These posts are one of the highlights of my month. As someone outside the field but with a lay interest, it's so exciting to hear about all this incredible work going on, written in an a way that's accessible to non-experts. Thanks for writing them!
This is really well done! My background is mostly in physical/engineering sciences, and light on biology, but I understand these brief summaries very well. Thanks!
Great issue, and the exa-cel section is the one that earns its space.
The detail you flagged carries the whole story: every serious harm in those trials traces to busulfan, not to the editor. So the trial reads out on two technologies at once, an editing step that behaved and a conditioning step from the 1950s that did the damage. It also means the in vivo prime editing you point to at the end wouldn't be competing with CRISPR on efficacy. It would be competing on whether you need chemotherapy at all. That's the actual comparison.
I love it. Using Crispr Cas12a2 to shred the DNA of p53 mutant cancer cells is great idea. With this technology, delivery is key - and the essential challenge.
These posts are one of the highlights of my month. As someone outside the field but with a lay interest, it's so exciting to hear about all this incredible work going on, written in an a way that's accessible to non-experts. Thanks for writing them!
Thank you!! That’s the goal, so that’s great to hear :)
This is really well done! My background is mostly in physical/engineering sciences, and light on biology, but I understand these brief summaries very well. Thanks!
Very happy to hear that! :)
Love this curated list!
Great issue, and the exa-cel section is the one that earns its space.
The detail you flagged carries the whole story: every serious harm in those trials traces to busulfan, not to the editor. So the trial reads out on two technologies at once, an editing step that behaved and a conditioning step from the 1950s that did the damage. It also means the in vivo prime editing you point to at the end wouldn't be competing with CRISPR on efficacy. It would be competing on whether you need chemotherapy at all. That's the actual comparison.
I love it. Using Crispr Cas12a2 to shred the DNA of p53 mutant cancer cells is great idea. With this technology, delivery is key - and the essential challenge.
> much earlier, after a first relapse
"much" earlier would be to use it when the cancer is first detected. Has that not been considered?
> shifting their wavelength by one-quarter
ITYM their phase
The study of nature is one long lesson in proportion. Human beings matter greatly, but they are not the center of every equation.