← BioTransfer GEO Dataset Finder
GEO series

Integrative multiomic analysis reveals how non-viral delivery system selection shapes CRISPR gene editing outcomes in stem cells.

GSE333489 Homo sapiens (human) RNA-seq (gene expression) 27 samples Submitted 2026/06/01 Platform GPL34284
At a glance

RNA-seq (gene expression) · human · 27 samples

What it is
RNA-seq (gene expression)Gene activity measured by sequencing. The summary does not mention single-cell work, so this is most likely bulk: one average per sample, the usual starting point for comparing groups.
Organism
Homo sapiens (human)
Samples
27 samples: 9 conditions, mostly in triplicateGroups are read from the sample names, not from the paper. Check the list below.
Data you can get
A processed table (series matrix) and supplementary files from NCBI; the raw sequencing reads from ENA. Which of these hold counts depends on the study, so check the file list.
Summary (written by the submitters)
The clinical translation of CRISPR gene editing is challenged by the lack of delivery systems that are both safe and efficient in therapeutically relevant cell types such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Non-viral delivery avoids the immunogenicity and genomic integration risks of viral vectors but faces fundamental trade-offs between editing efficiency and cytotoxicity.
Read the full summary ↓
Here, we present a comprehensive multiomic analysis of four non-viral CRISPR delivery modalities including cell-penetrating peptide- (CPP), lipid-, and polymer-based nanoparticles and electroporation; across mRNA and ribonucleoprotein (RNP) molecular formats. We systematically evaluate each modality, demonstrating that lipid-based delivery achieved the highest editing rates at the cost of genomic instability, interferon pathway activation, and a pro-inflammatory shift in the MSC paracrine activity. Alternatively, CPPs yield moderate editing rates while reducing these unintended side-effects, whereas polymers and electroporation consistently yielded the lowest efficiencies. CRISPR molecular format and delivery method interacted in a stress-dependent manner, with RNP delivery reducing editing rates under high-stress systems while improving them in lower-stress modalities such as CPP and electroporation. These findings establish that editing efficiency alone is an insufficient metric for delivery system selection, and that genomic stability, transcriptomic dysregulation, and inflammatory response must be treated as primary design criteria for CRISPR therapies.
This dataset
Open GSE333489 in finder → Find more human RNA-seq datasets →
Download · which file do I need?

Direct links to NCBI and ENA, no account and no request form. Pick by what you want to do: take the small processed table to look, the supplementary files to re-analyse, or the original raw data to start over.

1 · Just have a look

Processed table

The series matrix: one table of values per sample as the submitters processed it. The smallest download, and it opens in Excel or R. Start here to see what the data look like.

Series matrix ↓
2 · Re-analyse it

Supplementary files

The count tables and other files the authors uploaded. Take only the samples you need, or the whole study as GSE333489_RAW.tar (it can run to tens of gigabytes).

All supplementary files ↗ Whole study · RAW.tar ↓
3 · Start from the raw reads

Raw sequencing reads

The original FASTQ files, straight from the sequencer, held at ENA. Large, and you align them yourself, so only choose this if you need to re-process the study from scratch.

Raw reads on ENA ↗

What the files usually look like: For RNA-seq the counts are usually a table among the supplementary files (look for 'counts', 'expression', 'FPKM' or 'TPM' in the file name). The series matrix of a sequencing study is sometimes nearly empty.

Also filed as BioProject PRJNA1471165 and SRA study SRP704190. Searching any of these in the dataset finder brings you back here.

NCBI GEO page ↗
Study design
9 conditions, mostly in triplicate
Non-transfected, GFP experiment, ×3 CPP, GFP experiment, ×3 Lipid, GFP experiment, ×3 Polymer, GFP experiment, ×3 Electro, GFP experiment, ×3 Etoposide treatment, GFP experiment, ×3 Non-transfected, Cas9 experiment, ×3 CPP, Cas9 experiment, Cas9 RNP with AAVS1 gRN… ×3 +2 more

Supports a between-group comparison across 26 samples.

How we read this: 9 replicated groups read from 27 sample titles; they account for 26 of them. These groups are guessed from the sample names, not taken from the paper, so check them against the sample list below before relying on them.

Samples in this study
Datasets on a similar topic

Search all human RNA-seq datasets in GEO →

Share this dataset

Metadata from NCBI GEO, cached and refreshed periodically — the NCBI page above is authoritative. Downloads link straight to NCBI/ENA; nothing is proxied through BioTransfer.