Occurrence and diversity of CRISPR-Cas systems in the genus bifidobacterium

CRISPR-Cas systems constitute adaptive immune systems for antiviral defense in bacteria. We investigated the occurrence and diversity of CRISPR-Cas systems in 48 Bifidobacterium genomes to gain insights into the diversity and co-evolution of CRISPR-Cas systems within the genus and investigate CRISPR spacer content. We identified the elements necessary for the successful targeting and inference of foreign DNA in select Type II CRISPRCas systems, including the tracrRNA and target PAM sequence. Bifidobacterium species have a very high frequency of CRISPR-Cas occurrence (77%, 37 of 48). We found that many Bifidobacterium species have unusually large and diverse CRISPR-Cas systems that contain spacer sequences showing homology to foreign genetic elements like prophages. A large number of CRISPR spacers in bifidobacteria show perfect homology to prophage sequences harbored in the chromosomes of other species of Bifidobacterium, including some spacers that self-target the chromosome. A correlation was observed between strains that lacked CRISPR-Cas systems and the number of times prophages in that chromosome were targeted by other CRISPR spacers. The presence of prophage-targeting CRISPR spacers and prophage content may shed light on evolutionary processes and strain divergence. Finally, elements of Type II CRISPR-Cas systems, including the tracrRNA and crRNAs, set the stage for the development of genome editing and genetic engineering tools. © 2015 Briner et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.This study was supported by startup funds from North Carolina State University. The authors thank GenProbio srl for financial support of the Laboratory of Probiogenomics. DvS is a member of the Alimentary pharmabiotic Centre funded by Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), through the Irish Government’s National Development Plan (Grant number SFI/12/RC/2273). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Peer Reviewe

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Genotyping probiotic Bifidobacterium longum strains using CRISPR loci

Trabajo presentado en el Annual meeting of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM Microbe), celebrado en New Orleans (Estados Unidos) del 1 al 5 de junio de 2017Bifidobacterium longum strains are amongst the most widely used probiotics for human consumption due to their ability to modulate the host immune response, and withstand passage through the human gastrointestinal tract. Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, CRISPR, occur widely in bacteria and provide adaptive immunity via acquisition of DNA sequences from viruses and plasmids that constitute unique genetic records of immunization in each bacterium (1). CRISPR-Cas systems comprise a variety of cas genes and a repeat-spacer array, where the repeat sequence (diamonds) flanked the spacers (squares). The spacers are short sequences homologous to the invasive DNA that the bacteria recorded to be immunize against a future challenge with the same virus. Spacers represent the immune background of each strain and are consider a barcode for genotyping each strainPeer reviewe

Occurrence and Diversity of CRISPR-Cas Systems in the Genus Bifidobacterium.

CRISPR-Cas systems constitute adaptive immune systems for antiviral defense in bacteria. We investigated the occurrence and diversity of CRISPR-Cas systems in 48 Bifidobacterium genomes to gain insights into the diversity and co-evolution of CRISPR-Cas systems within the genus and investigate CRISPR spacer content. We identified the elements necessary for the successful targeting and inference of foreign DNA in select Type II CRISPR-Cas systems, including the tracrRNA and target PAM sequence. Bifidobacterium species have a very high frequency of CRISPR-Cas occurrence (77%, 37 of 48). We found that many Bifidobacterium species have unusually large and diverse CRISPR-Cas systems that contain spacer sequences showing homology to foreign genetic elements like prophages. A large number of CRISPR spacers in bifidobacteria show perfect homology to prophage sequences harbored in the chromosomes of other species of Bifidobacterium, including some spacers that self-target the chromosome. A correlation was observed between strains that lacked CRISPR-Cas systems and the number of times prophages in that chromosome were targeted by other CRISPR spacers. The presence of prophage-targeting CRISPR spacers and prophage content may shed light on evolutionary processes and strain divergence. Finally, elements of Type II CRISPR-Cas systems, including the tracrRNA and crRNAs, set the stage for the development of genome editing and genetic engineering tools

Representative agarose gel images from the <i>in vitro</i> PAM walk experiment conducted with the PSMD7 gene target.

<p>The percent cutting for active sequences is indicated below the gel. (PC) positive control. (NC) negative control. The target sequence and surrounding sequence is indicated for both isolated active sites as well as an example of consecutive active target sites. Target sites are underlined for all active sequences and for some, are paired with their lane on the gel for orientation. The percent cutting measurement can only be interpreted as a semi-quantitative estimate due to small differences in lysate batches in the <i>in vitro</i> assay measurement, as well as staining differences in gels. Comparisons of the efficacy of one target site/PAM versus another are not made except to conclude whether or not they have cutting activity.</p

<i>Lactobacillus gasseri</i> CRISPR-Cas9 characterization <i>In Vitro</i> reveals a flexible mode of protospacer-adjacent motif recognition

<div><p>While the CRISPR-Cas9 system from <i>S</i>. <i>pyogenes</i> is a powerful genome engineering tool, additional programmed nucleases would enable added flexibility in targeting space and multiplexing. Here, we characterized a CRISPR-Cas9 system from <i>L</i>. <i>gasseri</i> and found that it has modest activity in a cell-free lysate assay but no activity in mammalian cells even when altering promoter, position of tag sequences and NLS, and length of crRNA:tracrRNA. In the lysate assay we tested over 400 sequential crRNA target sequences and found that the Lga Cas9 PAM is NNGA/NDRA, different than NTAA predicted from the native bacterial host. In addition, we found multiple instances of consecutive crRNA target sites, indicating flexibility in either PAM sequence or distance from the crRNA target site. This work highlights the need for characterization of new CRISPR systems and highlights the non-triviality of porting them into eukaryotes as gene editing tools.</p></div

Strongest PAMs including degenerate base designations.

<p>Strongest PAMs including degenerate base designations.</p

PAM analysis method.

<p>(A) A diagram illustrating the generation of all possible PAM sequence motifs for lengths of one to five bases, including degenerate base designations, to be compared against the PAM sequences identified in the PAM walk experiment. The one-letter codes for bases follow standard IUPAC nomenclature: A, T, C, G = standard DNA bases adenine, thymine, cytosine, and gunaine; N = any of the four standard DNA bases; D = A, G, T; V = A, C, G; B = C, G, T; H = A, C, T; W = A, T; S = G, C; K = G, T; M = A, C; Y = C, T; R = A, G. (B) Diagram illustrating the method of scoring the lists of PAM sequences of targets site that were cut or not cut by Lga Cas9 against each potential PAM motif. The example provided uses the four-base PAM NDRA. (C) Diagram illustrating how potential PAM sequence motifs were aligned to the PAM sequences tested in the PAM walk experiment to allow for the targeting region of the crRNA to slip either one base forward or backward before cutting at the DNA target location indicated by the 20mer guide sequence of the crRNA.</p