Abstract
Cell-based therapeutics are an emerging modality with the potential to treat many currently intractable diseases through uniquely powerful modes of action. Despite notable recent clinical and commercial successes, cell-based therapies continue to face numerous challenges that limit their widespread translation and commercialization, including identification of the appropriate cell source, generation of a sufficiently viable, potent and safe product that meets patient- and disease-specific needs, and the development of scalable manufacturing processes. These hurdles are being addressed through the use of cutting-edge basic research driven by next-generation engineering approaches, including genome and epigenome editing, synthetic biology and the use of biomaterials.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pellegrini, G. et al. Navigating market authorization: the path holoclar took to become the first stem cell product approved in the European Union. Stem Cell Transl. Med. 7, 146–154 (2018).
Buscail, E. et al. Adipose-derived stem cells in the treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn’s disease: rationale, clinical results and perspectives. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22, 9967 (2021).
Shah, D. K. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations for the next generation protein therapeutics. J. Pharmacokinet. Pharmacodyn. 42, 553–571 (2015).
Kamath, A. V. Translational pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of monoclonal antibodies. Drug. Discov. Today Technol. 21–22, 75–83 (2016).
Bulaklak, K. & Gersbach, C. A. The once and future gene therapy. Nat. Commun. 11, 5820 (2020).
Elverum, K. & Whitman, M. Delivering cellular and gene therapies to patients: solutions for realizing the potential of the next generation of medicine. Gene Ther. 27, 537–544 (2020).
Roth, T. L. et al. Reprogramming human T cell function and specificity with non-viral genome targeting. Nature 559, 405–409 (2018). Describes the development of a CRISPR–Cas9-based targeting system to precisely insert large DNA segments without the need for viral vectors for rapid and flexible engineering of primary human immune cells.
Chew, W. L. et al. A multifunctional AAV-CRISPR-Cas9 and its host response. Nat. Methods 13, 868–874 (2016).
Keiser, J. Liver tumor in gene therapy recipient raises concerns about virus widely used in treatment. Science https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/liver-tumor-gene-therapy-recipient-raises-concerns-about-virus-widely-used-treatment (2020).
Aalipour, A. et al. Engineered immune cells as highly sensitive cancer diagnostics. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 531–539 (2019).
Panina, Y., Karagiannis, P., Kurtz, A., Stacey, G. N. & Fujibuchi, W. Human Cell Atlas and cell-type authentication for regenerative medicine. Exp. Mol. Med. 52, 1443–1451 (2020).
June, C. H., O’Connor, R. S., Kawalekar, O. U., Ghassemi, S. & Milone, M. C. CAR T cell immunotherapy for human cancer. Science 359, 1361–1365 (2018).
Tran, E., Longo, D. L. & Urba, W. J. A milestone for CAR T cells. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 2593–2596 (2017).
Kimbrel, E. A. & Lanza, R. Next-generation stem cells - ushering in a new era of cell-based therapies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 19, 463–479 (2020).
Henig, I. & Zuckerman, T. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation-50 years of evolution and future perspectives. Rambam Maimonides Med. J. 5, e0028 (2014).
Mayani, H., Wagner, J. E. & Broxmeyer, H. E. Cord blood research, banking, and transplantation: achievements, challenges, and perspectives. Bone Marrow Transpl. 55, 48–61 (2020).
Anassi, E. & Ndefo, U. A. Sipuleucel-T (Provenge) injection: the first immunotherapy agent (vaccine) for hormone-refractory prostate cancer. P T 36, 197–202 (2011).
Jaroslawski, S. & Toumi, M. Sipuleucel-T (Provenge((R)))-autopsy of an innovative paradigm change in cancer treatment: why a single-product biotech company failed to capitalize on its breakthrough invention. BioDrugs 29, 301–307 (2015).
Domaszewska-Szostek, A., Krzyzanowska, M. & Siemionow, M. Cell-based therapies for chronic wounds tested in clinical studies: review. Ann. Plast. Surg. 83, e96–e109 (2019).
US Food and Drug Administration. KYMRIAH (tisagenlecleucel) https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/kymriah-tisagenlecleucel (2019).
US Food and Drug Administration. YESCARTA (axicabtagene ciloleucel), https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/yescarta-axicabtagene-ciloleucel (2020).
Pettitt, D. et al. CAR-T cells: a systematic review and mixed methods analysis of the clinical trial landscape. Mol. Ther. 26, 342–353 (2018).
Crees, Z. D. & Ghobadi, A. Cellular therapy updates in B-cell lymphoma: the state of the CAR-T. Cancers (Basel) 13, 5181 (2021).
Albinger, N., Hartmann, J. & Ullrich, E. Current status and perspective of CAR-T and CAR-NK cell therapy trials in Germany. Gene Ther. 28, 513–527 (2021).
Liu, E. et al. Use of CAR-transduced natural killer cells in CD19-positive lymphoid tumors. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 545–553 (2020).
Atrash S., Ali S. A & Usmani, S. Z. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for multiple myeloma. Clin. Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 21, 21–34 (2021).
Feldman, S. A., Assadipour, Y., Kriley, I., Goff, S. L. & Rosenberg, S. A. Adoptive cell therapy–tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, T-cell receptors, and chimeric antigen receptors. Semin. Oncol. 42, 626–639 (2015).
Tesfaye, M. & Savoldo, B. Adoptive cell therapy in treating pediatric solid tumors. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 20, 73 (2018).
Marofi, F. et al. CAR T cells in solid tumors: challenges and opportunities. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 12, 81 (2021).
Deng, Q. et al. Characteristics of anti-CD19 CAR T cell infusion products associated with efficacy and toxicity in patients with large B cell lymphomas. Nat. Med. 26, 1878–1887 (2020).
Boulch, M. A cross-talk between CAR T cell subsets and the tumor microenvironment is essential for sustained cytotoxic activity. Sci. Immunol. 6, eabd4344 (2021).
Ferreira, L. M. R., Muller, Y. D., Bluestone, J. A. & Tang, Q. Next-generation regulatory T cell therapy. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 18, 749–769 (2019).
Petrou, P. et al. Safety and clinical effects of mesenchymal stem cells secreting neurotrophic factor transplantation in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: results of phase 1/2 and 2a clinical trials. JAMA Neurol. 73, 337–344 (2016).
Terashvili, M. & Bosnjak, Z. J. Stem cell therapies in cardiovascular disease. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 33, 209–222 (2019).
Mavilio, F. Developing gene and cell therapies for rare diseases: an opportunity for synergy between academia and industry. Gene Ther. 24, 590–592 (2017).
Pittenger, M. F. et al. Mesenchymal stem cell perspective: cell biology to clinical progress. NPJ Regen. Med. 4, 22 (2019).
Vaes, B., Van’t Hof, W., Deans, R. & Pinxteren, J. Application of multistem((R)) allogeneic cells for immunomodulatory therapy: clinical progress and pre-clinical challenges in prophylaxis for graft versus host disease. Front. Immunol. 3, 345 (2012).
Ronfard, V., Vertes, A. A., May, M. H., Dupraz, A., van Dyke, M. E. & Bayon, Y. Evaluating the past, present, future of regenerative medicine: a global view. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 2, 199–210 (2017).
Banerjee, M. N., Bolli, R. & Hare, J. M. Clinical studies of cell therapy in cardiovascular medicine: recent developments and future directions. Circ. Res. 123, 266–287 (2018).
Chien, K. R. et al. Regenerating the field of cardiovascular cell therapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 232–237 (2019).
Schneider, M. D. Heartbreak hotel: a convergence in cardiac regeneration. Development 143, 1435–1441 (2016).
Galleu, A. et al. Apoptosis in mesenchymal stromal cells induces in vivo recipient-mediated immunomodulation. Sci. Transl. Med. 9, eaam7828 (2017).
Zhou, T. et al. Challenges and advances in clinical applications of mesenchymal stromal cells. J. Hematol. Oncol. 14, 24 (2021).
Lanza, R., Russell, D. W. & Nagy, A. Engineering universal cells that evade immune detection. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 19, 723–733 (2019).
da Cruz, L. et al. Phase 1 clinical study of an embryonic stem cell-derived retinal pigment epithelium patch in age-related macular degeneration. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 328–337 (2018).
Osborn, T. M., Hallett, P. J., Schumacher, J. M. & Isacson, O. Advantages and recent developments of autologous cell therapy for Parkinson’s disease patients. Front. Cell Neurosci. 14, 58 (2020).
Ford, E. et al. Human pluripotent stem cells-based therapies for neurodegenerative diseases: current status and challenges. Cells 9, 2517 (2020).
Ahmadian-Moghadam, H., Sadat-Shirazi, M. S. & Zarrindast, M. R. Therapeutic potential of stem cells for treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. Biotechnol. Lett. 42, 1073–1101 (2020).
Lim, F. & Sun, A. M. Microencapsulated islets as bioartificial endocrine pancreas. Science 210, 908 (1980).
Basta, G., Montanucci, P. & Calafiore, R. Islet transplantation versus stem cells for the cell therapy of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Minerva Endocrinol. 40, 267–282 (2015).
Drew, L. How stem cells could fix type 1 diabetes. Nature 595, S64–S66 (2021).
Hogrebe, N. J., Maxwell, K. G., Augsornworawat, P. & Millman, J. R. Generation of insulin-producing pancreatic beta cells from multiple human stem cell lines. Nat. Protoc. 16, 4109–4143 (2021).
Henry, R. R. et al. Initial clinical evaluation of VC-01TM combination product — a stem cell–derived islet replacement for type 1 diabetes (T1D). Diabetes 67 (Suppl. 1), 138-OR (2018).
Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).
Mali, P. et al. RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823–826 (2013).
Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819–823 (2013). References 54–56 are three landmark studies describing the development of the CRIPSR–Cas platform for programmable genome editing applications.
Hilton, I. B. & Gersbach, C. A. Enabling functional genomics with genome engineering. Genome Res. 25, 1442–1455 (2015).
Gaj, T., Gersbach, C. A. & Barbas, C. F. III ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol. 31, 397–405 (2013).
Doudna, J. A. The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing. Nature 578, 229–236 (2020).
Porteus, M. H. A new class of medicines through DNA editing. N. Engl. J. Med. 380, 947–959 (2019).
Canver, M. C. et al. BCL11A enhancer dissection by Cas9-mediated in situ saturating mutagenesis. Nature 527, 192–197 (2015). This study demonstrates the use of CRISPR–Cas9 to saturate the BCL11A enhancer with mutations to produce a map of vulnerabilities that could open the door to new treatments for β-globinopathies.
Hu, W. et al. RNA-directed gene editing specifically eradicates latent and prevents new HIV-1 infection. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 11461–11466 (2014).
Hu, Z. et al. Disruption of HPV16-E7 by CRISPR/Cas system induces apoptosis and growth inhibition in HPV16 positive human cervical cancer cells. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 612823 (2014).
Bak, R. O. et al. Multiplexed genetic engineering of human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells using CRISPR/Cas9 and AAV6. eLife 6, e27873 (2017).
Ren, J. et al. Multiplex genome editing to generate universal CAR T cells resistant to PD1 inhibition. Clin. Cancer Res. 23, 2255–2266 (2017). This study leverages multiplexed CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing and lentiviral delivery of a CAR to generate CAR-T cells with potent antitumour activities and reduced alloreactivity.
Kabadi, A. M., Ousterout, D. G., Hilton, I. B. & Gersbach, C. A. Multiplex CRISPR/Cas9-based genome engineering from a single lentiviral vector. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, e147 (2014).
Eyquem, J. et al. Targeting a CAR to the TRAC locus with CRISPR/Cas9 enhances tumour rejection. Nature 543, 113–117 (2017). This study uses CRISPR–Cas-based genome editing to insert a CD19-specific CAR into the native TRAC locus, resulting in uniform CAR expression and enhanced CAR-T cell potency.
Roth, T. L. et al. Pooled knockin targeting for genome engineering of cellular immunotherapies. Cell 181, 728–744.e721 (2020).
Kosicki, M., Tomberg, K. & Bradley, A. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 765–771 (2018).
Haapaniemi, E., Botla, S., Persson, J., Schmierer, B. & Taipale, J. CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing induces a p53-mediated DNA damage response. Nat. Med. 24, 927–930 (2018).
Komor, A. C., Kim, Y. B., Packer, M. S., Zuris, J. A. & Liu, D. R. Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage. Nature 533, 420–424 (2016). This study describes the development of CRISPR–Cas base editors, which enable genome editing without the creation of DSBs in genomic DNA.
Gaudelli, N. M. et al. Programmable base editing of A*T to G*C in genomic DNA without DNA cleavage. Nature 551, 464–471 (2017).
Koblan, L. W. et al. Improving cytidine and adenine base editors by expression optimization and ancestral reconstruction. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 843–846 (2018).
Rees, H. A. & Liu, D. R. Base editing: precision chemistry on the genome and transcriptome of living cells. Nat. Rev. Genet. 19, 770–788 (2018).
Sangsin Lee, N. D. et al. Single C-to-T substitution using engineered APOBEC3G-nCas9 base editors with minimum genome- and transcriptome-wide off-target effects. Sci. Adv. 6, eaba1773 (2020).
Webber, B. R. et al. Highly efficient multiplex human T cell engineering without double-strand breaks using Cas9 base editors. Nat. Commun. 10, 5222 (2019).
Anzalone, A. V. et al. Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature 576, 149–157 (2019). This study describes the development of the CRISPR–Cas-based prime editing platorm, which can enable genome editing and programmable sequence alterations without the creation of DSBs in genomic DNA.
Strecker, J. et al. RNA-guided DNA insertion with CRISPR-associated transposases. Science 365, 48–53 (2019).
Klompe, S. E., Vo, P. L. H., Halpin-Healy, T. S. & Sternberg, S. H. Transposon-encoded CRISPR-Cas systems direct RNA-guided DNA integration. Nature 571, 219–225 (2019).
Charlesworth, C. T. et al. Identification of preexisting adaptive immunity to Cas9 proteins in humans. Nat. Med. 25, 249–254 (2019).
Wagner, D. L. et al. High prevalence of Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9-reactive T cells within the adult human population. Nat. Med. 25, 242–248 (2019).
Enache, O. M. et al. Cas9 activates the p53 pathway and selects for p53-inactivating mutations. Nat. Genet. 52, 662–668 (2020).
van Haasteren, J., Li, J., Scheideler, O. J., Murthy, N. & Schaffer, D. V. The delivery challenge: fulfilling the promise of therapeutic genome editing. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 845–855 (2020).
Gemberling, M. P. et al. Transgenic mice for in vivo epigenome editing with CRISPR-based systems. Nat. Methods 18, 965–974 (2021).
Stadtmauer, E. A. et al. CRISPR-engineered T cells in patients with refractory cancer. Science 367, eaba7365 (2020).
Klichinsky, M. et al. Human chimeric antigen receptor macrophages for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 947–953 (2020).
Cooper, M. L. et al. An “off-the-shelf” fratricide-resistant CAR-T for the treatment of T cell hematologic malignancies. Leukemia 32, 1970–1983 (2018).
Xu, H. et al. Targeted Disruption of HLA Genes via CRISPR-Cas9 generates iPSCs with enhanced immune compatibility. Cell Stem Cell 24, 566–578.e567 (2019).
Deuse, T. et al. Hypoimmunogenic derivatives of induced pluripotent stem cells evade immune rejection in fully immunocompetent allogeneic recipients. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 252–258 (2019).
Selle, K. et al. In vivo targeting of clostridioides difficile using phage-delivered CRISPR-Cas3 antimicrobials. mBio 10, e00019-20 (2020).
Gomaa, A. A. et al. Programmable removal of bacterial strains by use of genome-targeting CRISPR-Cas systems. mBio 5, e00928-13 (2014).
Frangoul, H. et al. CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 252–260 (2021).
Li, H. et al. In vivo genome editing restores haemostasis in a mouse model of haemophilia. Nature 475, 217–221 (2011).
Laoharawee, K. et al. Dose-dependent prevention of metabolic and neurologic disease in Murine MPS II by ZFN-mediated in vivo genome editing. Mol. Ther. 26, 1127–1136 (2018).
Thakore, P. I., Black, J. B., Hilton, I. B. & Gersbach, C. A. Editing the epigenome: technologies for programmable transcription and epigenetic modulation. Nat. Methods 13, 127–137 (2016).
Pickar-Oliver, A. & Gersbach, C. A. The next generation of CRISPR-Cas technologies and applications. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 490–507 (2019).
Goell, J. H. & Hilton, I. B. CRISPR/Cas-based epigenome editing: advances, applications, and clinical utility. Trends Biotechnol. 39, 678–691 (2021).
Chavez, A. et al. Highly efficient Cas9-mediated transcriptional programming. Nat. Methods 12, 326–328 (2015). This study describes the development of the widely used dCas9–VPR CRISPRa platform.
Black, J. B. et al. Targeted epigenetic remodeling of endogenous loci by CRISPR/Cas9-based transcriptional activators directly converts fibroblasts to neuronal cells. Cell Stem Cell 19, 406–414 (2016).
Chakraborty, S. et al. A CRISPR/Cas9-based system for reprogramming cell lineage specification. Stem Cell Rep. 3, 940–947 (2014).
Liao, H. K. et al. In vivo target gene activation via CRISPR/Cas9-mediated trans-epigenetic modulation. Cell 171, 1495–1507.e1415 (2017). This study demonstrates the utility of CRISPR–Cas-based gene activation in vivo for diverse indications.
Zhou, H. et al. In vivo simultaneous transcriptional activation of multiple genes in the brain using CRISPR-dCas9-activator transgenic mice. Nat. Neurosci. 21, 440–446 (2018).
Liu, P., Chen, M., Liu, Y., Qi, L. S. & Ding, S. CRISPR-based chromatin remodeling of the endogenous Oct4 or Sox2 locus enables reprogramming to pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 22, 252–261.e254 (2018).
Weltner, J. et al. Human pluripotent reprogramming with CRISPR activators. Nat. Commun. 9, 2643 (2018).
Mahata, B. et al. Compact engineered human transactivation modules enable potent and versatile synthetic transcriptional control. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.21.485228 (2022).
Nelson, C. E., Robinson-Hamm, J. N. & Gersbach, C. A. Genome engineering: a new approach to gene therapy for neuromuscular disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 13, 647–661 (2017).
Thakore, P. I. et al. RNA-guided transcriptional silencing in vivo with S. aureus CRISPR-Cas9 repressors. Nat. Commun. 9, 1674 (2018).
Hilton, I. B. et al. Epigenome editing by a CRISPR-Cas9-based acetyltransferase activates genes from promoters and enhancers. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 510–517 (2015). This study is one of the first examples of using dCas9-based fusions to programmably modulate the human epigenome and activate gene expression from endogenous human enhancers.
Li, J. et al. Programmable human histone phosphorylation and gene activation using a CRISPR/Cas9-based chromatin kinase. Nat. Commun. 12, 896 (2021).
Feucht, J. et al. Calibration of CAR activation potential directs alternative T cell fates and therapeutic potency. Nat. Med. 25, 82–88 (2019).
Cameron, D. E., Bashor, C. J. & Collins, J. J. A brief history of synthetic biology. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 12, 381–390 (2014).
Auslander, S. & Fussenegger, M. Engineering gene circuits for mammalian cell-based applications. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 8, a023895 (2016).
Kitada, T., DiAndreth, B., Teague, B. & Weiss, R. Programming gene and engineered-cell therapies with synthetic biology. Science 359, eaad1067 (2018).
Lim, W. A. & June, C. H. The principles of engineering immune cells to treat cancer. Cell 168, 724–740 (2017).
Roybal, K. T. & Lim, W. A. Synthetic immunology: hacking immune cells to expand their therapeutic capabilities. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 35, 229–253 (2017).
Di Stasi, A. et al. Inducible apoptosis as a safety switch for adoptive cell therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 1673–1683 (2011).
Wu, C. Y., Roybal, K. T., Puchner, E. M., Onuffer, J. & Lim, W. A. Remote control of therapeutic T cells through a small molecule-gated chimeric receptor. Science 350, aab4077 (2015).
Roybal, K. T. et al. Precision tumor recognition by T cells with combinatorial antigen-sensing circuits. Cell 164, 770–779 (2016). This study describes the the first use of transcriptional circuits engineered from artificial Notch-derived receptors to ehance CAR-T cell specificity.
Nissim, L. et al. Synthetic RNA-based immunomodulatory gene circuits for cancer immunotherapy. Cell 171, 1138–1150.e1115 (2017). This study reports on the use of RNA-based synthetic circuitry to direct a CAR-T cell to a target cell by computing its intracellular state.
Hernandez-Lopez, R. A. et al. T cell circuits that sense antigen density with an ultrasensitive threshold. Science 371, 1166–1171 (2021).
Williams, J. Z. et al. Precise T cell recognition programs designed by transcriptionally linking multiple receptors. Science 370, 1099–1104 (2020).
Cho, J. H., Collins, J. J. & Wong, W. W. Universal chimeric antigen receptors for multiplexed and logical control of T cell responses. Cell 173, 1426–1438.e1411 (2018). This study demonstrates the ability to direct CAR-T cells to specific cellular targets using programmable extracellular protein scaffolds.
Lajoie, M. J. et al. Designed protein logic to target cells with precise combinations of surface antigens. Science 369, 1637–1643 (2020).
Mo, F. et al. Engineered off-the-shelf therapeutic T cells resist host immune rejection. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 56–63 (2021).
Schukur, L., Geering, B., Charpin-El Hamri, G. & Fussenegger, M. Implantable synthetic cytokine converter cells with AND-gate logic treat experimental psoriasis. Sci. Transl. Med. 7, 318ra201 (2015). This study is one of the first examples of closed-loop sense-and-respond circuitry that enables cells to sense disease-associated environmental cues and therapeutically respond.
Xie, M. et al. Beta-cell-mimetic designer cells provide closed-loop glycemic control. Science 354, 1296–1301 (2016). This study harnesses ion channels to engineer encapsulated cell devices that are capable of treating glycaemia in an in vivo model.
Stirling, F. et al. Rational design of evolutionarily stable microbial kill switches. Mol. Cell 68, 686–697.e683 (2017).
Saxena, P., Bojar, D., Zulewski, H. & Fussenegger, M. Generation of glucose-sensitive insulin-secreting beta-like cells from human embryonic stem cells by incorporating a synthetic lineage-control network. J. Biotechnol. 259, 39–45 (2017). In this study, the authors describe one of the first instances of gene circuit-guided differentiation of pluripotent stem cells towards a mature cell fate.
Guye, P. et al. Genetically engineering self-organization of human pluripotent stem cells into a liver bud-like tissue using Gata6. Nat. Commun. 7, 10243 (2016).
Velazquez, J. J. et al. Gene regulatory network analysis and engineering directs development and vascularization of multilineage human liver organoids. Cell Syst. 12, 41–55.e11 (2021).
Khalil, A. S. et al. A synthetic biology framework for programming eukaryotic transcription functions. Cell 150, 647–658 (2012).
Donahue, P. S. et al. The COMET toolkit for composing customizable genetic programs in mammalian cells. Nat. Commun. 11, 779 (2020). References 131 and 132 describe a highly modular ZF transcription factor-based gene circuit engineering platform, and demonstrate its scalability to engineering complex circuit architetures in yeast and human cells.
Lienert, F., Lohmueller, J. J., Garg, A. & Silver, P. A. Synthetic biology in mammalian cells: next generation research tools and therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 95–107 (2014).
Bashor, C. J. et al. Complex signal processing in synthetic gene circuits using cooperative regulatory assemblies. Science 364, 593–597 (2019).
Chen, Z. et al. Programmable design of orthogonal protein heterodimers. Nature 565, 106–111 (2019). This study describes a set of computationally designed modular protein switches with verastile use for programming post-translational cellular circuitry.
Scheller, L., Strittmatter, T., Fuchs, D., Bojar, D. & Fussenegger, M. Generalized extracellular molecule sensor platform for programming cellular behavior. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 723–729 (2018).
Chang, Z. L. et al. Rewiring T-cell responses to soluble factors with chimeric antigen receptors. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 317–324 (2018).
Scarpitta, S. C. & Harley, N. H. Adsorption and desorption of noble gases on activated charcoal: I. 133Xe studies in a monolayer and packed bed. Health Phys. 59, 383–392 (1990).
Cheng, Z. et al. Targeted migration of mesenchymal stem cells modified with CXCR4 gene to infarcted myocardium improves cardiac performance. Mol. Ther. 16, 571–579 (2008).
Wan, T. et al. Genome editing of mutant KRAS through supramolecular polymer-mediated delivery of Cas9 ribonucleoprotein for colorectal cancer therapy. J. Control. Rel. 322, 236–247 (2020).
Maze, A. & Benenson, Y. Artificial signaling in mammalian cells enabled by prokaryotic two-component system. Nat. Chem. Biol. 16, 179–187 (2020).
Kim, E. et al. In vivo genome editing with a small Cas9 orthologue derived from Campylobacter jejuni. Nat. Commun. 8, 14500 (2017).
Schwarz, K. A., Daringer, N. M., Dolberg, T. B. & Leonard, J. N. Rewiring human cellular input-output using modular extracellular sensors. Nat. Chem. Biol. 13, 202–209 (2017).
Gordley, R. M. et al. Engineering dynamical control of cell fate switching using synthetic phospho-regulons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 13528–13533 (2016).
Gaub, B. M. et al. Neurons differentiate magnitude and location of mechanical stimuli. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 848–856 (2020).
Frey, B., Janel, G., Michelsen, U. & Kersten, H. Mutations in the Escherichia coli fnr and tgt genes: control of molybdate reductase activity and the cytochrome d complex by fnr. J. Bacteriol. 171, 1524–1530 (1989).
Kazuki, Y. & Oshimura, M. Human artificial chromosomes for gene delivery and the development of animal models. Mol. Ther. 19, 1591–1601 (2011).
Vijayachandran, L. S. et al. Gene gymnastics: synthetic biology for baculovirus expression vector system engineering. Bioengineered 4, 279–287 (2013).
Coon, M. E., Stephan, S. B., Gupta, V., Kealey, C. P. & Stephan, M. T. Nitinol thin films functionalized with CAR-T cells for the treatment of solid tumours. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 195–206 (2020).
Stephan, S. B. et al. Biopolymer implants enhance the efficacy of adoptive T-cell therapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 97–101 (2015).
Ghanta, R. K. et al. Immune-modulatory alginate protects mesenchymal stem cells for sustained delivery of reparative factors to ischemic myocardium. Biomater. Sci. 8, 5061–5070 (2020).
Chang, H. et al. Cryomicroneedles for transdermal cell delivery. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 1008–1018 (2021).
Nash, A. et al. Clinically translatable cytokine delivery platform for eradication of intraperitoneal tumors. Sci. Adv. 8, eabm1032 (2022). This study demonstrates programmable and localized immunomodulation through cell-generated cytokines.
Sieving, P. A. et al. Ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) for human retinal degeneration: phase I trial of CNTF delivered by encapsulated cell intraocular implants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 3896–3901 (2006).
Ramzy, A. et al. Implanted pluripotent stem-cell-derived pancreatic endoderm cells secrete glucose-responsive C-peptide in patients with type 1 diabetes. Cell Stem Cell 28, 2047–2061.e2045 (2021).
Mitrousis, N., Fokina, A. & Shoichet, M. S. Biomaterials for cell transplantation. Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 441–456 (2018).
Lin, C. M. & Gill, R. G. Direct and indirect allograft recognition: pathways dictating graft rejection mechanisms. Curr. Opin. Organ. Transpl. 21, 40–44 (2016).
Wang, G., Kong, G. & Li, X. C. Adaptive features of innate immune cells and their relevance to graft rejection. Curr. Opin. Organ. Transpl. 24, 664–669 (2019).
Han, X. et al. Generation of hypoimmunogenic human pluripotent stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 10441–10446 (2019).
Deuse, T. et al. Hypoimmune induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cell therapeutics treat cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases in immunocompetent allogeneic mice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2022091118 (2021).
Yoshihara, E. et al. Immune-evasive human islet-like organoids ameliorate diabetes. Nature 586, 606–611 (2020). This study describes the feasibility of universal stem cells for generating hypoimmunigenic islet cells.
Dolgin, E. Diabetes cell therapies take evasive action. Nat. Biotechnol. 40, 291–295 (2022).
Bochenek, M. A. et al. Alginate encapsulation as long-term immune protection of allogeneic pancreatic islet cells transplanted into the omental bursa of macaques. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2, 810–821 (2018). Demonstrates the use of immunomodulatory biomaterials to enable long-term transplantation of allogeneic islets without immunosuppression in non-human primates.
Bose, S. et al. A retrievable implant for the long-term encapsulation and survival of therapeutic xenogeneic cells. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 814–826 (2020).
Farina, M., Alexander, J. F., Thekkedath, U., Ferrari, M. & Grattoni, A. Cell encapsulation: overcoming barriers in cell transplantation in diabetes and beyond. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 139, 92–115 (2019).
Basta, G. et al. Long-term metabolic and immunological follow-up of nonimmunosuppressed patients with type 1 diabetes treated with microencapsulated islet allografts: four cases. Diabetes Care 34, 2406–2409 (2011).
Calafiore, R. et al. Microencapsulated pancreatic islet allografts into nonimmunosuppressed patients with type 1 diabetes: first two cases. Diabetes Care 29, 137–138 (2006).
Tuch, B. E. et al. Safety and viability of microencapsulated human islets transplanted into diabetic humans. Diabetes Care 32, 1887–1889 (2009).
Elliott, R. B. et al. Live encapsulated porcine islets from a type 1 diabetic patient 9.5yr after xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 14, 157–161 (2007).
Desai, T. & Shea, L. D. Advances in islet encapsulation technologies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 16, 338–350 (2017).
Strand, B. L., Coron, A. E. & Skjak-Braek, G. Current and future perspectives on alginate encapsulated pancreatic islet. Stem Cell Transl. Med. 6, 1053–1058 (2017).
Desai, T. & Shea, L. D. Advances in islet encapsulation technologies. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 16, 367 (2017).
Chew, E. Y. et al. Effect of ciliary neurotrophic factor on retinal neurodegeneration in patients with macular telangiectasia type 2: a randomized clinical trial. Ophthalmology 126, 540–549 (2019).
Lohr, M. et al. Cell therapy using microencapsulated 293 cells transfected with a gene construct expressing CYP2B1, an ifosfamide converting enzyme, instilled intra-arterially in patients with advanced-stage pancreatic carcinoma: a phase I/II study. J. Mol. Med. 77, 393–398 (1999).
Snow, B. et al. A phase IIb, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging investigation of the safety and efficacy of NTCELL((R)) [immunoprotected (alginate-encapsulated) porcine choroid plexus cells for xenotransplantation] in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat. Disord. 61, 88–93 (2019).
Doloff, J. C. et al. Colony stimulating factor-1 receptor is a central component of the foreign body response to biomaterial implants in rodents and non-human primates. Nat. Mater. 16, 671–680 (2017).
Ashimova, A., Yegorov, S., Negmetzhanov, B. & Hortelano, G. Cell encapsulation within alginate microcapsules: immunological challenges and outlook. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 7, 380 (2019).
Veiseh, O. & Vegas, A. J. Domesticating the foreign body response: recent advances and applications. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 144, 148–161 (2019).
Sheikh, Z., Brooks, P. J., Barzilay, O., Fine, N. & Glogauer, M. Macrophages, foreign body giant cells and their response to implantable biomaterials. Materials 8, 5671–5701 (2015).
Dondossola, E. et al. Examination of the foreign body response to biomaterials by nonlinear intravital microscopy. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 0007 (2016).
Veiseh, O. et al. Size- and shape-dependent foreign body immune response to materials implanted in rodents and non-human primates. Nat. Mater. 14, 643–651 (2015).
Farah, S. et al. Long-term implant fibrosis prevention in rodents and non-human primates using crystallized drug formulations. Nat. Mater. 18, 892–904 (2019).
Yesilyurt, V. et al. A facile and versatile method to endow biomaterial devices with zwitterionic surface coatings. Adv. Health. Mater. 6, https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.201601091 (2017).
Vegas, A. J. et al. Combinatorial hydrogel library enables identification of materials that mitigate the foreign body response in primates. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 345–352 (2016).
Bygd, H. C. & Bratlie, K. M. The effect of chemically modified alginates on macrophage phenotype and biomolecule transport. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 104, 1707–1719 (2016).
Shapiro, A. D. et al. First-in-human phase 1/2 clinical trial of SIG-001, an innovative shielded cell therapy platform, for hemophilia Α. Blood 136 (Suppl. 1), 8 (2020).
Blackman, L. D., Gunatillake, P. A., Cass, P. & Locock, K. E. S. An introduction to zwitterionic polymer behavior and applications in solution and at surfaces. Chem. Soc. Rev. 48, 757–770 (2019).
Jiang, S. & Cao, Z. Ultralow-fouling, functionalizable, and hydrolyzable zwitterionic materials and their derivatives for biological applications. Adv. Mater. 22, 920–932 (2010).
Xie, X. et al. Reduction of measurement noise in a continuous glucose monitor by coating the sensor with a zwitterionic polymer. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2, 894–906 (2018).
Liu, Q. et al. Zwitterionically modified alginates mitigate cellular overgrowth for cell encapsulation. Nat. Commun. 10, 5262 (2019).
Mariani, E., Lisignoli, G., Borzi, R. M. & Pulsatelli, L. Biomaterials: foreign bodies or tuners for the immune response? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 20, 636 (2019).
Chandorkar, Y., K, R. & Basu, B. The foreign body response demystified. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 5, 19–44 (2019).
Vassey, M. J. et al. Immune modulation by design: using topography to control human monocyte attachment and macrophage differentiation. Adv. Sci. 7, 1903392 (2020).
Roach, P., Eglin, D., Rohde, K. & Perry, C. C. Modern biomaterials: a review — bulk properties and implications of surface modifications. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 18, 1263–1277 (2007).
Doloff, J. C. et al. The surface topography of silicone breast implants mediates the foreign body response in mice, rabbits and humans. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 1115–1130 (2021).
Chen, S. et al. Characterization of topographical effects on macrophage behavior in a foreign body response model. Biomaterials 31, 3479–3491 (2010).
Hulander, M. et al. Immune complement activation is attenuated by surface nanotopography. Int. J. Nanomed. 6, 2653–2666 (2011).
Jahed, Z. et al. Cell responses to metallic nanostructure arrays with complex geometries. Biomaterials 35, 9363–9371 (2014).
Rajyalakshmi, A., Ercan, B., Balasubramanian, K. & Webster, T. J. Reduced adhesion of macrophages on anodized titanium with select nanotube surface features. Int. J. Nanomed. 6, 1765–1771 (2011).
Finbloom, J. A., Sousa, F., Stevens, M. M. & Desai, T. A. Engineering the drug carrier biointerface to overcome biological barriers to drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 167, 89–108 (2020).
Lin, C.-C., Metters, A. T. & Anseth, K. S. Functional PEG–peptide hydrogels to modulate local inflammation inducedby the pro-inflammatory cytokine TNFα. Biomaterials 30, 4907–4914 (2009).
Chang, R. et al. Nanoporous immunoprotective device for stem-cell-derived beta-cell replacement therapy. ACS Nano 11, 7747–7757 (2017).
Goswami, D. et al. Design considerations for macroencapsulation devices for stem cell derived islets for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Adv. Sci. 8, e2100820 (2021).
Wang, L. H. et al. An inverse-breathing encapsulation system for cell delivery. Sci. Adv. 7, eabd5835 (2021).
Yang, K. et al. A therapeutic convection-enhanced macroencapsulation device for enhancing beta cell viability and insulin secretion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2101258118 (2021).
Mirabella, T. et al. 3D-printed vascular networks direct therapeutic angiogenesis in ischaemia. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 1, 0083 (2017).
Sarker, M. D., Naghieh, S., Sharma, N. K. & Chen, X. 3D biofabrication of vascular networks for tissue regeneration: a report on recent advances. J. Pharm. Anal. 8, 277–296 (2018).
Mastrullo, V., Cathery, W., Velliou, E., Madeddu, P. & Campagnolo, P. Angiogenesis in tissue engineering: as Nature intended? Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8, 188 (2020).
Grigoryan, B. et al. Multivascular networks and functional intravascular topologies within biocompatible hydrogels. Science 364, 458–464 (2019).
Regehly, M. et al. Xolography for linear volumetric 3D printing. Nature 588, 620–624 (2020).
Skylar-Scott, M. A., Mueller, J., Visser, C. W. & Lewis, J. A. Voxelated soft matter via multimaterial multinozzle 3D printing. Nature 575, 330–335 (2019).
Skylar-Scott, M. A. et al. Biomanufacturing of organ-specific tissues with high cellular density and embedded vascular channels. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2459 (2019).
Lee, A. et al. 3D bioprinting of collagen to rebuild components of the human heart. Science 365, 482–487 (2019).
Hynes, W. F. et al. Examining metastatic behavior within 3D bioprinted vasculature for the validation of a 3D computational flow model. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb3308 (2020).
Kinstlinger, I. S. et al. Generation of model tissues with dendritic vascular networks via sacrificial laser-sintered carbohydrate templates. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 916–932 (2020).
Kinstlinger, I. S. & Miller, J. S. 3D-printed fluidic networks as vasculature for engineered tissue. Lab. Chip 16, 2025–2043 (2016).
TG, P. & C, S. Vascular wall shear stress: basic principles and methods. Hellenic J. Cardiol. 46, 9–15 (2005).
Koons, G. L., Diba, M. & Mikos, A. G. Materials design for bone-tissue engineering. Nat. Rev. Mater. 5, 584–603 (2020).
Frassica, M. T. & Grunlan, M. A. Perspectives on synthetic materials to guide tissue regeneration for osteochondral defect repair. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 6, 4324–4336 (2020).
Wainwright, D. J. Use of an acellular allograft dermal matrix (AlloDerm) in the management of full-thickness burns. Burn 21, 243–248 (1995).
Veves, A., Falanga, V., Armstrong, D. G. & Sabolinski, M. L. Graftskin, a human skin equivalent, is effective in the management of noninfected neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial. Diabetes Care 24, 290–295 (2001).
Bargehr, J. et al. Epicardial cells derived from human embryonic stem cells augment cardiomyocyte-driven heart regeneration. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 895–906 (2019).
Kearney, C. J. et al. Switchable release of entrapped nanoparticles from alginate hydrogels. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 4, 1634–1639 (2015).
Abedi, M. H., Lee, J., Piraner, D. I. & Shapiro, M. G. Thermal control of engineered T-cells. ACS Synth. Biol. 9, 1941–1950 (2020).
Chen, R., Romero, G., Christiansen, M. G., Mohr, A. & Anikeeva, P. Wireless magnetothermal deep brain stimulation. Science 347, 1477–1480 (2015).
Krawczyk, K. et al. Electrogenetic cellular insulin release for real-time glycemic control in type 1 diabetic mice. Science 368, 993–1001 (2020).
Maude, S. L. et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells for sustained remissions in leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 1507–1517 (2014).
Muul, L. M. et al. Persistence and expression of the adenosine deaminase gene for 12 years and immune reaction to gene transfer components: long-term results of the first clinical gene therapy trial. Blood 101, 2563–2569 (2003).
Schweizer, M. T. et al. A phase I study to assess the safety and cancer-homing ability of allogeneic bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells in men with localized prostate cancer. Stem Cell Transl. Med. 8, 441–449 (2019).
Shapiro, A. M. et al. International trial of the Edmonton protocol for islet transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 1318–1330 (2006).
Matsumoto, S., Abalovich, A., Wechsler, C., Wynyard, S. & Elliott, R. B. Clinical benefit of islet xenotransplantation for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. EBioMedicine 12, 255–262 (2016).
Ludwig, B. et al. Transplantation of human islets without immunosuppression. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 19054–19058 (2013).
Eriksdotter-Jonhagen, M. et al. Encapsulated cell biodelivery of nerve growth factor to the basal forebrain in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Dement. Geriatr. Cogn. Disord. 33, 18–28 (2012).
Kauper, K. et al. Two-year intraocular delivery of ciliary neurotrophic factor by encapsulated cell technology implants in patients with chronic retinal degenerative diseases. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 53, 7484–7491 (2012).
Dhawan, A. et al. Alginate microencapsulated human hepatocytes for the treatment of acute liver failure in children. J. Hepatol. 72, 877–884 (2020).
Xu, X. et al. A CRISPR-based approach for targeted DNA demethylation. Cell Discov. 2, 16009 (2016).
Liu, X. S. et al. Editing DNA methylation in the mammalian genome. Cell 167, 233–247. e217 (2016).
Yue, Y. et al. Extensive germline genome engineering in pigs. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 5, 134–143 (2021).
Alessandrini, M., Krause, K. H., Speck, R. F. & Pepper, M. S. Transplantation of gene-modified haematopoietic stem cells: application and clinical considerations. S. Afr. Med. J. 109, 64–69 (2019).
Lutzko, C. et al. Genetically corrected autologous stem cells engraft, but host immune responses limit their utility in canine alpha-L-iduronidase deficiency. Blood 93, 1895–1905 (1999).
Squeri, G. et al. Targeting a pre-existing anti-transgene T cell response for effective gene therapy of MPS-I in the mouse model of the disease. Mol. Ther. 27, 1215–1227 (2019).
Thompson, A. A. et al. Gene therapy in patients with transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 1479–1493 (2018).
Geller, M. A. & Miller, J. S. Use of allogeneic NK cells for cancer immunotherapy. Immunotherapy 3, 1445–1459 (2011).
Ankrum, J. A., Ong, J. F. & Karp, J. M. Mesenchymal stem cells: immune evasive, not immune privileged. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 252–260 (2014).
Brusko, T. M., Russ, H. A. & Stabler, C. L. Strategies for durable beta cell replacement in type 1 diabetes. Science 373, 516–522 (2021).
Barney, L. et al. Optimization of shielded encapsulated cell therapy for hemophilia and beyond. Mol. Ther. 28, 364 (2020).
Anderson, J. M., Rodriguez, A. & Chang, D. T. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin. Immunol. 20, 86–100 (2008).
Vegas, A. J. et al. Long-term glycemic control using polymer-encapsulated human stem cell-derived beta cells in immune-competent mice. Nat. Med. 22, 306–311 (2016).
Ran, F. A. et al. In vivo genome editing using Staphylococcus aureus Cas9. Nature 520, 186–191 (2015).
Ibraheim, R. et al. All-in-one adeno-associated virus delivery and genome editing by Neisseria meningitidis Cas9 in vivo. Genome Biol. 19, 137 (2018).
Fonfara, I., Richter, H., Bratovic, M., Le Rhun, A. & Charpentier, E. The CRISPR-associated DNA-cleaving enzyme Cpf1 also processes precursor CRISPR RNA. Nature 532, 517–521 (2016).
Zetsche, B. et al. Multiplex gene editing by CRISPR-Cpf1 using a single crRNA array. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 31–34 (2017).
Abudayyeh, O. O. et al. RNA targeting with CRISPR-Cas13. Nature 550, 280–284 (2017). This study describes the use of CRISPR–Cas13 to target endogenous RNAs for degradation.
Konermann, S. et al. Transcriptome engineering with RNA-targeting Type VI-D CRISPR effectors. Cell 173, 665–676.e614 (2018). This study describes the development of the widely used dCas9–VPR CRISPRa platform.
Pickar-Oliver, A. et al. Targeted transcriptional modulation with type I CRISPR-Cas systems in human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1493–1501 (2019).
Cameron, P. et al. Harnessing type I CRISPR-Cas systems for genome engineering in human cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1471–1477 (2019).
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. High-fidelity CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target effects. Nature 529, 490–495 (2016).
Slaymaker, I. M. et al. Rationally engineered Cas9 nucleases with improved specificity. Science 351, 84–88 (2016). References 257 and 258 highlight engineering efforts resulting in Cas9 proteins with improved specificity profiles in human cells.
Chen, J. S. et al. Enhanced proofreading governs CRISPR-Cas9 targeting accuracy. Nature 550, 407–410 (2017).
Kleinstiver, B. P. et al. Engineered CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases with altered PAM specificities. Nature 523, 481–485 (2015).
Hu, J. H. et al. Evolved Cas9 variants with broad PAM compatibility and high DNA specificity. Nature 556, 57–63 (2018).
Walton, R. T., Christie, K. A., Whittaker, M. N. & Kleinstiver, B. P. Unconstrained genome targeting with near-PAMless engineered CRISPR-Cas9 variants. Science 368, 290–296 (2020).
Qi, L. S. et al. Repurposing CRISPR as an RNA-guided platform for sequence-specific control of gene expression. Cell 152, 1173–1183 (2013).
Gilbert, L. A. et al. CRISPR-mediated modular RNA-guided regulation of transcription in eukaryotes. Cell 154, 442–451 (2013). References 263 and 264 are landmark studies describing the use of the dCas9 protein as a platform to modulate gene expression in human cells.
Konermann, S. et al. Genome-scale transcriptional activation by an engineered CRISPR-Cas9 complex. Nature 517, 583–588 (2015).
Tanenbaum, M. E., Gilbert, L. A., Qi, L. S., Weissman, J. S. & Vale, R. D. A protein-tagging system for signal amplification in gene expression and fluorescence imaging. Cell 159, 635–646 (2014).
Yeo, N. C. et al. An enhanced CRISPR repressor for targeted mammalian gene regulation. Nat. Methods 15, 611–616 (2018).
Stepper, P. et al. Efficient targeted DNA methylation with chimeric dCas9-Dnmt3a-Dnmt3L methyltransferase. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 1703–1713 (2017).
O’Geen, H. et al. dCas9-based epigenome editing suggests acquisition of histone methylation is not sufficient for target gene repression. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 9901–9916 (2017).
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge editorial assistance of J. Veljkovic Garafalo, an employee of Sigilon Therapeutics (Cambridge, MA). Work in the authors’ laboratories was supported by the JDRF grant JDRF 3-SRA-2021-1023-S-B (O.V.), the US NIH, grants R01DK120459 (O.V.), R35GM143532 (I.B.H.), R21EB030772 (I.B.H.) and R01EB032272 (C.J.B.), ONR N00014-21-1-4006 (C.J.B.) the Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) grants RR170030 (I.B.H.) and RP210205 (O.V.).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors performed literature reviews and participated in the writing of the manuscript. C.J.B., I.B.H. and O.V. share corresponding author responsibilities.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
All authors are inventors on several patents in the field of cell-based therapeutics, biomaterials, genome editing and genetic engineering that are owned by their current or former employers. D.M.S. holds equity in Sigilon Therapeutics and is currently an employee and shareholder of Arbor Bio. H.B. holds equity in Sigilon Therapeutics and is currently an employee and shareholder of Flagship Pioneering. O.V. is co-founder, holds equity in and receives consulting payments from Sigilon Therapeutics, Pana Bio, Avenge Bio and Curada Bio. O.V. has received compensation for consulting from Establishment Labs and Auregen Bio Therapeutics SA. The views presented here should not be considered as endorsements of any specific product or company.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Glossary
- Adoptive cell transfer
-
The transfer of cells into a recipient patient.
- Gene therapy
-
A therapy whereby vectors are administered to modify a person’s genes to treat or cure a disease.
- Chimeric antigen receptors
-
Receptors that have been engineered to direct immune cell response to cells expressing specific antigens.
- Cell therapy
-
A form of treatment in which viable cells are administered to a patient to elicit a medicinal effect.
- Epigenome editing
-
Genetic engineering approach in which the epigenome is modified at specific genomic sites using engineered molecules.
- Allogeneic cell therapies
-
Cell therapy interventions that rely on a single donor source to treat many patients.
- Pluripotent stem cells
-
Cells that have the capacity to self-renew by dividing and to differentiate into various phenotypes.
- Universal cells
-
Cells that have been genetically manipulated to remove required components for immune recognition to create a universal donor.
- Non-homologous end joining
-
(NHEJ). An error-prone mechanism in which broken ends of DNA are joined together.
- Homology-directed repair
-
(HDR). A precise repair mechanism that uses homologous donor DNA to repair DNA damage.
- Base editing
-
CRISPR–Cas9-based genome editing technology that allows the introduction of point mutations in the DNA without generating double-stranded breaks.
- Safety kill switch
-
Engineered gene into therapeutic cells that can be activated using small molecules to induce apoptosis to enhance the safety of cell therapy.
- Switch-like activation
-
When system activates abruptly at a specific threshold of input.
- Boolean AND-gate
-
A system that performs a computation whereby an output occurs only when all the inputs are present.
- Hypoimmunogenic
-
Describes genetically manipulated cells designed to avoid adaptive and innate immune surveillance.
- Autologous cell therapy
-
Cell therapy intervention that uses an individual’s own cells.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bashor, C.J., Hilton, I.B., Bandukwala, H. et al. Engineering the next generation of cell-based therapeutics. Nat Rev Drug Discov 21, 655–675 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41573-022-00476-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41573-022-00476-6
