AIToday
AI in HealthcareAI Safety & AlignmentHacker NewsPublished: Jul 25, 2026, 04:00 JST

AlphaFold used to redesign CRISPR proteins, cutting off-target edits from 28% to 5%

AlphaFold used to redesign CRISPR proteins, cutting off-target edits from 28% to 5%

3 Key Points

  1. What happened

    Researchers used Google's AlphaFold AI to identify which parts of the Cas9 protein (used in CRISPR gene editing) enable unwanted off-target edits. By modifying amino acids at 10 key positions identified through this analysis, they created a variant that maintained normal activity at intended targets while reducing off-target activity from 28% to 5%.

  2. Why it matters

    Gene-editing therapies must edit many cells to be effective, and even rare off-target sequences appear multiple times in the human genome by chance—making unintended edits inevitable at scale. This computational approach offers a systematic method to design safer gene-editing systems tailored to specific guide RNAs, potentially removing a safety bottleneck in therapy development.

  3. What to watch

    The researchers showed their method worked for both Cas9 and a different Cas protein (Cas12), suggesting broad applicability. They also note that individual changes could potentially be combined with previously developed Cas9 variants for even greater improvements, though that combination was not tested here.

Not sure about something? Ask the AI

Questions and answers are published on this page.

Summaries like this, in your inbox every morning.

Context & Analysis

Gene-editing therapies have faced a fundamental safety challenge since CRISPR systems were first adapted for human use. Although guide RNAs are designed to match only the intended target sequence, the sheer size of the human genome (about 3 billion bases) means that even rare sequences can appear multiple times by chance. More problematically, the Cas9 protein can tolerate small numbers of mismatched base pairs without losing its ability to bind DNA, making it difficult to predict which off-target sequences will be cut. Researchers have pursued various strategies to address this—optimizing guide RNA selection, improving the Cas proteins themselves, and modifying the effector proteins that make the actual DNA change. This new work takes a computational approach, leveraging AlphaFold's ability to model protein-nucleic acid interactions to identify the exact structural features of Cas9 that enable off-target binding.

What makes this approach particularly valuable is its specificity and generality. By analyzing how Cas9's structure changes when binding mismatch-containing sequences, the researchers found that amino acids shift their contact patterns in predictable ways. This allowed them to design targeted modifications—swapping amino acids at identified positions—that reduce off-target activity dramatically without losing on-target performance. The fact that the method worked for both Cas9 and Cas12 suggests it could be applied to other gene-editing systems. While other research teams have achieved similar or slightly better results using directed evolution, this computational method offers the potential to design systems tailored to specific guide RNAs and known mismatch patterns, opening a path toward personalized safety optimization in gene therapy development.

FAQ
What is the off-target effect in gene editing?
Off-target effects occur when gene-editing systems edit the wrong DNA sequence instead of the intended one. Although guide RNAs are designed to be specific, Cas9 can tolerate a small number of mismatched base pairs and still bind to unintended sequences, especially when many cells are edited—making errors inevitable at scale.
How did the researchers use AlphaFold in this work?
The team fed AlphaFold versions of target and off-target DNA sequences along with guide RNA and the Cas9 protein sequence. By comparing the structures AlphaFold generated for on- and off-target sites, they identified amino acids whose "contact probability" (likelihood of being within eight Angstroms of RNA or DNA) changed when mismatches were present, pinpointing the regions responsible for off-target binding.
How does the new Cas9 variant compare to other improved versions?
When tested against Cas9 variants developed through other approaches like directed evolution, the newly designed versions tended to produce similar or even slightly better activity and specificity. The key difference is that these changes may be more specific to a given guide RNA/mismatch combination rather than more generally effective across all scenarios.

AI news that matters for your work, delivered every morning.

Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.

Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →

Ask AI

Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.

Questions and answers are published on this page.

Related Articles

Next articleResearcher builds compiler turning computation graphs into transformer weights—no training needed