Featured Post from ChristianaCare

Scientists Put CRISPR on Safer Path to Patient Treatments with New Process for Evaluating Impacts of Gene Edits that Alter Rather than “Knock Out” DNA Code

Mar 22, 2022

5 min

In new study in journal Gene Therapy, researchers at ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute describe how the advance is validating the safety and efficacy of their novel approach for using CRISPR to improve lung cancer treatments


A new study from scientists at ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute is advancing the safety and efficacy of using CRISPR gene editing in patient treatments by demonstrating how to identify and evaluate the broad-based biological impact of gene editing on targeted tissues, where the edits are designed to fully disable or “knock out” a specific sequence of genetic code. The work, published today in the Nature journal Gene Therapy, supports the Institute’s efforts to improve lung cancer treatments by using CRISPR to disable or alter a master regulator gene to prevent it from producing a protein that blunts the impact of chemotherapy.


“We found that when you use CRISPR, the edits sometimes end up altering rather than completely disabling the target gene, so we developed a process to gain a more complete understanding of what that means for patients,” said Eric Kmiec, Ph.D., executive director and chief scientific officer of ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute and the principal author of the study.


Dr. Kmiec said that for his team’s lung cancer work, “We discovered that even when our CRISPR-based genetic manipulation did not completely disable the targeted gene, it altered it in ways that appear to make lung cancer tumors more sensitive to chemotherapy.


Validating lung cancer research using CRISPR

“We were fortunate that our strategy for using CRISPR to improve lung cancer treatments has been validated once again,” he added. “But our commitment to conducting an unbiased assessment of our approach highlights the importance of examining all potential outcomes of an attempt to use CRISPR to knock out a specific gene. Specifically, anyone developing CRISPR therapies needs to be on the lookout for edits that don’t fully knock out a section of DNA code—and evaluate the potential impacts for patients. They could be positive, as they were in our case, negative or neutral, but they need to be known.”


Much of the excitement around medical applications of CRISPR involves using the tool to disable harmful genes by editing or “knocking out” a specific sequence of DNA code. But there is increasing evidence that in the wake of a CRISPR edit, cells may remain that contain merely an altered form of the targeted code that allows the gene to continue to produce biologically active proteins.


Scientists at the Gene Editing Institute are investigating the potential of using CRISPR to disable a gene called NRF2 to alter production of the protein that protects squamous cell carcinoma lung cancer tumors from the effects of chemotherapy or radiation. They already have shown, in studies with tumor cells and in animals, that they can selectively target the NRF2 gene without affecting normal cells, where the gene confers health benefits.


In the present study they wanted to go further. They wanted to fully understand the implications of a CRISPR gene edit that allowed the NRF2 gene to retain enough DNA code to continue making a version of the protein, albeit in an altered or truncated form. The team is laying the groundwork for a clinical trial that would use CRISPR to improve the efficacy of conventional chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Dr. Kmiec said that before proceeding, he wanted his team to develop a clear process for identifying and evaluating all outcomes of CRISPR edits.

Identifying and understanding the diversity of genetic outcomes produced by CRISPR-directed gene editing has been a centerpiece of the foundational research programs established by the Gene Editing Institute.


Using CRISPR in a safe way

“We carry out experiments in an unbiased fashion, not hoping for a particular outcome, but with patient safety and efficacy serving as the true north for our scientific endeavors,” Dr. Kmiec said. “No matter what we uncover or elucidate, the insights will help both ChristianaCare and the entire field use CRISPR in a safer and more efficacious manner.”


The researchers found multiple cells where the targeted strand of DNA code in the NRF2 gene was not completely knocked out. Rather, following the CRISPR edit, cells emerged that had retained enough of the original code to continue producing a different form of the protein. Tests revealed that cancer tumor cells generating these altered proteins may be more vulnerable to chemotherapy drugs.


"For the work we are doing with NRF2, the truncated proteins generated by the CRISPR edit appear to be beneficial for making tumors more sensitive to treatment,” said lead author Kelly Banas, Ph.D. “But the key point is these proteins were clearly biologically active. And that means we needed to determine their potential impact on the safety and efficacy of using CRISPR to treat lung cancer patients.”


Dr. Banas noted that the study points to the limits of considering a CRISPR edit to be successful simply by testing for the absence of a targeted protein in its original form. She said by that standard, their edit was successful. The edited NRF2 genes were no longer producing the same protein. But she said if that’s all the ChristianaCare team had looked for, they would have missed the altered proteins coming from the NRF2 gene—and overlooked an important outcome that, in this case, strengthens the original hypothesis and experimental approach: that using CRISPR to target the NRF2 gene holds promise for improving outcomes for lung cancer patients.


Importance of due diligence

“The process we describe in this study is a template that should be followed in any effort to develop CRISPR as a medical treatment,” Dr. Kmiec said. “We’re part of a health care organization where patient safety is the top priority. We also are working at the vanguard of an exciting area of cutting-edge medicine, where a failure to conduct due diligence could cause tragic outcomes that would set back this field for decades. With this study, we have validated a process that can help this field move forward rapidly but safely.”


CRISPR stands for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats.” It is a defense mechanism found in bacteria that can recognize and slice up the DNA of invading viruses. Scientists have learned how to modify this mechanism so it can be directed to “edit” specific sequences of DNA code.


About ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute

The Gene Editing Institute, a worldwide leader in CRISPR gene editing technology and the only institute of its kind based within a community health care system, takes a patient-first approach in all its research to improve the lives of people with life-threatening disease. Since 2015, researchers at the Gene Editing Institute have been involved in several ground-breaking firsts in the field, including the development of the first CRISPR gene editing tool to allow DNA repairs outside the human cell which will rapidly speed therapies to patients and the ExACT ™pathway of single-stranded DNA repair, which increased the on-target efficacy of CRISPR and paved the way for new CRISPR breakthroughs in precise DNA edits. Its researchers created CRISPR in a Box™, the leading educational toolkit to teach gene editing, DECODR™, recognized as the most user-friendly and precise analytical tool to understand the diversity of genetic outcomes of gene editing and are currently developing a patient trial for lung cancer using CRISPR.



Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ChristianaCare

3 min

New Study Finds Most Patients Can Safely Continue Weight Loss and Diabetes Drugs Before Gynecologic Surgery

Most patients taking popular weight loss and diabetes medications such as Ozempic and Wegovy can safely continue them before gynecologic surgery, according to a new journal article from ChristianaCare published in Obstetrics & Gynecology. The review found that serious anesthesia risks linked to these drugs are uncommon for most patients and can usually be managed through individualized planning rather than stopping the medication. The paper is the first to take a focused look at glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, commonly called GLP-1 drugs, in gynecologic surgery. These medications were first approved to treat diabetes and are now widely used to support weight loss and metabolic health, which refers to how the body processes sugar and energy. “Our study shows that the evidence does not support routinely stopping these medications before surgery and that the actual risk is low for most patients,” said Michelle Pacis, M.D., MPH, senior author of the study and a minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon at ChristianaCare. Why these medications raised concerns GLP-1 drugs work in part by slowing how quickly the stomach empties. This helps patients feel full longer, but it also raises concerns for surgery. Doctors worry that food remaining in the stomach could increase the risk of aspiration, when stomach contents enter the lungs during anesthesia. Because of this, early recommendations often advised stopping GLP-1 medications before surgery. The ChristianaCare review found that this approach was largely based on caution rather than strong evidence. The authors reviewed data from multiple studies, including large patient groups, that examined outcomes in people taking GLP-1 drugs during procedures. While some studies showed higher amounts of stomach contents, aspiration events were rare and occurred at rates similar to patients who were not taking the medications. New guidance reflects a change in thinking Recent national guidance from several medical societies now recommends a more tailored approach. Most patients can continue GLP-1 medications before surgery. For patients with higher risk factors, such as significant stomach symptoms or known delayed digestion, simple precautions can reduce risk. These precautions may include a clear liquid diet for 24 hours before surgery or closer monitoring during anesthesia. A clear liquid diet includes fluids like water, broth and clear juices. “This shift recognizes both the benefits of these medications and the importance of patient-specific decision making,” Pacis said. Why this matters for gynecologic surgery Many gynecologic surgeries require patients to be positioned in ways that can affect breathing and circulation. At the same time, many patients needing these procedures also have obesity or diabetes, which can increase surgical risk. GLP-1 medications can improve blood sugar control and support weight loss, helping patients enter surgery in better overall health and enhance recovery. Stopping these drugs without a clear reason may work against those benefits. Practical steps to support patient safety The study outlines several strategies care teams can use when patients remain on GLP-1 medications. These include thoughtful anesthesia planning, careful monitoring of heart and lung function, and, in select cases, the use of ultrasound to check stomach contents before surgery. “The goal is not to ignore risk, but to manage it wisely,” Pacis said. “For many patients, continuing these medications supports safer surgery and better recovery.” The authors note that more research is needed, particularly studies focused specifically on gynecologic surgery. Still, the findings offer clarity for patients and clinicians navigating a rapidly changing area of care. “This review helps bring evidence and balance to an issue that has caused a lot of confusion,” Pacis said. “It supports keeping patients on therapies that benefit their health whenever it is safe to do so.”

1 min

Two Research Scientists at the Cawley Center for Translational Cancer Research Earn Top Honors at UD Biology Research Day

Two rising cancer researchers from ChristianaCare’s Cawley Center for Translational Cancer Research were recognized for outstanding scientific contributions at the University of Delaware’s Annual Biology Research Day Conference on January 30, 2026. The awards highlight the strength and impact of colorectal cancer research underway at the Cawley Center. Anh Nguyen, a third year Ph.D. student, received the conference’s first place poster award for his project, “FGF19/FGFR4 Axis: A Key Driver in Tumor Growth and Treatment Resistance in Colorectal Cancer.” His research explores a signaling pathway that may lead to new strategies for targeting treatment resistant disease. Molly Lausten, a fifth year Ph.D. student, earned third place for her presentation, “Investigating the role of miR 27a 3p in the WNT signaling pathway and chemoresistance in colorectal cancer stem cells.” Her work examines a key microRNA that may influence resistance to therapy, a major challenge in treating aggressive tumors. “These awards reflect far more than individual excellence,” said Bruce M. Boman, M.D., Ph.D., MSPH, FACP, senior scientist and director of Cancer Genetics at the Cawley Center. “They show the power of rigorous, curiosity driven science to move the field forward. Molly and Anh are tackling some of the hardest questions in colorectal cancer, and their success speaks to the innovative environment we are building at ChristianaCare. I could not be more proud of their achievement and their commitment to improving outcomes for patients.”

3 min

Gene Editing Breakthrough Offers New Hope for Head and Neck Cancer Patients

Researchers at the ChristianaCare Gene Editing Institute have made an important advance in treating head and neck cancers. By using CRISPR gene editing, the team found a way to restore how well chemotherapy works in tumors that have stopped responding to treatment. Their results, now published in Molecular Therapy Oncology, could change how doctors treat these aggressive cancers and give new hope to many patients who face limited options. Head and neck cancer is the seventh most common cancer worldwide, and cases are expected to rise by 30 percent every year by 2030. Even with progress in surgery, chemotherapy and immunotherapy, many patients still reach a point where treatment no longer works. The ChristianaCare team aimed to solve this challenge at its source. Targeting the Heart of Drug Resistance The researchers focused on a gene called NRF2. This gene acts like a master switch that helps cancer cells survive stress and resist chemotherapy. Because NRF2 plays such a central role in tumor growth, the team chose to develop a genetic therapy that disables the gene itself rather than targeting a single protein, which is common in traditional drug development. Since NRF2 is a transcription factor, shutting it down in a lasting way is more likely to succeed through CRISPR gene editing. Their major advance was showing that CRISPR can successfully disrupt NRF2 in head and neck cancer cells and in esophageal cancer cells. This work builds on earlier studies in lung cancer, where blocking NRF2 made tumors more sensitive to chemotherapy and improved survival in animal models. “Our goal was to break through the wall of drug resistance that so many patients face,” said Natalia Rivera Torres, Ph.D., the study’s lead author. “By precisely editing the NRF2 gene, we can make cancer cells vulnerable again to standard treatments. This could improve outcomes and quality of life.” Precision Matters: The Power of Target Choice The study also showed that the location of the CRISPR cut within the NRF2 gene makes a big difference. The strongest results came from targeting exon 4, a part of the gene that controls a key section of the NRF2 protein. Editing this region reduced NRF2 levels by 90 percent and made cancer cells much more sensitive to chemotherapy. In comparison, editing exon 2 was less effective even though it still caused high levels of gene disruption. The team also found that a process called exon skipping, where sections of genetic code are rearranged, can affect the outcome of gene editing. This discovery highlights how important careful design and testing are when building gene editing therapies. A Platform for Broader Impact ChristianaCare researchers saw the same results in both head and neck cancer cells and esophageal cancer cells. This suggests the strategy could help treat many solid tumors that have high levels of NRF2 and are known for strong drug resistance. “This is more than just a single experiment,” said Eric Kmiec, Ph.D., director of the Gene Editing Institute and senior author of the study. “We are building a platform that can be adapted to different cancers. Our earlier work in lung cancer showed the promise of this approach, and now we see it working in other hard to treat tumors. It is an exciting step toward making gene editing a meaningful part of cancer treatment.” Looking Ahead: Toward Clinical Application With these strong results, the team is now focused on finding the safest and most effective way to deliver the gene editing tools directly to tumors. Their goal is to reduce how much standard treatment a patient needs in order to get the best result with fewer side effects. “Drug resistance is one of the biggest challenges in cancer care,” Rivera Torres said. “If we can overcome it with gene editing, we could give patients more time, better quality of life and a renewed sense of hope.” Kmiec added, “We are committed to moving this technology forward quickly while always keeping the patient in mind. The future of cancer treatment is personal, precise and, we believe, within reach.”

View all posts
Powered by