Molecular biotechnologyJan 6, 2026

Using Prime Editing, CRISPR-Cas9, and NanoCas Gene Editing Techniques for Cancer Treatment

CRISPR Gene Editing Weekly Brief ↗PubMed ↗DOI ↗

Updated Jan 7, 2026

Abstract

Genome editing technologies have evolved significantly over two decades, with advanced systems like CRISPR-Cas9 and prime editing showing potential in cancer treatment.

CRISPR-Cas9 facilitates gene knockouts and high-throughput genomic screening but has limitations including off-target effects.
Base and prime editors provide alternatives that do not induce double-strand breaks, potentially correcting mutations in key oncogenes like TP53, KRAS, and EGFR.
Prime editing faces challenges related to delivery and efficiency despite its versatility.
NanoCas systems, derived from compact Cas orthologs, may offer improved delivery for in vivo applications.
The effectiveness and safety of genome editing are influenced by factors like tumor microenvironment, cell-type specificity, and immune barriers.
Strategies such as high-fidelity variants and optimized guide RNAs aim to enhance precision and reduce risks associated with these technologies.

Simplified

Over the past two decades, genome editing has advanced dramatically from Zinc Finger Nucleases (ZFNs) and Transcription Activator-Like Effector Nucleases (TALENs) to more refined systems such as CRISPR-Cas9, prime editing, and nanoCas technologies. These innovations have opened new frontiers in cancer treatment. This review aims to critically examine and compare recent advances in these genome editing platforms, with a focus on their molecular mechanisms, delivery challenges, oncological applications, and clinical prospects. We systematically explore how CRISPR-Cas9 enables gene knockouts, high-throughput functional genomic screens, and immune editing, while acknowledging its limitations due to off-target effects and genotoxicity. In contrast, base and prime editors offer precise, double-strand breaks (DSBs) free alternatives, suitable for correcting oncogenic mutations such as TP53, KRAS, and EGFR. Prime editing, although versatile, faces delivery and efficiency challenges. The emergence of nanoCas systems, derived from compact Cas orthologs, provides promising delivery advantages for in vivo applications. We also examine how tumor microenvironment, cell-type specificity, and immune barriers impact editing efficacy and safety. Strategies such as high-fidelity variants, optimized guide RNAs, and stimuli-responsive nanoparticles are discussed to enhance precision and minimize risk. Conclusively, integrating these genome editing tools into oncology requires addressing translational barriers while harnessing their precision and therapeutic potential for next-generation cancer treatments.

Full Text

Full text is available at the source.

View Full Text ↗

Using Prime Editing, CRISPR-Cas9, and NanoCas Gene Editing Techniques for Cancer Treatment

Abstract

Full Text

You found one interesting study. We’ll send the next 7.

what lands in your inbox each week:

Recent issues from the crispr gene editing brief