Gene and RNA Editing: Methods, Enabling Technologies, Applications, and Future Directions

Mohammed Aledhari; Mohamed Rahouti

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2409.09057

Gene and RNA Editing: Methods, Enabling Technologies, Applications, and Future Directions

Mohammed Aledhari·Mohamed Rahouti

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Gene and RNA editing methods, technologies, and applications are emerging as innovative forms of therapy and medicine, offering more efficient implementation compared to traditional pharmaceutical treatments. Current trends emphasize the urgent need for advanced methods and technologies to detect public health threats, including diseases and viral agents. Gene and RNA editing techniques enhance the ability to identify, modify, and ameliorate the effects of genetic diseases, disorders, and disabilities. Viral detection and identification methods present numerous opportunities for enabling technologies, such as CRISPR, applicable to both RNA and gene editing through the use of specific Cas proteins. This article explores the distinctions and benefits of RNA and gene editing processes, emphasizing their contributions to the future of medical treatment. CRISPR technology, particularly its adaptation via the Cas13 protein for RNA editing, is a significant advancement in gene editing. The article will delve into RNA and gene editing methodologies, focusing on techniques that alter and modify genetic coding. A-to-I and C-to-U editing are currently the most predominant methods of RNA modification. CRISPR stands out as the most cost-effective and customizable technology for both RNA and gene editing. Unlike permanent changes induced by cutting an individual's DNA genetic code, RNA editing offers temporary modifications by altering nucleoside bases in RNA strands, which can then attach to DNA strands as temporary modifiers.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.GN cs.CE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Mohammed Aledhari, Mohamed Rahouti. 2024-09-01. Gene and RNA Editing: Methods, Enabling Technologies, Applications, and Future Directions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.09057

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Transcriptomic Models for Immunotherapy Response Prediction Show Limited Cross-cohort Generalisability

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed cancer therapy; yet substantial proportion of patients exhibit intrinsic or acquired resistance, making accurate pre-treatment response prediction a critical unmet need. Transcriptomics-based biomarkers derived from bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) offer a promising avenue for capturing tumour-immune interactions, yet the cross-cohort generalisability of existing prediction models remains unclear.We systematically benchmark nine state-of-the-art transcriptomic ICI response predictors, five bulk RNA-seq-based models (COMPASS, IRNet, NetBio, IKCScore, and TNBC-ICI) and four scRNA-seq-based models (PRECISE, DeepGeneX, Tres and scCURE), using publicly available independent datasets unseen during model development. Overall, predictive performance was modest: bulk RNA-seq models performed at or near chance level across most cohorts, while scRNA-seq models showed only marginal improvements. Pathway-level analyses revealed sparse and inconsistent biomarker signals across models. Although scRNA-seq-based predictors converged on immune-related programs such as allograft rejection, bulk RNA-seq-based models exhibited little reproducible overlap. PRECISE and NetBio identified the most coherent immune-related themes, whereas IRNet predominantly captured metabolic pathways weakly aligned with ICI biology. Together, these findings demonstrate the limited cross-cohort robustness and biological consistency of current transcriptomic ICI prediction models, underscoring the need for improved domain adaptation, standardised preprocessing, and biologically grounded model design.

q-bio.GN↗

arXiv2026

Large Language Model Agents for Evidence Based Genetic Disease Severity Classification

Disease severity classification for genetic conditions is subjective and labor-intensive, creating bottlenecks in genomic screening, where commercial panels vary widely in size and overlap. We developed an autonomous AI agent integrating Reasoning and Acting (ReAct) with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to classify 10,211 Human Phenotype Ontology terms. It uses American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)-endorsed severity guidelines and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) quality-of-life criteria to retrieve PubMed literature, generate interpretable reasoning chains, and independently verify claims. At the phenotype level, using expert-curated cohorts, the agent achieved 93.55% accuracy (MCC 0.9237) with 82.6% to 91.4% of claims supported by direct evidence or valid inferences. Gene-level severity was aggregated across 8,738 pairs, identifying 3,283 autosomal recessive pairs with severe or profound presentations. External validation showed 95.2% concordance with Mackenzie's Mission gene list. This system enables standardized panel design by providing reliable, automated classification supported by direct evidence.

q-bio.GN↗

arXiv2026

Harmonised benchmarking of foundation models for single-cell and spatial transcriptomics reveals context-dependent generalisation

Single-cell and spatial foundation models promise transferable biological representations, yet their generality remains largely untested across modalities, biological domains and analytical tasks. We benchmarked six representative models, Nicheformer, CellPLM, scGPT-spatial, GenePT, scELMo and Novae, using a harmonised framework spanning scRNA-seq, spatial transcriptomics and Perturb-seq. We evaluated zero-shot and continually pretrained clustering, supervised annotation, marker-gene concordance and perturbation prediction. Model performance was strongly conditional: expression-trained cell-level transformers best resolved many cell-identity tasks, spatial and graph-aware models better preserved tissue architecture, and language-derived gene embeddings were competitive for selected perturbation-response metrics. No model dominated across tasks, and rankings shifted with modality, preprocessing, tokenisation, biological prior, domain shift and metric choice. This benchmark provides practical guidance for model selection and argues that future models should be judged by biological generalisation, interpretability and perturbation-grounded validity, not by scale or leaderboard performance alone.

q-bio.GN↗