CRISPR‐based therapeutic and modelling approaches in Huntington's disease: Progress, challenges and future directions

Abstract Background Huntington’s disease (HD) is an autosomal dominant neurodegenerative disorder caused by CAG‐repeat expansion in exon 1 of the huntingtin gene ( HTT ). Mutant huntingtin accumulation and somatic repeat expansion contribute to neuronal dysfunction, making HD a compelling target for CRISPR‐based intervention. Objective To evaluate CRISPR technologies for HTT modulation, validation of somatic CAG‐expansion modifiers, and HD modeling, with emphasis on efficacy, selectivity, delivery, and safety. Methods This narrative review synthesizes preclinical evidence on DNA‐targeting nucleases, CRISPR interference, RNA‐targeting Cas13 systems, repeat stabilization, functional screens, and cellular and animal models. Approaches are compared by mechanism, durability, allele selectivity, central nervous system delivery, and translational limitations. Results Cas9‐based strategies can disrupt HTT or excise exon 1, while SNP‐linked PAMs and guide mismatches may enable allele‐selective editing in genetically eligible patients. dCas9‐KRAB represses HTT transcription without DNA cleavage, whereas RfxCas13d/CasRx reduces HTT RNA without permanent genome modification; for both, selectivity and durability depend on guide design and delivery. CRISPR screens have identified expansion‐promoting DNA repair factors, including MSH3, MLH3, and PMS1, whereas protective factors such as FAN1 should be preserved. CAG‐to‐CAA base editing offers a complementary repeat‐stabilizing strategy. CRISPR‐corrected isogenic induced pluripotent stem cell‐derived neurons, organoids, and CRISPR‐generated large‐animal models strengthen mechanistic studies; conventional Q140 and zQ175 knock‐in mice remain useful for testing interventions but were not generated using CRISPR. Evidence remains preclinical. Major barriers include brain‐wide delivery, incomplete neuronal coverage, loss of wild‐type HTT function, heterogeneous on‐target repair, off‐target DNA or RNA activity, immune responses, durability, patient stratification, and long‐term safety. Conclusions CRISPR is a versatile platform for HD research and development, but no approach yet combines adequate central nervous system distribution, mutant‐allele selectivity, durable neurological benefit, and established long‐term safety. Clinical translation requires comparative studies, allele‐resolved and genome‐wide safety assessment, validated delivery systems and biomarkers, and long‐term evaluation in disease‐relevant models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical and Translational Discovery
Published
2026-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ctd2.70211
Primary Topic
Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

CRISPR‐based therapeutic and modelling approaches in Huntington's disease: Progress, challenges and future directions

Alireza Ghahari, Seyed Mohsen Mirhosseini, Z.K. Rakhimov, Kairat Zhakipbekov et al.
Clinical and Translational Discovery
Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
article

CRISPR‐based therapeutic and modelling approaches in Huntington's disease: Progress, challenges and future directions

Alireza Ghahari, Seyed Mohsen Mirhosseini, Z.K. Rakhimov, Kairat Zhakipbekov, Elmurod Eshqobilov, Niyozbek Abdurakhmonov, Ziyodulla Tokhtamurod, Abdusaid Khasanov, Surayyo Eshkabilova, Avazbek Abduraxmanov, Axmadjan Ashurmetov, Sharof Eshonov
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Huntington’s disease (HD) is an autosomal dominant neurodegenerative disorder caused by CAG‐repeat expansion in exon 1 of the huntingtin gene ( HTT ). Mutant huntingtin accumulation and somatic repeat expansion contribute to neuronal dysfunction, making HD a compelling target for CRISPR‐based intervention. Objective To evaluate CRISPR technologies for HTT modulation, validation of somatic CAG‐expansion modifiers, and HD modeling, with emphasis on efficacy, selectivity, delivery, and safety. Methods This narrative review synthesizes preclinical evidence on DNA‐targeting nucleases, CRISPR interference, RNA‐targeting Cas13 systems, repeat stabilization, functional screens, and cellular and animal models. Approaches are compared by mechanism, durability, allele selectivity, central nervous system delivery, and translational limitations. Results Cas9‐based strategies can disrupt HTT or excise exon 1, while SNP‐linked PAMs and guide mismatches may enable allele‐selective editing in genetically eligible patients. dCas9‐KRAB represses HTT transcription without DNA cleavage, whereas RfxCas13d/CasRx reduces HTT RNA without permanent genome modification; for both, selectivity and durability depend on guide design and delivery. CRISPR screens have identified expansion‐promoting DNA repair factors, including MSH3, MLH3, and PMS1, whereas protective factors such as FAN1 should be preserved. CAG‐to‐CAA base editing offers a complementary repeat‐stabilizing strategy. CRISPR‐corrected isogenic induced pluripotent stem cell‐derived neurons, organoids, and CRISPR‐generated large‐animal models strengthen mechanistic studies; conventional Q140 and zQ175 knock‐in mice remain useful for testing interventions but were not generated using CRISPR. Evidence remains preclinical. Major barriers include brain‐wide delivery, incomplete neuronal coverage, loss of wild‐type HTT function, heterogeneous on‐target repair, off‐target DNA or RNA activity, immune responses, durability, patient stratification, and long‐term safety. Conclusions CRISPR is a versatile platform for HD research and development, but no approach yet combines adequate central nervous system distribution, mutant‐allele selectivity, durable neurological benefit, and established long‐term safety. Clinical translation requires comparative studies, allele‐resolved and genome‐wide safety assessment, validated delivery systems and biomarkers, and long‐term evaluation in disease‐relevant models.

Clinical and Translational DiscoveryVol. 6(5)
Samarkand State University named after Sharof Rashidov (UZ), Pasteur Institute of Iran (IR), Kazakh National Medical University (KZ), Ferghana Polytechnical Institute (UZ), Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sino (UZ), Samarkand State Medical Institute (UZ), Termez State University (UZ), Andijan State Medical Institute (UZ), Tashkent Pediatric Medical Institute (UZ), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.