What is the duration of RNA-based gene editing compared to Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) gene editing using Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)?

From the Guidelines

RNA-based gene editing effects are temporary, lasting only days to weeks, while DNA-based CRISPR editing creates permanent changes that persist for the lifetime of the cell and can be passed to daughter cells. This is because RNA editing typically modifies gene expression without altering the underlying DNA sequence, working at the messenger RNA level where effects naturally diminish as the edited RNA degrades 1. The duration of RNA therapeutic effects can vary depending on the type of RNA, dose, encoded protein, carrier, and route of administration, with some studies showing effects lasting from a few days to several weeks 1. For example, intravenously administered LNP-mRNA can have effects lasting up to 7 days, while self-amplifying RNA can have effects lasting up to 28 days 1. In contrast, CRISPR-Cas9 directly cuts and modifies the DNA itself, creating permanent genetic changes that remain in the genome indefinitely.

Some key points to consider when comparing RNA and DNA gene editing include:

• The type of RNA therapeutic used, with self-amplifying RNA potentially having longer-lasting effects than other types of RNA 1
• The route of administration, with subcutaneous or intradermal injection potentially leading to longer-lasting effects than intravenous administration 1
• The potential for repeated administration, with RNA editing potentially requiring repeated doses for chronic conditions, while DNA editing through CRISPR potentially offering a one-time treatment solution 1
• The risk of off-target effects, with RNA editing potentially being safer due to its temporary nature, while DNA editing through CRISPR carries a higher risk of permanent genetic changes 1.

Overall, the choice between RNA and DNA gene editing depends on the specific therapeutic goal and the desired duration of effect, with RNA editing potentially being more suitable for temporary modifications and DNA editing being more suitable for permanent genetic corrections 1.

From the Research

Comparison of Gene Editing with RNA and DNA

The duration of gene editing with RNA compared to DNA gene editing with CRISPR is a topic of ongoing research.

• Gene editing with CRISPR technology has been shown to be a highly effective tool for making precise changes to the DNA sequence 2, 3, 4.
• However, the use of CRISPR for RNA editing is a more recent development, and its longevity is still being studied 5, 6.
• RNA editing with CRISPR-Cas13 has been shown to be a promising tool for treating viral infections and other diseases, but its duration of action is not yet fully understood 5, 6.
• In general, RNA editing is considered to be a more temporary solution than DNA editing, as RNA molecules have a shorter half-life than DNA molecules 5, 6.
• However, the development of new CRISPR tools, such as RNA base editors, may provide more stable and long-lasting solutions for RNA editing 5.

Limitations and Future Directions

• The current understanding of RNA editing with CRISPR is limited, and more research is needed to fully understand its potential and limitations 5, 6.
• Further studies are needed to determine the duration of action of RNA editing with CRISPR and to develop more stable and long-lasting solutions 5, 6.
• The use of CRISPR for RNA editing has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of genetic diseases and other disorders, but its development is still in its early stages 2, 3, 4, 6.