The experimental design and data interpretation in “Unexpected mutations after CRISPR–Cas9 editing in vivo” by Schaefer et al. are insufficient to support the conclusions drawn by the authors
To the Editor To the Editor Conflict of Interest Statement References References The recent correspondence to the Editor of Nature Methods by Schaefer et al.1 has garnered significant attention since its publication as a result of its strong conclusions contradicting numerous publications in the field using similar analytical approaches and methods2-4. The authors suggest that the CRISPR-Cas9 system is highly mutagenic in genomic regions not expected to be targeted by the gRNA. We believe that the conclusions drawn from this study are unsubstantiated by the disclosed experiments as they were designed and carried out. Further, it is impossible to ascribe the observed differences in the subject mice to the effects of CRISPR per se. The genetic differences seen in ...