Designs and analyzes pooled prime-editor (PE) screens for installing precise genetic variants without bystander confounding. Covers pegRNA design with PRIDICT and PRIDICT2 (Mathis 2023/2024) for predicting per-pegRNA editing efficiency, pegRNA architecture (spacer + scaffold + PBS + RTT), PE2 / PE3 / PE3b / PEmax / PEAR variants, MOSAIC in situ saturation mutagenesis (Hsu JY et al 2024 bioRxiv), the PRIME pooled-screen methodology (Erwood/Doman 2023 Nat Biotechnol 41:885; ~3,699 ClinVar varia...
Scanned 9/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add gabrielmoreira/agent-skills-mirror --skill prime-editing-screens --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Prime Editing Screens?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/gabrielmoreira-prime-editing-screens)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: bio-crispr-screens-prime-editing-screens
description: Designs and analyzes pooled prime-editor (PE) screens for installing precise genetic variants without bystander confounding. Covers pegRNA design with PRIDICT and PRIDICT2 (Mathis 2023/2024) for predicting per-pegRNA editing efficiency, pegRNA architecture (spacer + scaffold + PBS + RTT), PE2 / PE3 / PE3b / PEmax / PEAR variants, MOSAIC in situ saturation mutagenesis (Hsu JY et al 2024 bioRxiv), the PRIME pooled-screen methodology (Erwood/Doman 2023 Nat Biotechnol 41:885; ~3,699 ClinVar variant screens), chromatin context as a primary determinant of PE efficiency, scaffold-incorporation and indel byproduct quantification with CRISPResso2, and the cross-modal validation strategy of PE + base-editor screens for variant function. Use when designing a pegRNA library for variant installation, choosing between BE and PE for a specific edit, predicting pegRNA efficiency before library synthesis, analyzing PE screen output, distinguishing intended-edit from scaffold-incorporation, or scaling PE screens to thousands of variants.
tool_type: mixed
primary_tool: PRIDICT2
---
## Version Compatibility
Reference examples tested with: PRIDICT2 v1.0+ (https://github.com/uzh-dqbm-cmi/PRIDICT2), CRISPResso2 2.2.14+, pandas 2.2+, biopython 1.83+, numpy 1.26+.
Before using code patterns, verify installed versions match. If versions differ:
- CLI: `python pridict2_pegRNA_design.py single --help`; `python pridict2_pegRNA_design.py batch --help`
- Web: PRIDICT2 web interface at https://pridict.it/
If code throws ImportError, AttributeError, or TypeError, introspect the installed package and adapt the example to match the actual API rather than retrying.
## Prime-Editing Screen Analysis
**"Design or analyze a pooled prime-editor screen"** -> Design pegRNAs (spacer + scaffold + PBS + RTT) for intended edits, predict efficiency with PRIDICT2, filter pre-synthesis to efficient candidates, install variants in the screen, quantify intended-edit vs scaffold-incorporation vs indel via CRISPResso2, and aggregate to per-variant fitness scores.
- Python: `PRIDICT2` for pegRNA efficiency prediction
- CLI: `CRISPResso --prime_editing_pegRNA_*` for amplicon-level analysis
- Workflow: pegRNA library design -> PRIDICT2 filtering -> screen execution -> CRISPResso2 quantification -> per-variant scoring
## Prime Editor Chemistry Comparison
| Editor | Year | Mechanism | Indel rate | Use when |
|--------|------|-----------|------------|----------|
| PE2 (Anzalone 2019) | 2019 | nCas9-RT fusion + pegRNA | 1-3% | Standard PE; lowest indel rate |
| PE3 | 2019 | PE2 + nick of opposite strand by additional sgRNA | 2-5% | Higher editing efficiency, slightly more indels |
| PE3b | 2019 | PE3 with edit-blocking ssgRNA | 1-3% | When PE3's added nick risks unwanted indels |
| PEmax (Chen 2021) | 2021 | Engineered RT + nCas9 | 1-2% | Higher editing rate per pegRNA |
| PEAR (Erwood 2023) | 2023 | PE with optimal pegRNA scaffold | 1-2% | Improved PE scaffold |
| PE5max (Chen 2021) | 2021 | PEmax with engineered scaffold variants | 1% | Highest efficiency at favorable sites |
| Dual-pegRNA / PE6 (2024) | 2024 | Twin pegRNA system | Variable | Specific applications |
**Decision rule:** For pooled screens at scale, PE2 or PEmax (less RAM-intensive in cells) is preferred over PE3 (additional sgRNA complicates library architecture). For specific high-efficiency edits, PEmax + PRIDICT2-optimized pegRNA.
## pegRNA Architecture
A pegRNA contains four critical elements that determine efficiency:
```
5' SPACER (20 nt) -- standard sgRNA spacer; defines target locus via NGG PAM
+
SCAFFOLD (~80 nt) -- canonical or engineered scaffold (Chen 2021 has improved scaffold)
+
PBS (Primer Binding Site, 8-15 nt) -- complements protospacer downstream of cut site
+
RTT (Reverse Transcription Template, 10-30 nt) -- encodes intended edit; copied by RT
3'
```
**Key design parameters:**
- **PBS length:** 11-13 nt typical; longer for high-GC contexts; PBS GC fraction critical (35-65% target)
- **RTT length:** 10-20 nt typical; longer for distant edits (10+ bp away from cut)
- **RTT-edit position:** intended edit at position 4-30 from cut site
- **Scaffold:** standard sgRNA scaffold OR Chen 2021 engineered scaffold (5-10% higher editing)
## PRIDICT and PRIDICT2 pegRNA Efficiency Prediction
**Mathis N et al 2023 *Nat Biotechnol* 41:1151 (PRIDICT v1) / 2025 *Nat Biotechnol* 43(5):712 (PRIDICT2; published online June 2024)** developed deep-learning predictors of per-pegRNA editing efficiency. PRIDICT2 is the current state of the art.
```bash
# PRIDICT2 is invoked via CLI: pridict2_pegRNA_design.py
# Single sequence input:
python pridict2_pegRNA_design.py single \
--sequence-name BRCA1_c5135 \
--sequence "AGCAGCCT(C/T)CTGAATGCCC...60nt_context" \ # parens = intended edit
--output-dir predictions/ \
--use_5folds # 5-fold ensemble averaging
# Batch input from CSV:
python pridict2_pegRNA_design.py batch \
--input-fname variants_to_design.csv \ # CSV: sequence_name, sequence
--output-dir predictions/ \
--cores 4 \
--summarize # generate summary table
# Output: per-pegRNA predictions in predictions/<sequence_name>/
# Columns: PBS_sequence, PBS_length, RTT_sequence, RTT_length, predicted_editing_efficiency,
# predicted_indel_rate, deep_ensemble_score, etc.
```
**Loading PRIDICT2 results in Python:**
```python
import pandas as pd
from pathlib import Path
def load_pridict2_predictions(prediction_dir):
'''Load PRIDICT2 batch outputs from prediction_dir/'''
summary = pd.read_csv(Path(prediction_dir) / 'pridict2_summary.csv')
# summary has columns: sequence_name, PBS, RTT, predicted_efficiency, predicted_indel, etc.
return summary
```
**Key determinants of PE efficiency (Mathis 2024 PRIDICT2):**
| Feature | Effect on efficiency |
|---------|----------------------|
| PBS GC content | 40-55% optimal; high GC slows annealing |
| PBS length | 11-13 nt optimal; longer for high-GC PBS |
| RTT length | 10-20 nt typical; trade-off between coverage and processivity |
| Edit position in RTT | Closest to PBS = highest efficiency |
| Chromatin context | Open chromatin = 2-5x higher efficiency than closed |
| Cell line / Cas9 expression | Variable; piloting required |
| Cell cycle phase | S/G2 = higher efficiency |
**Critical insight from Mathis 2024:** Chromatin context is the dominant determinant. Sequence-based predictions like PRIDICT under-predict at silenced loci and over-predict at open chromatin. For genome-scale screens, validate predictions empirically at representative loci.
## PRIME Pooled Screen Methodology
**Erwood S, Doman JL et al 2023 *Nat Biotechnol* 41:885** established the PRIME pooled-screen methodology (earlier 2022 bioRxiv preprint):
- pegRNA library covering thousands of intended variants
- Filter pegRNAs to PRIDICT2 efficiency >50% (or pilot top 25%)
- Lentiviral delivery at standard MOI 0.3 in PE-expressing cell line
- Selection on integration marker
- Time-course screen for variant function (e.g., drug sensitivity)
- Endpoint amplicon sequencing of each pegRNA target locus
- CRISPResso2 quantification of intended-edit %
- MAGeCK / drugZ-style hit calling on edit-efficient pegRNAs
**Quantified scale:** ~3,699 ClinVar variants installed in a single PRIME screen (Erwood/Doman 2023 *Nat Biotechnol* 41:885), with editing efficiency >5% at >50% of pegRNAs (validation cohort).
## MOSAIC In Situ Saturation Mutagenesis
**MOSAIC (Hsu JY, Lam KC, Shih J, Pinello L, Joung JK 2024 bioRxiv 10.1101/2024.04.25.591078)** is a higher-throughput variant of PRIME with multiplexed read-out:
- Tile pegRNAs across protein domains for systematic mutagenesis
- Saturation: every possible amino acid change in a region
- Identify drug-resistance variants in real-time
- Smaller per-variant cell numbers (more variants total)
**Use case:** Cancer-drug-resistance variant scanning; protein-domain function mapping.
## Run PRIDICT2 on a Custom pegRNA Library
**Goal:** Predict editing efficiency for thousands of pegRNAs before library synthesis.
**Approach:** Build a CSV with one row per intended edit (sequence + edit notation), run PRIDICT2 in batch mode, parse the per-pegRNA efficiency summary, and filter to candidates above the chosen efficiency threshold.
```bash
# Step 1: prepare batch input CSV (sequence_name, sequence with (REF/ALT) edit notation)
cat > variants.csv <<EOF
sequence_name,sequence
BRCA1_R71X,AGCAGCCT(C/T)CTGAATGCCC...
MLH1_c677,GAGCTGAGC(A/G)GAGGCTCTTGAAGC...
EOF
# Step 2: run PRIDICT2 batch
python pridict2_pegRNA_design.py batch \
--input-fname variants.csv \
--output-dir predictions/ \
--cores 8 \
--summarize
```
```python
# Step 3: parse and filter
import pandas as pd
predictions = pd.read_csv('predictions/pridict2_summary.csv')
# Filter to pegRNAs with predicted efficiency > 50% (Mathis 2024 threshold)
filtered = predictions[predictions['predicted_editing_efficiency'] > 50]
print(f'pegRNAs passing PRIDICT2 >50%: {len(filtered)} / {len(predictions)}')
# Pick top 3 per intended edit
top3 = (filtered.sort_values(['sequence_name', 'predicted_editing_efficiency'],
ascending=[True, False])
.groupby('sequence_name').head(3))
top3.to_csv('peg_library_filtered.csv', index=False)
```
## Cross-Validate PE with Base Editor Screens
**Goal:** Confirm variant-function calls from PE with orthogonal BE screens.
**Approach:** Design parallel BE library for the same variants; run both screens; intersect hits.
```python
# BE screen output (target conversion + bystander)
be_hits = pd.read_csv('be_screen_hits.tsv', sep='\t')
# PE screen output (intended edit + scaffold-incorp + indel)
pe_hits = pd.read_csv('pe_screen_hits.tsv', sep='\t')
# Intersect on intended variant
concordant = be_hits.merge(pe_hits, on='variant_id', suffixes=('_be', '_pe'))
# Filter to high-confidence: both methods call variant + same direction
concordant['high_confidence'] = (concordant['be_fdr'] < 0.05) & (concordant['pe_fdr'] < 0.05) & \
(np.sign(concordant['be_lfc']) == np.sign(concordant['pe_lfc']))
```
**Critical:** PE-only hits in BE-coverable variants are suspect (BE should detect them). PE-only hits in non-BE-coverable variants (e.g., transversions) are genuinely PE-unique.
## CRISPResso2 for PE Quantification
```bash
CRISPResso \
--fastq_r1 pe_sample.fq.gz \
--amplicon_seq <amplicon_seq> \
--guide_seq <20nt_spacer> \
--prime_editing_pegRNA_spacer_seq <spacer> \
--prime_editing_pegRNA_extension_seq <PBS+RTT> \
--prime_editing_pegRNA_scaffold_seq <scaffold> \
--quantification_window_size 25 \ # widen to cover edit
--output_folder pe_results \
--name sample_id
# Output: Prime_editing_outcomes.txt
# Columns: intended_edit_pct, scaffold_incorp_pct, indel_pct, unmodified_pct
```
## Failure Modes
### Low pegRNA efficiency despite high PRIDICT prediction
**Trigger:** Sequence-only prediction missed chromatin context.
**Mechanism:** Closed chromatin reduces Cas9 binding and RT activity; PRIDICT2 only sees sequence.
**Symptom:** PRIDICT2 predicts 60% efficiency; observed is 5%.
**Fix:** Cross-reference target with chromatin accessibility data (ATAC-seq) in your cell line; flag pegRNAs at silenced loci; pilot before screen.
### High scaffold incorporation
**Trigger:** RTT too short relative to PBS, or RT processivity issue.
**Mechanism:** RT reads past edit into scaffold; resulting product is detectable but undesired.
**Symptom:** Scaffold incorporation >5%; intended edit efficiency low.
**Fix:** Re-design pegRNA with longer RTT; verify with PRIDICT2 score for scaffold_incorp; pilot at representative loci.
### PE2 cell line lacks RT expression
**Trigger:** PE2 construct expressed at low level; insufficient RT for productive editing.
**Mechanism:** PE2 requires high RT expression; some cell lines down-regulate.
**Symptom:** Library-wide editing <10%; not locus-specific.
**Fix:** Verify PE2 expression by Western blot; consider PEmax (higher activity); use better-validated cell lines (K562, HEK293T, U2OS).
### Multi-base intended edit but only one base installed
**Trigger:** Long RTT designed for multi-base edit; RT prematurely terminates.
**Mechanism:** RT processivity drops with longer RTT; multi-base edits often incomplete.
**Symptom:** Allele table shows partial-edit alleles (some bases installed, not all).
**Fix:** Re-design with shorter RTT covering only the closest edits; or use PE3 to nick opposite strand and force longer RT processivity.
### Library missing intended variant
**Trigger:** No suitable PAM/PBS/RTT combination for the intended edit.
**Mechanism:** PE requires NGG PAM within 30 nt of edit; rare edits cannot be installed.
**Symptom:** Specific variants absent from library.
**Fix:** Use SpRY-PE for relaxed PAM; accept that some variants cannot be PE-installed; consider BE if applicable.
## Cas9 vs BE vs PE for Variant Installation
| Approach | Bystander | Indels | Coverage | When to use |
|----------|-----------|--------|----------|-------------|
| Cas9 + HDR | None | High | Variable (depends on template integration) | Precise edits at scale; high indel byproduct |
| Base editor | YES | Low (<5%) | Limited by editing window | C->T or A->G at editable position |
| Prime editor | NONE | Low (<3%) | NGG-PAM within 30 nt of edit | Precise variants; multi-base; transversions |
| Cas9 (no template) | NONE | 70%+ | Anywhere with NGG | LoF only; not variant-specific |
**Decision tree:**
- C->T or A->G at editing-window position: BE (higher efficiency than PE)
- Multi-base / transversion / out-of-window: PE
- LoF without specifying variant: Cas9
- Random insertions: HDR (lower throughput than PE)
## Quantitative Thresholds
| Threshold | Value | Source / Rationale |
|-----------|-------|--------------------|
| PRIDICT2 efficiency for library inclusion | >50% | Mathis 2024 |
| Intended edit % for screen power | >5% (per Anzalone 2019); >20% at favorable sites | Anzalone 2019 |
| Scaffold incorporation | <2% (clean PE); <5% acceptable | Empirical |
| Indel byproduct | <3% (PE2); <5% (PE3) | Anzalone 2019; Chen 2021 |
| PBS GC content | 40-55% | PRIDICT2 |
| PBS length | 11-13 nt | PRIDICT2 |
| RTT length | 10-20 nt | PRIDICT2 |
| Edit position from cut | 1-30 nt | Anzalone 2019 |
| Cell line for PE | K562, HEK293T, U2OS validated | High RT expression |
## Common Errors
| Error / symptom | Cause | Solution |
|-----------------|-------|----------|
| Low editing across library | Cell-line RT inactivity | Verify PE2 expression; switch to validated line |
| Scaffold incorporation >10% | RTT too short | Re-design with longer RTT |
| Partial multi-base edits | RT processivity limit | Shorter RTT or PE3 |
| PRIDICT predicts but observes much lower | Chromatin context | Pilot at chromatin-aware sites |
| Library missing variants | No NGG PAM | SpRY-PE; BE alternative |
| PE concordant with BE on transitions, disagrees on transversions | PE handles transversions BE doesn't | Expected; trust PE |
## References
- Anzalone AV et al. 2019. *Nature* 576:149. Original PE2/PE3 (foundational prime editing paper).
- Mathis N et al. 2023. *Nat Biotechnol* 41:1151. PRIDICT v1 deep-learning pegRNA prediction.
- Mathis N et al. 2025. *Nat Biotechnol* 43(5):712 (published online June 2024). PRIDICT2 + chromatin context (current state-of-the-art).
- Chen PJ et al. 2021. *Cell* 184:5635. PEmax + engineered RT.
- Erwood S et al. 2023. *Nature Biotechnology* 41:885. PEAR pegRNA scaffold design.
- Hsu JY, Lam KC, Shih J, Pinello L, Joung JK 2024 bioRxiv (doi:10.1101/2024.04.25.591078). MOSAIC in situ saturation mutagenesis via prime editing.
- Erwood S, Doman JL et al. 2023. *Nature Biotechnology* 41:885. PRIME pooled-screen methodology (~3,699 ClinVar variants); cross-reference for variant-installation scale.
## Related Skills
- crispr-screens/library-design - pegRNA library design
- crispr-screens/base-editing-analysis - Orthogonal BE for variant attribution
- crispr-screens/crispresso-editing - CRISPResso2 PE mode and quantification
- crispr-screens/hit-calling - Per-variant hit calling
- crispr-screens/screen-qc - Editing-efficiency QC
- variant-calling/variant-annotation - Annotate edited variants
- clinical-databases/clinvar-lookup - Variant pathogenicity
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!