038/nprot.2016.152 27929521 160. Eggenschwiler R Moslem M Fráguas MS Galla M Papp O Naujock M Fonfara I Gensch I Wähner A Beh-Pajooh A Improved bi-allelic modification of a transcriptionally silent locus in patient-derived iPSC by Cas9 nickase Sci Rep 2016 6 38198 10.1038/srep38198 27910942 161. Li MA Pettitt SJ Eckert S Ning Z Rice S Cadiñanos J Yusa K Conte N Bradley A The piggyBac transposon displays local and distant reintegration preferences and can cause mutations at noncanonical integration sites Mol Cell Biol 2013 33 1317 1330 10.1128/MCB.00670-12 23358416 162. Kühn R Chu VT Pop in, pop out: a novel gene-targeting strategy for use with CRISPR-Cas9 Genome Biol 2015 16 244 10.1186/s13059-015-0810-2 26553112 163. Bendixen L Jensen TI Bak RO CRISPR-Cas-mediated transcriptional modulation: the therapeutic promises of CRISPRa and CRISPRi Mol Ther 2023 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.03.024 36964659 164. Jensen TI Mikkelsen NS Gao Z Foßelteder J Pabst G Axelgaard E Laustsen A König S Reinisch A Bak RO Targeted regulation of transcription in primary cells using CRISPRa and CRISPRi Genome Res 2021 31 2120 2130 10.1101/gr.275607.121 34407984 165. Genovese P, Ferrari S, Lombardo Angelo L, Naldini L, Fiumara M. Selection by means of artificial transactivators. WO: OSPEDALE San Raffaele SRL Fond Telethon; 2020. 166. Sakemura R Terakura S Watanabe K Julamanee J Takagi E Miyao K Koyama D Goto T Hanajiri R Nishida T A tet-on inducible system for controlling CD19-chimeric antigen receptor expression upon drug administration Cancer Immunol Res 2016 4 658 668 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0043 27329987 167. Li X Sun B Qian H Ma J Paolino M Zhang Z A high-efficiency and versatile CRISPR/Cas9-mediated HDR-based biallelic editing system J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2022 23 141 152 10.1631/jzus.B2100196 35187887 168. Sconocchia T Foßelteder J Köhnke T Majeti R Reinisch A Engineering oncogenic heterozygous gain-of-function mutations in human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells J Vis Exp 2023 10.3791/64558 36971438 169. Foßelteder J Pabst G Sconocchia T Schlacher A Auinger L Kashofer K Beham-Schmid C Trajanoski S Waskow C Schöll W Human gene-engineered calreticulin mutant stem cells recapitulate MPN hallmarks and identify targetable vulnerabilities Leukemia 2023 37 843 853 10.1038/s41375-023-01848-6 36813992 170. Ma Y Zhang J Yin W Zhang Z Song Y Chang X Targeted AID-mediated mutagenesis (TAM) enables efficient genomic diversification in mammalian cells Nat Methods 2016 13 1029 1035 10.1038/nmeth.4027 27723754 171. Katti A Foronda M Zimmerman J Diaz B Zafra MP Goswami S Dow LE GO: a functional reporter system to identify and enrich base editing activity Nucleic Acids Res 2020 48 2841 2852 10.1093/nar/gkaa124 32112097 172. Wang P Xu L Gao Y Han R BEON: a functional fluorescence reporter for quantification and enrichment of adenine base-editing activity Mol Ther 2020 28 1696 1705 10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.04.009 32353322 173. Brookhouser N Nguyen T Tekel SJ Standage-Beier K Wang X Brafman DA A Cas9-mediated adenosine transient reporter enables enrichment of ABE-targeted cells BMC Biol 2020 18 193 10.1186/s12915-020-00929-7 33317513 174. Martin AS Salamango DJ Serebrenik AA Shaban NM Brown WL Harris RS A panel of eGFP reporters for single base editing by APOBEC-Cas9 editosome complexes Sci Rep 2019 9 497 10.1038/s41598-018-36739-9 30679582 175. St Martin A Salamango D Serebrenik A Shaban N Brown WL Donati F Munagala U Conticello SG Harris RS A fluorescent reporter for quantification and enrichment of DNA editing by APOBEC-Cas9 or cleavage by Cas9 in living cells Nucleic Acids Res 2018 46 e84 10.1093/nar/gky332 29746667 176. Coelho MA Li S Pane LS Firth M Ciotta G Wrigley JD Cuomo ME Maresca M Taylor BJM BE-FLARE: a fluorescent reporter of base editing activity reveals editing characteristics of APOBEC3A and APOBEC3B BMC Biol 2018 16 150 10.1186/s12915-018-0617-1 30593278 177. Standage-Beier K Tekel SJ Brookhouser N Schwarz G Nguyen T Wang X Brafman DA A transient reporter for editing enrichment (TREE) in human cells Nucleic Acids Res 2019 47 e120 10.1093/nar/gkz713 31428784 178. Brookhouser N Tekel SJ Standage-Beier K Nguyen T Schwarz G Wang X Brafman DA BIG-TREE: base-edited isogenic hPSC line generation using a transient reporter for editing enrichment Stem Cell Rep 2020 14 184 191 10.1016/j.stemcr.2019.12.013 179. Tálas A Simon DA Kulcsár PI Varga É Krausz SL Welker E BEAR reveals that increased fidelity variants can successfully reduce the mismatch tolerance of adenine but not cytosine base editors Nat Commun 2021 12 6353 10.1038/s41467-021-26461-y 34732717 180. Adikusuma F Lushington C Arudkumar J Godahewa GI Chey YCJ Gierus L Piltz S Geiger A Jain Y Reti D Optimized nickase- and nuclease-based prime editing in human and mouse cells Nucleic Acids Res 2021 49 10785 10795 10.1093/nar/gkab792 34534334 181. Sürün D Schneider A Mircetic J Neumann K Lansing F Paszkowski-Rogacz M Hänchen V Lee-Kirsch MA Buchholz F Efficient generation and correction of mutations in human iPS cells utilizing mRNAs of CRISPR base editors and prime editors Genes (Basel). 2020 10.3390/genes11050511 32384610 182. Lin Q Zong Y Xue C Wang S Jin S Zhu Z Wang Y Anzalone AV Raguram A Doman JL Prime genome editing in rice and wheat Nat Biotechnol 2020 38 582 585 10.1038/s41587-020-0455-x 32393904 183. Simon DA Tálas A Kulcsár PI Biczók Z Krausz SL Várady G Welker E PEAR, a flexible fluorescent reporter for the identification and enrichment of successfully prime edited cells Elife 2022 10.7554/eLife.69504 36083619 184. Levesque S Mayorga D Fiset JP Goupil C Duringer A Loiselle A Bouchard E Agudelo D Doyon Y Marker-free co-selection for successive rounds of prime editing in human cells Nat Commun 2022 13 5909 10.1038/s41467-022-33669-z 36207338 185. Neff T Horn PA Peterson LJ Thomasson BM Thompson J Williams DA Schmidt M Georges GE von Kalle C Kiem HP Methylguanine methyltransferase-mediated in vivo selection and chemoprotection of allogeneic stem cells in a large-animal model J Clin Invest 2003 112 1581 1588 10.1172/JCI200318782 14617759 186. Davis BM Reese JS Koç ON Lee K Schupp JE Gerson SL Selection for G156A O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase gene-transduced hematopoietic progenitors and protection from lethality in mice treated with O6-benzylguanine and 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea Cancer Res 1997 57 5093 5099 9371508 187. Chen Y Schroeder JA Gao C Li J Hu J Shi Q In vivo enrichment of genetically manipulated platelets for murine hemophilia B gene therapy J Cell Physiol 2021 236 354 365 10.1002/jcp.29861 32510630 188. Beard BC Trobridge GD Ironside C McCune JS Adair JE Kiem HP Efficient and stable MGMT-mediated selection of long-term repopulating stem cells in nonhuman primates J Clin Invest 2010 120 2345 2354 10.1172/JCI40767 20551514 189. Li C Georgakopoulou A Newby GA Chen PJ Everette KA Paschoudi K Vlachaki E Gil S Anderson AK Koob T In vivo HSC prime editing rescues sickle cell disease in a mouse model Blood 2023 10.1182/blood.2022018252 37319434 190. Neubacher S Hennig S RNA structure and cellular applications of fluorescent light-up aptamers Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2019 58 1266 1279 10.1002/anie.201806482 30102012 191. Paige JS Wu KY Jaffrey SR RNA mimics of green fluorescent protein Science 2011 333 642 646 10.1126/science.1207339 21798953 192. Ewen-Campen B Perrimon N ovo(D) Co-selection: a method for enriching CRISPR/Cas9-edited alleles in drosophila G3 (Bethesda). 2018 8 2749 2756 10.1534/g3.118.200498 29934375 193. Challagulla A, Shi S, Nair K, ONeil TE, Morris KR, Wise TG, Cahill DM, Tizard ML, Doran TJ, Jenkins KA. Marker counter-selection via CRISPR/Cas9 co-targeting for efficient generation of genome edited avian cell lines and germ cells. Anim Biotechnol. 2021; 10.1080/10495398.2021.1885428. 194. Piñero-Lambea C Garcia-Ramallo E Miravet-Verde S Burgos R Scarpa M Serrano L Lluch-Senar M SURE editing: combining oligo-recombineering and programmable insertion/deletion of selection markers to efficiently edit the Mycoplasma pneumoniae genome Nucleic Acids Res 2022 50 e127 10.1093/nar/gkac836 36215032 195. Shimatani Z Kashojiya S Takayama M Terada R Arazoe T Ishii H Teramura H Yamamoto T Komatsu H Miura K Targeted base editing in rice and tomato using a CRISPR-Cas9 cytidine deaminase fusion Nat Biotechnol 2017 35 441 443 10.1038/nbt.3833 28346401 196. Li XL Li GH Fu J Fu YW Zhang L Chen W Arakaki C Zhang JP Wen W Zhao M Highly efficient genome editing via CRISPR-Cas9 in human pluripotent stem cells is achieved by transient BCL-XL overexpression Nucleic Acids Res 2018 46 10195 10215 10.1093/nar/gky804 30239926 197. Dunbar CE Cottler-Fox M O'Shaughnessy JA Doren S Carter C Berenson R Brown S Moen RC Greenblatt J Stewart FM Retrovirally marked CD34-enriched peripheral blood and bone marrow cells contribute to long-term engraftment after autologous transplantation Blood 1995 85 3048 3057 10.1182/blood.V85.11.3048.bloodjournal85113048 7538814 198. Zhang P Raju J Ullah MA Au R Varelias A Gartlan KH Olver SD Samson LD Sturgeon E Zomerdijk N Phase I trial of inducible caspase 9 T cells in adult stem cell transplant demonstrates massive clonotypic proliferative potential and long-term persistence of transgenic T cells Clin Cancer Res 2019 25 1749 1755 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-3069 30765390 199. Adair JE Chandrasekaran D Sghia-Hughes G Haworth KG Woolfrey AE Burroughs LM Choi GY Becker PS Kiem HP Novel lineage depletion preserves autologous blood stem cells for gene therapy of Fanconi anemia complementation group A Haematologica 2018 103 1806 1814 10.3324/haematol.2018.194571 29976742 200. Zhou X Tu S Wang C Huang R Deng L Song C Yue C He Y Yang J Liang Z Phase I trial of fourth-generation anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells against relapsed or refractory B cell non-hodgkin lymphomas Front Immunol 2020 11 564099 10.3389/fimmu.2020.564099 33329526 201. Sutermaster BA Darling EM Considerations for high-yield, high-throughput cell enrichment: fluorescence versus magnetic sorting Sci Rep 2019 9 227 10.1038/s41598-018-36698-1 30659223 202. Pello OM Lanzarot D Colorado M Amunarriz C Insunza A Álvarez-Rodríguez L Díez de Velasco M Sainz-Sainz N Arroyo JL Optimal large-scale CD34+ enrichment from a leukapheresis collection using the clinimacs prodigy platform Clin Case Rep 2020 8 2650 2653 10.1002/ccr3.3232 33363798 203. Shah NN Johnson BD Schneider D Zhu F Szabo A Keever-Taylor CA Krueger W Worden AA Kadan MJ Yim S Bispecific anti-CD20, anti-CD19 CAR T cells for relapsed B cell malignancies: a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion trial Nat Med 2020 26 1569 1575 10.1038/s41591-020-1081-3 33020647 204. Di Stasi A Tey SK Dotti G Fujita Y Kennedy-Nasser A Martinez C Straathof K Liu E Durett AG Grilley B Inducible apoptosis as a safety switch for adoptive cell therapy N Engl J Med 2011 365 1673 1683 10.1056/NEJMoa1106152 22047558 205. Eissenberg LG Rettig MP Ritchey JK Prior JL Schwarz SW Frye J White BS Fulton RS Ghobadi A Cooper ML [(18)F]FHBG PET/CT imaging of CD34-TK75 transduced donor T cells in relapsed allogeneic stem cell transplant patients: safety and feasibility Mol Ther 2015 23 1110 1122 10.1038/mt.2015.48 25807290 206. Durmus NG Tekin HC Guven S Sridhar K Arslan Yildiz A Calibasi G Ghiran I Davis RW Steinmetz LM Demirci U Magnetic levitation of single cells Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015 112 E3661 3668 10.1073/pnas.1509250112 26124131 207. Verzeletti S Bonini C Marktel S Nobili N Ciceri F Traversari C Bordignon C Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene transfer for controlled graft-versus-host disease and graft-versus-leukemia: clinical follow-up and improved new vectors Hum Gene Ther 1998 9 2243 2251 10.1089/hum.1998.9.15-2243 9794208 208. Zhan H Gilmour K Chan L Farzaneh F McNicol AM Xu JH Adams S Fehse B Veys P Thrasher A Production and first-in-man use of T cells engineered to express a HSVTK-CD34 sort-suicide gene PLoS ONE 2013 8 e77106 10.1371/journal.pone.0077106 24204746