Designs pegRNAs and nicking guides for prime editing (PE) -- choosing the nick/strand, tuning the primer-binding site (PBS) and reverse-transcription template (RTT) as a per-locus panel, selecting the PE system (PE2/PE3/PE3b/PE4/PE5/PEmax/PE7), adding MMR-evading and PAM-disrupting silent edits, appending epegRNA 3' motifs (tevopreQ1/mpknot), and ranking with PRIDICT/DeepPrime. Covers twinPE/PASTE for large insertions and the prime-vs-base-editing decision. Use when designing a scarless point mutation, small insertion/deletion, or any of the 12 base conversions without a double-strand break, when efficiency is low and MMR inhibition or pegRNA stabilization is needed, or when routing a large insertion to an integrase method. Generic guide scoring and base editing are separate skills.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
Designs pegRNAs and nicking guides for prime editing (PE) -- choosing the nick/strand, tuning the primer-binding site (PBS) and reverse-transcription template (RTT) as a per-locus panel, selecting the PE system (PE2/PE3/PE3b/PE4/PE5/PEmax/PE7), adding MMR-evading and PAM-disrupting silent edits, appending epegRNA 3' motifs (tevopreQ1/mpknot), and ranking with PRIDICT/DeepPrime. Covers twinPE/PASTE for large insertions and the prime-vs-base-editing decision. Use when designing a scarless point mutation, small insertion/deletion, or any of the 12 base conversions without a double-strand break, when efficiency is low and MMR inhibition or pegRNA stabilization is needed, or when routing a large insertion to an integrase method. Generic guide scoring and base editing are separate skills.
Before using code patterns, verify installed versions match. If versions differ:
Python: pip show <package> then help(module.function) to check signatures
CLI: <tool> --version then <tool> --help to confirm flags
If code throws ImportError, AttributeError, or TypeError, introspect the installed package and adapt the example to match the actual API rather than retrying.
PrimeDesign is Docker-only (no pip) and takes the edit inline in a single string with exact parenthesis notation (below) -- the most-hallucinated thing in PE tooling; verify it against the repo, never reconstruct from memory. Outcome-prediction models are trained mostly on HEK293T + small edits (<=3 bp); their scores are priors, not measurements, and degrade off-distribution. The PE (MMR status, expressed vs synthetic pegRNA) drives efficiency more than any oligo tweak.
system
Prime Editing Design
"Install a precise small edit without a double-strand break" -> Establish the edit, cell type, MMR status, and delivery; choose the nick position/strand; design a panel of PBS x RTT combinations; pick the PE system; add the free wins (PAM-disrupting + MMR-evading silent edits, a 3' motif); rank with a model; and test.
CLI (Docker): PrimeDesign generates ranked pegRNA + nicking-guide components from a reference + edit string
Python: assemble/sweep PBS x RTT panels with Bio.Seq; enforce the don't-end-on-C and 5'-G rules
Web/code: PRIDICT2.0 / DeepPrime rank candidates by intended-edit and indel rate
The Single Most Important Modern Insight -- there is no universal PBS/RTT optimum, and the system choice carries the order of magnitude
Two reframes:
PBS and RTT length are parameters to optimize per locus, not constants to look up. The PBS x RTT optimum is locus-specific -- it depends on local GC (which sets the PBS annealing Tm), the edit, the nick-to-edit distance, and chromatin. A high-GC target wants a short PBS; a low-GC target a long one; the "13/15" that is perfect at one locus is useless 200 bp away. A hard-coded default produces a sequence that looks valid, so nothing flags it until the data come back at 2%. The correct deliverable is a ranked panel (a few PBS x a few RTT x the viable nicks), tested or model-ranked -- emitting a single pegRNA is the tell of someone who has never run PE.
Prime editing efficiency is a cellular-genetics problem, not just oligo design. The cell's mismatch repair (MMR; MutSalpha/MutLalpha) detects the edit:original heteroduplex and excises the edited strand, reverting it and spawning indels. The biggest post-2019 jump was not a better PBS -- it was inhibiting MMR (MLH1dn -> PE4/PE5, ~7.7x average). The second was stopping the pegRNA 3' end from being degraded (epegRNA motifs; PE7's La protein). Design now means choosing the system (PE2 vs PE3b vs PE5max+epegRNA vs PE7) as much as the sequence. First branch: what edit, what cell type, MMR-proficient or not, expressed or synthetic.
Mechanism (the design rules fall out of it)
The prime editor (Anzalone 2019) is Cas9 H840A nickase + engineered M-MLV reverse transcriptase, programmed by a pegRNA = sgRNA (spacer + scaffold) with a 3' extension read 5'->3' as [RTT][PBS]. (1) The nickase cuts the protospacer (PAM) strand ~3 nt 5' of the PAM, exposing a free 3'-OH. (2) The PBS anneals to that nicked 3' end (the genomic strand becomes the primer). (3) The RT extends through the RTT, synthesizing a new 3' DNA flap that encodes the edit. (4) FEN1-type nucleases preferentially excise the unedited 5' flap, favoring incorporation of the edited 3' flap; ligation seals it. (5) The resulting heteroduplex is resolved by MMR -- which preferentially reverts the edit (hence the MMR section below). Consequences: PBS length is tuned by annealing Tm; RTT length = nick-to-edit distance + edit + 3' homology tail (~10-16 nt); efficiency falls as the edit moves farther from the nick; the edit must lie within the RTT.
The PE System Stack -- orthogonal axes, not a "bigger number is better" ranking
System
Adds over previous
Acts on
Cite
PE1
Cas9 H840A + wild-type M-MLV RT
proof of concept
Anzalone 2019
PE2
engineered M-MLV RT (pentamutant)
the workhorse enzyme
Anzalone 2019
PE3
+ second nicking sgRNA on the non-edited strand (~1.5-4x)
PE3 ngRNA matching only the edited sequence -> nick fires after the edit
near-eliminates PE3's indels; only possible when the edit makes/breaks a protospacer
Anzalone 2019
PE4
PE2 + MLH1dn (dominant-negative MMR) (~7.7x avg)
MMR globally
Chen 2021
PE5
PE3 + MLH1dn
second nick + MMR
Chen 2021
PEmax
optimized protein (codon, NLS, R221K/N394K, linker); +MLH1dn = PE4max/PE5max
the protein
Chen 2021
PE7
PEmax-family + La-protein RBD capping the pegRNA 3' end
pegRNA stability
Yan 2024
The expert move is to reason about which axis the problem needs: low efficiency in an MMR-active cell -> add MLH1dn; too many indels -> drop to PE2 or design PE3b (not PE3); short pegRNA half-life -> epegRNA/PE7. Note: in MMR-deficient lines (HCT116, many tumor lines) PE2 already behaves like PE4, so MLH1dn adds nothing -- benchmark numbers from such lines overstate the gain in MMR-proficient primary cells. PE5max + epegRNA is the modern default workhorse for hard, MMR-active contexts.
pegRNA Parameters & the Free Wins
PBS (~8-17 nt; start ~11-15): tune to annealing Tm/GC, not a fixed length. pegFinder's starting heuristic is PBS ~= 24 - (GC%/5), clamped 8-17; test a small ladder (e.g. 10/13/15/17).
RTT: = nick-to-edit + edit + ~10-16 nt 3' homology. Shorter RTT is usually more efficient -- use the shortest that spans the edit with adequate homology, then test a couple.
Don't end the synthesized flap on a C (a C at the +1 templated position lowers efficiency; PrimeDesign exposes --filter_c1_extension).
5' G for U6: prepend a G if the spacer lacks one -- prepend, do not replace the first base (replacing creates a spacer:target mismatch).
PAM-disrupting silent edit (free win): if the edit (or an added silent change) destroys the protospacer/PAM, the editor cannot re-nick the edited strand -> fewer indels, and the change doubles as an MMR-evading mismatch. Always check whether the edit can be routed to disrupt the PAM.
MMR-evading bystander edits (free win): add 1-2 silent substitutions next to the intended edit to make a >=3-bp edited "bubble" that MMR recognizes less efficiently -> higher correct-edit yield. Trivial in coding sequence (synonymous codons); the tactic of choice before reaching for MLH1dn.
epegRNA 3' Motifs & pegRNA Stability
The pegRNA 3' extension (RTT+PBS) is single-stranded RNA that is exonucleolytically degraded before it can prime RT -- an invisible failure (the molecule is made, just chewed back). epegRNAs append a structured pseudoknot motif to the 3' end (Nelson 2022): use tevopreQ1 by default (~3-4x gain, no added off-target); mpknot is larger and benefits most from a pegLIT-designed linker (tevopreQ1/evopreQ1 often work linker-free). PE7 (La protein) attacks the same degradation from the protein side and is partly redundant with epegRNAs (PE7's gains are largest with plain pegRNAs) -- don't stack them as if independent. For synthetic (non-expressed) pegRNAs where a folded motif is awkward, PE7 / La-optimized 3' chemistry is the lever instead.
Outcome Prediction (rank, but still test)
Model
Predicts
Cite
PRIDICT / PRIDICT2.0
intended-edit + unintended (indel) rate; 2.0 is chromatin-aware across lines
efficiency across 8 PE systems x 7 cell types, edits <=3 bp
Yu 2023 Cell 186:2256
Easy-Prime
XGBoost pegRNA design with RNA-structure features
Li 2021 Genome Biol 22:235
Limits: trained mostly on HEK293T + small edits; scores degrade for large edits, untrained cell types, primary/iPS cells, and in vivo loci. A high score says "worth synthesizing," not "will work in the target cell." Report edit:indel purity, not efficiency alone (PE3's indel liability hides when only the intended-edit rate is reported).
Large / Advanced Edits (single-pegRNA PE runs out of room)
Strategy
Mechanism
Size
Cite
twinPE
two pegRNAs template complementary flaps -> replacement/deletion/inversion
up to ~hundreds bp; +recombinase -> kb
Anzalone 2022 Nat Biotechnol 40:731
GRAND editing
dual pegRNAs, RTTs complementary to each other (non-genomic) -> template-free insertion
up to a few hundred bp (drops sharply >~400 bp)
Wang 2022
PASTE
PE writes a serine-integrase attB site, integrase drops in a donor
~10-36 kb, DSB-free
Yarnall 2023 Nat Biotechnol 41:500
Route "knock in a 2 kb reporter" to twinPE+integrase/PASTE (or HDR/HITI) -- a single giant-RTT pegRNA is a category error.
Decision Tree by Scenario
Scenario
Recommended
Why
C->T / G->A or A->G / T->C transition, base positionable in a window
-> base-editing-design
BE is higher-efficiency, cleaner, no flap/MMR competition for its transition
Any of the other small edits (other transversions, small indels, combined)
prime editing, panel of PBS x RTT
PE owns the precise-small-edit-without-a-DSB box
Low efficiency in an MMR-proficient cell
PE4/PE5 (MLH1dn) + MMR-evading silent edits
MMR is the dominant barrier
Indels unacceptable (therapeutic)
PE2 or PE3b (not PE3)
PE3's second nick raises indels
Expressed pegRNA
add a tevopreQ1 3' motif (PE5max+epegRNA default)
fixes invisible 3'-degradation
Large insertion (genes/tags, >~hundreds bp)
-> twinPE+integrase / PASTE / hdr-template-design
beyond single-pegRNA flap capacity
Knockout only (any frameshift)
-> grna-design (plain Cas9)
PE's precision is wasted; nuclease is simpler/more efficient
Validate edits
-> crispr-screens/crispresso-editing
quantify intended-edit and indel rates from amplicons
Generate Designs with PrimeDesign (verified notation)
Goal: Produce ranked pegRNA + nicking-guide candidates for a precise edit.
Approach: Encode the reference and edit in ONE inline string with PrimeDesign's exact parenthesis notation, then run the Docker CLI; it sweeps PBS/RTT, ranks pegRNAs (PAM-disrupted preferred), and nominates ngRNAs. Do not hand-roll the design as the only step.
# PrimeDesign edit-string notation (verify against the repo README; the most-hallucinated PE detail):# substitution: ...AAACG(T/A)CTTCC... # ref/edit, slash-separated# insertion: ...AAACGT(+CTT)CTTCC... # bare leading + (also (/CTT))# deletion: ...AAAAC(-GTCT)TCCAAT... # bare leading - (also (GTCT/))# combinatorial: GCCTGTGACTAACTGC(G/T)CCA(+ATCG)AAACGTC(-TTCC)AATCCCCTTATCCAATTTA
docker run -v ${PWD}/:/DATA -w /DATA pinellolab/primedesign primedesign_cli \
-f edits.csv -pbs 10 12 14 -rtt 10 16 22 -nick_dist_min 0 -nick_dist_max 100 -out designs/
Sweep a PBS x RTT Panel and Enforce the Hard Rules
Goal: Build a small, ordered panel of pegRNA extensions for one nick, applying the don't-end-on-C and 5'-G rules.
Approach: For each PBS length, take the reverse complement of the genomic sequence 5' of the nick; for each RTT length, build the edited 3' flap and reject extensions whose first templated base is C. Rank the panel by a model (PRIDICT/DeepPrime) for synthesis. (See examples/prime_editing_design.py.)
from Bio.Seq import Seq
defprepend_u6_g(spacer):
return spacer if spacer.startswith('G') else'G' + spacer # prepend, never replace
Per-Method Failure Modes
One pegRNA from a fixed PBS=13/RTT=15
Trigger: treating PBS/RTT as constants. Mechanism: the optimum is locus-specific (GC/Tm/nick distance/chromatin). Symptom: valid-looking pegRNA, ~2% editing. Fix: design and test a PBS x RTT panel; rank with PRIDICT2.0/DeepPrime.
Designed for the edit, ignored the repair machinery
Trigger: installing only the literal intended base. Mechanism: MMR reverts the edit; an intact PAM lets the editor re-nick. Symptom: low yield + indels. Fix: add a PAM-disrupting silent edit and 1-2 MMR-evading silent edits; use PE4/PE5 (MLH1dn) in MMR-active cells.
Reached for PE3 when PE3b was available
Trigger: reading the ladder as a scalar. Mechanism: PE3's second nick is a transient near-DSB. Symptom: good efficiency, unacceptable indels. Fix: if the edit makes/breaks a protospacer, design PE3b; otherwise drop to PE2/PE4.
Reported % editing without % indels
Trigger: efficiency-only readout. Mechanism: PE yields a mix (edit/unedited/indel). Symptom: a "40%" pegRNA that throws 15% indels looks fine. Fix: report edit:indel purity (PRIDICT predicts both).
Trusted a model score off-distribution / forgot the locus
Trigger: picking the top-scored pegRNA, skipping the panel, in a non-HEK293T context. Mechanism: models are trained on HEK293T + small edits; chromatin dominates and is invisible to sequence. Symptom: "designed perfectly, didn't work." Fix: weight the model less far from training; still test; a closed locus may sink any design.
5' G replaced, or flap ends on C, or large insert forced into one pegRNA
Trigger:'G'+spacer[1:]; RTT ending on C; 2 kb into one RTT. Mechanism: spacer:target mismatch; +1-C re-incorporation; flap can't template/resolve. Fix: prepend the G; shift RTT off a terminal C; route large inserts to twinPE/PASTE.
Quantitative Thresholds
Parameter
Value
Source
PBS length
~8-17 nt, tuned to Tm/GC (start ~24-GC%/5)
Anzalone 2019; pegFinder heuristic
RTT
edit + ~10-16 nt 3' homology; shortest workable
Anzalone 2019
Nick-to-edit
as small as possible; efficiency falls with distance
Anzalone 2019
PE3 ngRNA distance
~40-100 bp (sweet spot ~50-90), non-edited strand
Anzalone 2019
Flap +1 base
not C
Anzalone 2019 / PrimeDesign --filter_c1_extension
MMR inhibition gain
~7.7x avg (MMR-proficient cells only)
Chen 2021
epegRNA 3' motif
tevopreQ1 default; ~3-4x
Nelson 2022
Deliverable
a ranked panel, report edit:indel purity
field practice
Common Errors
Error / symptom
Cause
Solution
Editing ~2% despite a "perfect" pegRNA
fixed PBS/RTT, unfavorable locus
test a panel; consider MLH1dn/epegRNA; the locus may be closed
High indels with PE3
second nick on non-edited strand
use PE3b (if the edit makes/breaks a protospacer) or PE2
PrimeDesign mis-encodes the edit
wrong inline notation
use exact (ref/edit)/(+ins)/(-del); verify against the repo
No benefit from MLH1dn
MMR-deficient cell line
PE2 already behaves like PE4 there
References
Anzalone AV, Randolph PB, Davis JR, et al. (2019). Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature 576(7785):149-157.
Chen PJ, Hussmann JA, Yan J, et al. (2021). Enhanced prime editing systems by manipulating cellular determinants of editing outcomes. Cell 184(22):5635-5652.
Nelson JW, Randolph PB, Shen SP, et al. (2022). Engineered pegRNAs improve prime editing efficiency. Nat Biotechnol 40(3):402-410.
Yan J, Oyler-Castrillo P, Ravisankar P, et al. (2024). Improving prime editing with an endogenous small RNA-binding protein. Nature 628(8008):639-647.
Anzalone AV, Gao XD, Podracky CJ, et al. (2022). Programmable deletion, replacement, integration and inversion of large DNA sequences with twin prime editing. Nat Biotechnol 40(5):731-740.
Yarnall MTN, Ioannidi EI, Schmitt-Ulms C, et al. (2023). Drag-and-drop genome insertion of large sequences without double-strand DNA cleavage using CRISPR-directed integrases (PASTE). Nat Biotechnol 41(4):500-512.
Hsu JY, Grunewald J, Szalay R, et al. (2021). PrimeDesign software for rapid and simplified design of prime editing guide RNAs. Nat Commun 12:1034.
Chow RD, Chen JS, Shen J, Chen S (2021). A web tool for the design of prime-editing guide RNAs (pegFinder). Nat Biomed Eng 5(2):190-194.
Mathis N, Allam A, Kissling L, et al. (2023). Predicting prime editing efficiency and product purity by deep learning (PRIDICT). Nat Biotechnol 41(8):1151-1159.
Mathis N, Allam A, Talas A, et al. (2025). Machine learning prediction of prime editing efficiency across diverse chromatin contexts (PRIDICT2.0). Nat Biotechnol 43(5):712-719.
Yu G, Kim HK, Park J, et al. (2023). Prediction of efficiencies for diverse prime editing systems in multiple cell types (DeepPrime). Cell 186(10):2256-2272.
Li Y, Chen J, Tsai SQ, Cheng Y (2021). Easy-Prime: a machine learning-based prime editor design tool. Genome Biol 22:235.
Related Skills
base-editing-design - Preferred for the single transition a base editor can make
grna-design - Generic spacer scoring; plain-nuclease knockout when precision is unneeded
off-target-prediction - pegRNA spacer and PE3 nicking-guide off-target considerations
hdr-template-design - Large-insertion alternative (HDR/HITI) when PASTE/twinPE is not used
crispr-screens/prime-editing-screens - Pooled prime-editing screen analysis
crispr-screens/crispresso-editing - Quantify intended-edit vs indel rates from amplicons
variant-calling/variant-annotation - Identify the pathogenic variant to correct or install
