Randomized trial shows enhanced genome editing efficiency in Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 variants, suggesting effective computational design methods for future applications.
CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases have transformed genome engineering, yet their application is often constrained by protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) requirements. Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 (SaCas9) is particularly attractive for in vivo applications due to its compact size; however, its NNGRRT PAM limits targetable genomic sites. Here, we report KRH, a SaCas9 variant designed entirely from the wild-type enzyme through a fully computational point-mutation design workflow, UniDesign, without additional experimental optimization. As expected, KRH efficiently recognizes an expanded NNNRRT PAM and exhibits substantially enhanced editing efficiency at non-canonical PAM sites, with improvements of up to 116-fold over the wild type. KRH achieves genome- and base-editing efficiencies comparable to, or exceeding, those of the well-known evolution-derived KKH variant. Computational modeling by UniDesign provides a mechanistic explanation for the PAM relaxation observed in both KRH and KKH, with structural and energetic analyses revealing that KRH relaxes PAM specificity by fine-tuning the balance between sequence-specific interactions with PAM bases and nonspecific contacts with the DNA backbone. Beyond its practical utility, KRH demonstrates that computational design can identify a minimal set of mutations sufficient to remodel the PAM interface while preserving high nuclease activity. This approach recapitulates—and in some cases surpasses—the performance of evolution-derived variants, offering a scalable strategy for high-throughput Cas9 engineering. Overall, these results establish KRH as a blueprint for rationally engineered, PAM-relaxed nucleases and underscore the power of computational design to accelerate next-generation genome editing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xiong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: