Next Article in Journal
Laser-Based Photobiomodulation for Orthodontic Pain: Mechanistic Evidence from Experimental Tooth-Movement Models
Previous Article in Journal
The Predictive Role of ctDNA and CTCs in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Receiving Immunotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Gene Therapy Tools for Diseases Caused by Mutations of the Mitochondrial Genome

by
Vladislav Simonov
* and
Sergey Rastorguev
Center for High-Precision Technologies for Biomedicine, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ostrovityanova 1, 117513 Moscow, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27(12), 5517; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27125517 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 27 April 2026 / Revised: 7 June 2026 / Accepted: 13 June 2026 / Published: 18 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Genetics and Genomics)

Abstract

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations are associated with a diverse spectrum of diseases and pose a significant threat to human health. Despite their importance as therapeutic targets, the unique structural and electrochemical properties of mitochondria—most notably the impermeable inner mitochondrial membrane and the high membrane potential—present formidable challenges for the targeted delivery of therapeutic agents. Currently, there are no approved curative treatments for patients harboring pathogenic mtDNA mutations. In this review, we discuss recent advancements in gene therapy for mitochondrial genome-related disorders, with a particular focus on allotopic expression of mtDNA-encoded genes and mitochondrial genome editing technologies. We conclude that allotopic expression currently stands as the most promising approach for near-term clinical implementation. But we also pay great attention to programmable nucleases and base editors utilizing RNA-independent DNA recognition which are evolving with remarkable speed.

1. Introduction

Mitochondria are semi-autonomous organelles originating from ancient endosymbiotic proteobacteria, whose primary function is the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the usable form of energy for cells. The vast majority of mitochondrial proteins are encoded by the nuclear genome, translated in the cytosol, and imported into the mitochondrion. However, there is also a mitochondrial genome. It is circular and 16.5 kb in length. It encodes 22 tRNA genes, two ribosomal RNAs (rRNA), and 13 protein products. Of the 13 core subunits of the respiratory complexes encoded by the reduced mitochondrial genome, seven polypeptides are subunits of complex I, one is part of complex III, three are subunits of complex IV, and two are part of ATP synthase [1]. As these 13 proteins are core subunits of the OxPhos chain, any disruption to the structure, stability, or function of these subunits can have severe biochemical and physiological consequences [2]. Approximately 1 in 5000 individuals suffer from mitochondrial disease—a heterogeneous group of conditions caused by mutations in any of the >1400 genes encoding components of the organelle responsible for aerobic respiration [3,4,5]. Unlike the diploid nuclear genome, mitochondrial DNA is polyploid, with hundreds to thousands of copies per cell. This often leads to the coexistence of mutant and wild-type genomes within the same cell—a condition known as heteroplasmy [6]. The presence of wild-type genomes compensates for the effect of mutant genomes until the percentage of mutant mtDNA exceeds a certain threshold, after which clinical symptoms manifest [7,8]. Mitochondrial diseases most commonly affect tissues requiring high levels of cellular ATP for proper functioning, such as the nervous system, heart, skeletal muscles, and liver. Phenotypes, onset, and severity range from mild symptoms, such as exercise intolerance, to neonatal lethality [9]. Mitochondrial genome mutations most commonly cause mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke-like episodes (MELAS), myoclonic epilepsy with ragged red fibers (MERRFs), Neurogenic muscle weakness, ataxia, and retinitis pigmentosa (NARP), and Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON). LHON causes optic nerve atrophy, sudden loss of central vision, optic disc edema, and large central visual field defects. Patients with MELAS may experience episodic sudden headaches, intermittent atypical migraines, and intractable seizures. Patients with MERRF exhibit myoclonic epilepsy, ataxia, spasticity, generalized seizures, optic nerve atrophy, and dementia. They may also present with muscle weakness, myopathy, neuropathy, or sensorineural hearing loss. Neurogenic muscle weakness, ataxia, and retinitis pigmentosa NARP can represent a milder form of maternally inherited Leigh syndrome. Patients with NARP may present with developmental delay, dementia, seizures, ataxia, retinitis pigmentosa, proximal neurogenic muscle weakness, and sensory neuropathy [5]. Some of the most common mutations in the mitochondrial genome and the diseases they cause are listed in Table 1.
We explore the most promising strategies developed, discussing their mechanisms of action and potential for clinical application with the ultimate goal of providing a comprehensive understanding of the potential of gene therapy in treating mitochondrial diseases.

2. Allotopic Expression

The synthesis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)-encoded proteins within the cytosol, a process known as allotopic expression, offers a compelling strategy for the genetic treatment of human diseases caused by mutations in the mitochondrial genome. The fundamental concept involves integrating a wild-type copy of a mutated mitochondrial gene into the nuclear genome, followed by the import of the resulting protein products into the mitochondria from the cytosol. This approach requires two critical modifications: the addition of a mitochondrial targeting sequence (MTS) to the gene to facilitate the translocation of the precursor protein into the mitochondrial matrix, and codon optimization to account for the divergence between the nuclear and mitochondrial genetic codes.
However, experimental attempts using various MTS and mtDNA-encoded genes in human cells have shown that precursor polypeptides are not consistently imported with high efficiency (the various MTS used for allotopic expression are listed in Table 2). Consequently, the repertoire of mtDNA-encoded polypeptides that can be successfully expressed and integrated into the mitochondrial respiratory chain complexes remains limited [23]. This constraint is primarily attributed to the high hydrophobicity of mtDNA-encoded proteins, which possess transmembrane domains that impede mitochondrial import. Precursors synthesized in the cytosol may fail to maintain an import-competent conformation necessary for efficient translocation. It is now widely recognized that the extreme hydrophobicity of mitochondrial-encoded proteins represents a formidable barrier to their mitochondrial import during cytosolic translation [24].
Currently, the most prevalent strategy involves the codon optimization of mitochondrial genes for nuclear translation, fused with an MTS derived from a nuclear-encoded mitochondrial protein. For instance, O’Connor et al. utilized patient-derived cybrid cell lines harboring a single point mutation in the overlapping region of the ATP8 and ATP6 genes. This mutation results in the loss of ATP8 expression and a reduction in ATP6 levels. Nuclear expression of ATP8 utilizing the ATP5G1 MTS restored ATP synthesis levels but failed to recover ATP hydrolysis. Notably, the co-expression of both ATP8 and ATP6 under similar conditions led to stable protein expression, successful integration into Complex V, and functional phenotypic rescue [25]. Similarly, Manfredi et al. reported the restoration of ATP synthesis in cybrids homoplasmic for the 8993T>G mutation following the allotopic expression of a codon-optimized ATP6 [26].
Furthermore, an optimized allotopic approach for ND4 has demonstrated success in clinical trials for Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON) [27,28], although it remains the only instance of successful clinical translation for allotopic mitochondrial gene therapy to date. In animal models, Begelman et al. achieved functional ATP synthase restoration in C57BL/6J(mtFVB) mice, which harbor a natural polymorphism (m.7778 G>T) in the ATP8 gene, through allotopic expression [29]. Successful allotopic expression of ND3 in patient-derived cells has also been reported by Borna et al. [30].
A significant potential obstacle in expression of genes encoding highly hydrophobic proteins is their propensity for aggregation within the cytoplasm or on the mitochondrial outer membrane [31,32]. Oca-Cossio et al. reported that allotopically expressed apocytochrome b and ND4 failed to colocalize with mitochondria; instead, upon overexpression, they aggregated into cytoplasmic fibrils containing tubulin and vimentin [33]. Perales-Clemente et al. similarly observed that the allotopic expression of ND6 led to cytoplasmic protein accumulation, although the extent of aggregation was not explicitly detailed [34]. Comparable effects have been documented during the allotopic expression of Cox2 in yeast [35]. In such cases, allotopic expression not only fails to restore respiratory function but may also trigger the loss of mitochondrial membrane potential, ultimately leading to cell death [33]. Another challenge relates to hydrophobic proteins are potentially misdirected to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) rather than the mitochondria [36]. Protein translocation to the ER occurs co-translationally and is initiated by the signal recognition particle (SRP), which binds to hydrophobic segments such as transmembrane domains or signal sequences [37]. This aberrant targeting from the mitochondria to the ER may be driven by increased hydrophobicity of either the C-terminal [38] or N-terminal [39] domains, a reduction in the net positive charge of the C-terminal domain [39,40], or specific post-translational modifications [41]. Knöringer et al. demonstrated that when mitochondrial protein translocation is blocked, mitochondrial membrane proteins tend to accumulate within the ER [42]. It is highly probable that the similarity and potential interchangeability of mitochondrial and ER-targeting signals possess significant adaptive value during cellular stress, as they serve to localize protein aggregation to a limited number of compartments. Finally, experimental evidence has shown that nuclear-expressed Cox1, Cytb, and ATP6 proteins predominantly colocalize with the ER [36,43].
Notably, in mammalian cells, many mRNAs are localized to the mitochondrial surface to facilitate the co-translational import of the resulting proteins [44]. Matsumoto et al. established that human mRNAs encoding highly hydrophobic proteins with more than two transmembrane domains are typically associated with outer membrane-bound polysomes. In contrast, mRNAs encoding proteins with one or no transmembrane domains are distributed between both mitochondrial-associated and cytosolic polysome fractions [45]. In this regard, it is hypothesized that the 3′-untranslated region (3′UTR), by ensuring mRNA localization to the mitochondrial surface, may significantly facilitate protein import. For instance, ATP6, ND4, and ND1 constructs fused with the 3′UTR of the COX10 gene encoded proteins that exhibited markedly improved mitochondrial entry [46]. Kaltimbacher et al. further confirmed the beneficial effect of the 3′UTR from the nuclear-encoded SOD2 gene on the import of ATP6 [47]. However, a subsequent study by Chin et al., which evaluated 31 MTS and 15 3′UTRs for their ability to localize allotopically expressed proteins, concluded that the choice of MTS is the primary determinant of successful optimization, while 3′UTR optimization exerts negligible influence [48].
Table 2. Signals of mitochondrial localization, which were used for alotopic expression of mitochondrial genome genes.
Table 2. Signals of mitochondrial localization, which were used for alotopic expression of mitochondrial genome genes.
Mitochondrial Target SignalSource Protein Source
Protein
UniProt ID
Grand Average of Hydropathy (GRAVY Scope)ReferencesResult
ATP5MC1ATP5MC1 Homo sapiensP054960.641[25,49]Mainly successful
ATP6ATP6 Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiQ8H7620.533[50]unsuccessful
Cox3Cox3 Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiQ9FV970.224[50]unsuccessful
COX8ACOX8A Homo sapiensP101760.349[33,34,36]unsuccessful
COX10COX10 Homo sapiensQ128870.128[27,46]Mainly successful, but it is possible that a successful transfer requires 3′UTR of COX10
Phase 3 clinical trials of lenadogene nolparvovec, a gene therapy product based on the allotopic expression of the ND4 gene, have demonstrated sustained bilateral visual improvement and a favorable safety profile at a 5-year long-term follow-up [51]. Additionally, a clinical study targeting the mutated ND1 gene has been registered, although its findings remain unpublished to date [52,53]. Regrettably, lenadogene nolparvovec currently stands as the only allotopic expression-based therapy in late-stage clinical development.
The unique physiological characteristics of the eye—including its immune privilege, relative anatomical isolation allowing for direct vector delivery (e.g., via intravitreal or subretinal injection), small volume, and the feasibility of non-invasive longitudinal monitoring—position ocular diseases as a primary frontier for innovative biotechnological solutions. These include tetracycline-induced expression, polycistronic vectors [54], and the utilize of dual-AAV systems [55]. The potential clinical success of lenadogene nolparvovec may serve as a critical milestone, paving the way for gene therapies targeting more complex organs, such as the brain and skeletal muscles.

3. Xenotopic Expression

Xenotopic expression refers to the cytosolic expression of a gene orthologous to a mitochondrial gene but derived from a different species, followed by the import of the protein into the mitochondria to functionally replace a mutant counterpart [56,57]. Throughout evolution, orthologs of several genes encoded by the human mitochondrial genome have been successfully transferred to the nucleus in other organisms [58]. Such genes typically possess an endogenous MTS and encode less hydrophobic proteins; however, they are often found in phylogenetically distant taxa, such as algae [59,60] and higher plants [61]. This evolutionary distance raises concerns regarding the efficiency with which these xenotopic products can integrate into human OXPHOS complexes.
Unique mitochondrial genomic architectures are characteristic of green algae. For instance, in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and Polytomella sp., the ATP6 [62] and COX3 [63] genes are nuclear-encoded, while COX2 has not only been transferred to the nucleus but also split into two subunits, cox2a and cox2b [64]. As early as 2004, González-Halphen et al. proposed leveraging these unique evolutionary features to develop gene therapies for human mitochondrial diseases [65]. Initial attempts using human codon-optimized COX3 and ATP6 fused with C. reinhardtii MTS demonstrated successful mitochondrial translocation in human cells but failed to achieve integration into the OXPHOS complexes. This failure was potentially attributed to the introduction of specific amino acid substitutions intended to reduce protein hydrophobicity [50]. In contrast, the expression of full-length ATP6 from C. reinhardtii in human cells harboring pathogenic ATP6 mutations resulted in successful mitochondrial import, integration into human ATP synthase, and the restoration of ATP synthesis [66].
Furthermore, while Saccharomyces cerevisiae mitochondria lack a classical respiratory Complex I, they utilize NADH dehydrogenases (Nde1, Nde2, and Ndi1) to catalyze electron transfer from NADH to ubiquinone without proton translocation [67]. The application of NDI1 in a mouse model of Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy led to a 1.5-fold reduction in retinal ganglion cell (RGC) mortality and a 1.4-fold decrease in optic nerve atrophy, resulting in significant preservation of retinal function [68]. NDI1 has also been shown to improve mitochondrial function and attenuate reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels in mouse models of glaucoma [69] and in cell culture models of Parkinson’s disease, although it does not prevent the formation of Lewy bodies. Moreover, this approach improved behavioral outcomes and biochemical parameters in a murine model of Parkinson’s disease [70].

4. Strategies for Correcting Mitochondrial tRNA Mutations

All tRNAs required for the human mitochondrial translation machinery are encoded by mtDNA. Pathogenic point mutations frequently occur within these mitochondrial tRNA (mt-tRNA) genes [71]. Given that mitochondrial RNA import is generally highly inefficient in humans, a direct allotopic approach—involving the nuclear expression of mt-tRNAs—is considered unfeasible. Nevertheless, several strategies have been proposed to partially restore the intra-mitochondrial aminoacyl-tRNA pools.
While most organisms synthesize their mitochondrial translation components exclusively within the organelle, Saccharomyces cerevisiae possesses a cytosolic lysine tRNA (tRNA-Lys) that is partially imported into the mitochondria [72]. Kolesnikova et al. demonstrated that this yeast tRNA can also be imported into human cell cultures harboring the m.8344A>G mutation (MT-TK), where it partially restores mitochondrial function [73]. Building on this yeast tRNA scaffold, Karicheva et al. engineered leucyl-tRNA variants designed for cytosolic synthesis and subsequent mitochondrial translocation. However, they were unable to identify a variant that simultaneously possessed both high recognition determinants for leucyl-tRNA synthetase and efficient import signals; consequently, only limited functional recovery was achieved in m.3243A>G (MT-TL1) mutant cells [74].
In 2012, Wang et al. reported the successful suppression of MT-TK and MT-TL1 mutations using a hybrid tRNA containing a stem-loop sequence from H1 RNA and the 3′UTR of the human mitochondrial ribosomal protein S12 (MRPS12) gene. They also claimed to achieve mitochondrial import of COX2 mRNA using the same targeting sequences. However, these results remain controversial due to a lack of independent replication and ongoing debates regarding the intrinsic importability of H1 RNA (discussed further in the “CRISPR/Cas9 and Other RNA-Guided Editors” section) [75].
An alternative approach involves the RNA Import Complex (RIC) from Leishmania tropica. Unlike humans, Kinetoplastids have lost all mitochondrial tRNA genes during evolution and rely on the multi-subunit RIC to import tRNAs from the cytoplasm [76,77]. It has been shown that the Leishmania RIC can enter human cells via a caveolin-1-dependent pathway, where it facilitates the import of endogenous cytosolic tRNAs (including tRNA-Lys) and restores mitochondrial function in MT-TK mutant cybrids [78,79]. Nonetheless, the requirement of nine distinct proteins for RIC assembly poses a significant challenge for in vivo therapeutic delivery.
Furthermore, Sieber et al. explored non-selective RNA transport using the RNA-binding protein DHFR fused to the MTS of Neurospora crassa ATP9. They achieved the delivery of approximately 5% of cytoplasmic tRNA-Ala into isolated mitochondria [80]. However, the efficacy of this artificial transporter has not been validated in mammalian cell cultures or animal models. Moreover, since DHFR binds RNA non-specifically, it likely transports various cytosolic RNAs up to 800 nucleotides in length. Such an influx of exogenous RNA could potentially interfere with mitochondrial matrix processes, such as replication inhibition [81].
In myoblast cultures derived from patients with the m.3243A>G mutation, respiratory function was partially rescued by overexpressing translation factors EFTu or EFG2, though no effect was observed with EFT or EFG1 [82]. Additionally, the τm5U-modifying enzyme MTO1 has been shown to restore mitochondrial activity in myoblasts from patients with MELAS and MERRF syndromes [83].
A substantial body of research has focused on the overexpression of amino-acyl-tRNA synthetases (ARSs). It is hypothesized that variations in endogenous ARS expression levels may contribute to the phenotypic diversity observed in individuals carrying pathogenic mt-tRNA mutations [84]. For instance, Perli et al. described a family patients harboring the pathogenic 4277T>C mutation in mt-tRNA(Ile), where the severity of clinical symptoms was found to correlate with the expression levels of the isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase gene, IARS2 [85]. Furthermore, the overexpression of cognate aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases has been successfully employed to rescue mitochondrial dysfunction in various models carrying mutations in their respective mitochondrial tRNA genes [86,87,88,89].
Moreover, the deleterious effects of the m.3243A>G mutation are suppressed not only by the full-length leucyl-tRNA synthetase but also by its carboxy-terminal domain (Cterm) [90]. While the Cterm enhances de novo mitochondrial protein synthesis, it lacks a catalytic site, possesses no enzymatic activity, and does not influence the aminoacylation of mt-tRNA(Leu) [91]. Notably, as demonstrated by d’Amati et al., a 16-amino acid peptide derived from the Cterm is sufficient to improve the cellular phenotype compromised by the m.3243A>G and m.8344A>G mt-tRNA mutations [92]. In contrast, an analysis of the suppressive activity of mitochondrial alanyl-tRNA synthetase (AARS2) on mt-tRNA(Ala) revealed that AARS2 overexpression restores a healthy phenotype by increasing aminoacylation activity rather than by stabilizing the tRNA structure [88]. These divergent mechanisms of action between leucyl-tRNA synthetase [93] and alanyl-tRNA synthetase [88] may be attributed to their classification into different enzyme classes [94,95]. Furthermore, aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases within the same functional group exhibit partial interchangeability in their capacity to mitigate the effects of tRNA mutations. Specifically, three human mitochondrial aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases—leucyl-, valyl-, and isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase—have been shown to enhance both the viability and bioenergetic profile of human transmitochondrial cybrid cells harboring pathogenic mutations in the mt-tRNA(Ile) gene [90]. The various approaches related to the expression of protein-coding genes, which were discussed in Section 2, Section 3 and Section 4, are listed in Table 3.

5. DNA Delivery to Mitochondria

While the MITO-Porter system can deliver RNA molecules up to 500 bp with moderate efficiency [97], the translocation of large DNA fragments, such as full-length plasmids, across the mitochondrial membrane remains a significant challenge with extremely low efficiency [98]. Nevertheless, several pioneering studies have reported successful mitochondrial transformation. Yasuzaki et al. utilized hydrodynamic injection to deliver the pHSP-mtLuc (CGG) vector, which contains a luciferase gene under the control of the mitochondrial heavy-strand promoter (HSP), resulting in detectable luciferase expression [99]. Similarly, Yamada et al. employed a MITO-Porter system modified with the KALA peptide to deliver pCMV-mtLuc (CGG) plasmids into the mitochondria, achieving luciferase expression driven by the CMV promoter [100]. Furthermore, Lyrawati et al. reported the delivery of pmtGFP—a self-replicating plasmid harboring the GFP gene—into macrophage mitochondria using dequalinium vesicles (DQAsomes) [101]. A notable advancement in viral-mediated delivery was achieved by Yu et al., who fused the adeno-associated virus (AAV) VP2 capsid protein with a mitochondrial targeting sequence (MTS) to deliver the ND4 gene. The expression of wild-type (WT) ND4 in cells carrying the 11778G>A mutation successfully restored defective ATP synthesis. Moreover, in vivo administration into rodent eyes resulted in transgene expression across most inner retinal neurons, effectively preventing vision loss and optic nerve atrophy [99]. The purported ability of mitochondria to maintain AAV sequences as episomes is particularly striking, as wild-type viruses do not naturally form episomes within this organelle. Although definitive evidence that mammalian mitochondria can support stable episomes is lacking, recombinant AAV (rAAV) may potentially integrate into the mitochondrial genome at a low frequency [102]. However, despite being first reported in 2012, this technology has not yet transitioned into routine laboratory practice and remains largely confined to its laboratory of origin. Consequently, the feasibility of AAV-mediated mitochondrial DNA delivery necessitates further independent validation and robust replication.

6. CRISPR/Cas9 and Other RNA-Guided Editors

The CRISPR/Cas9 system is a cornerstone of nuclear DNA editing, used for both generating mutations and correcting pathogenic alleles. The first report of successful mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) editing was published by Jo et al. [103]. While several subsequent studies have claimed successful mtDNA correction using CRISPR/Cas9 [104,105], these findings are countered by numerous negative reports, with the primary bottleneck being the low efficiency of guide RNA (gRNA) translocation into the mitochondrial matrix [106]. A fundamental distinction between nuclear and mitochondrial CRISPR/Cas9 applications lies in the DNA repair mechanisms. Double-strand break (DSB) repair is notoriously inefficient in mammalian mitochondria [107,108]. Consequently, CRISPR/Cas9-mediated mtDNA editing likely functions not through precise repair, but through the selective degradation of mutant genomes, thereby modulating heteroplasmy levels. This mechanism is supported by observations of significant mtDNA copy number depletion following CRISPR/Cas9 treatment [109,110]. Therefore, the introduction of novel mutations (e.g., insertions or transversions) into the mitochondrial genome remains largely unfeasible. Moreover, this degradative approach poses a clinical risk for patients with high heteroplasmy levels (exceeding 85–90%), such as those with the m.8344A>G (MT-TK) mutation, where further depletion of mtDNA copies could exacerbate mitochondrial deficiency [111].
The targeting of CRISPR/Cas9 components to the mitochondria presents distinct challenges. While wild-type Cas9 lacks intrinsic tropism for eukaryotic organelles, it can be redirected on the nucleus or mitochondria using a targeting sequence [112,113]. However, the delivery of single-guide RNA (sgRNA) is far more complex. Unlike nuclear editing, where sgRNAs are transcribed in the nucleus and remain there, mitochondrial transport of RNA is highly selective and its mechanisms remain a subject of intense debate [114,115].
There is currently no consensus on the translocation machinery or the specific transcripts capable of entering the mitochondria. For instance, it was long believed that mammalian mitochondrial RNase P required a nuclear-encoded catalytic RNA subunit [116,117]. However, subsequent structural studies revealed that human mtRNase P is a protein-only complex (comprising three subunits) devoid of an RNA component [118]. This discovery casts significant doubt on strategies using the RP-loop for mitochondrial RNA targeting [119,120]. Similarly, RNase MRP, initially described as a mitochondrial ribonucleoprotein complex [121,122], has been shown to localize predominantly in the nucleolus, where it facilitates pre-ribosomal RNA processing [121,122,123].
Conflicting reports also exist regarding the mitochondrial transport of telomerase RNA (TERC) [124,125] and some nuclear-encoded long non-coding RNAs, as like as SAMMSON, for which an effect on mitochondrial function has been shown, which is why they are sometimes considered imported into the mitochondria, but no evidence has been provided [126]. In many cases, these RNAs may influence mitochondrial physiology indirectly—either via cytosolic RNA-binding proteins [127] or by regulating nuclear-encoded mitochondrial genes [128]—rather than through direct translocation. These indirect effects likely explain the lack of reproducibility in several RNA transport studies. Nonetheless, it is widely accepted that specific microRNAs (miRNAs) [129,130,131] and potentially some lncRNAs [132,133] are present in the mitochondrial matrix. Their transport may involve proteins such as Ago2 [134,135] and PNPase [135,136]. It is hypothesized that sgRNAs might utilize these same endogenous miRNA import pathways, which notably lack defined targeting sequences.
The limitations of RNA import can potentially be circumvented by delivering CRISPR/Cas9 components inside lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) [104]; however, the in vivo efficacy of this delivery strategy remains to be fully elucidated.
Intriguingly, Jo et al. reported that Cas9 exhibits an inherent tropism for mitochondria both in the absence and presence of a COX8A-derived MTS, and that gRNAs could translocate into the mitochondrial matrix without specific targeting signals [103]. Similar findings were shared by Wang et al. [105] and Bi et al. [110], who successfully employed SaCas9 with a COX8A MTS and sgRNAs lacking targeting sequences. However, these reports have been met with significant skepticism, most notably from Gammage et al. [137], who argue that spontaneous sgRNA transport is highly improbable given the extreme selectivity of the mitochondrial RNA import machinery [115].
In response to these challenges, subsequent studies have increasingly incorporated targeting signals derived from nuclear-encoded RNAs that are putatively imported into mitochondria. For instance, Schmiderer et al. failed to detect any editing effects using Cas9 and Cas9-BE3 even when employing the RP-loop [106]. Conversely, Hussain et al. successfully edited an ND4 mutation by fusing the sgRNA with an RP-loop derived from RNase P [109]. It is important to note, however, that the RNA component of RNase P, from which the RP-loop was derived, is now considered non-exported according to recent evidence [118], which casts doubt on the mechanism by which it might enhance sgRNA import. More recently, a hairpin structure from the long non-coding RNA RP11-46H11.3 was reported to possess high mitochondrial tropism; when fused with Cas9-sgRNA, it achieved a heteroplasmy shift comparable to that of a mito-TALEN targeting the same locus [138].
As an alternative to Cas9, the Cas12a (Cpf1) system has been proposed, which is claimed to target mitochondria more efficiently due to its requirement for shorter guide RNAs (crRNAs: ~40 nucleotides vs. sgRNAs: ~100 nucleotides) [139,140]. Nikitchina et al. demonstrated that short crRNAs for AsCas12a effectively penetrate the mitochondrial matrix independently of targeting hairpin sequences. Furthermore, Antón et al. highlighted the mitochondrial toxicity of SpCas9 fused with a COX8A MTS, which resulted in poor localization, impaired mitochondrial morphology, and functional decline in transiently transfected mammalian cells. In contrast, LbCas12a showed successful expression and localization within the mitochondrial matrix using several MTS (with Su9 being the most effective), although prolonged expression also induced mitochondrial damage. The authors suggest that the superior performance of LbCas12a may be due to its smaller size, higher positive charge, and lower hydrophobicity compared to SpCas9. Paradoxically, despite testing several sgRNA/crRNA versions with various targeting signals (FD, AD, or RP), Antón et al. were unable to definitively detect RNA entry into the matrix, and LbCas12a editing unexpectedly resulted in an increase in mtDNA copy number [139].
A novel approach recently proposed by Rimskaya et al. involves the use of Argonaute proteins from the mesophilic bacterium Alteromonas macleodii (AmAgo). Argonautes are significantly smaller than Cas-family nucleases (AmAgo is ~65 kDa, compared to ~160 kDa for Cas9 and ~150 kDa for Cas12a), which may facilitate their mitochondrial import. Furthermore, while Cas nucleases rely on long guide RNAs and specific protospacer adjacent motifs (PAMs), prokaryotic Argonautes (pAgos) utilize short single-stranded RNA or DNA guides (typically 16–20 nt) and operate independently of PAM sequences, offering greater targeting flexibility. However, the presence of endogenous miRNAs within the mitochondria remains a potential source of unintended off-target effects [141].

7. RNA-Independent Genome Editing Using Targetable Nucleases

Initially, the use of restriction endonucleases (REs) was proposed for mitochondrial genome cleavage. As previously discussed, the objective of this nuclease-based approach is to cleave a specific mtDNA locus present in only one haplotype. Since double-strand breaks (DSBs) almost invariably lead to the degradation of the mitochondrial genome in mammalian cells, the selective elimination of mutant mtDNA results in a proportional increase in wild-type genomes within the total population—a process known as a heteroplasmy shift. Although off-target DSBs should be strictly avoided due to potential adverse effects, the multi-copy nature of mtDNA renders non-specific breaks less catastrophic for the mitochondrial compartment than for the nuclear genome [107,108].
The primary limitation of this approach is that naturally occurring restriction endonucleases are not easily programmable. Consequently, the only relevant application involves mutations that spontaneously generate a recognition site for an existing RE. For instance, the m.8399G mutation in the MT-ATP6 gene, which causes Leigh syn-drome/NARP, creates a unique SmaI recognition site that is otherwise absent in the human and murine mitochondrial genomes. This approach has demonstrated high efficacy both ex vivo in cultured cells and in vivo in heteroplasmic mouse models [142]. However, the rarity of such mutations precludes this method from being applied to the vast majority of mitochondrial pathogenic variants.
Massive expansion of mitochondrial editing capabilities became possible with the advent of programmable nucleases, starting with Zinc Finger Nucleases (ZFNs). Zinc fingers, engineered to recognize specific trinucleotides, are typically linked in arrays of 3 to 6 modules to extend the target sequence. This modularity allows for the creation of ZFNs with bespoke DNA-binding specificity. To achieve targeted cleavage, the ZF binding domain is fused to the catalytic domain of the FokI nuclease. The FokI enzyme possesses distinct DNA-binding and cleavage domains, enabling the use of a non-specific catalytic domain to introduce breaks at predefined sites. To enhance specificity, the FokI nuclease (originally active as a homodimer) was engineered into an obligate heterodimer that forms active complexes only when bound to adjacent DNA sequences in an inverted orientation. MitoZFNs have been successfully used to edit several mutations, including m.5024C>T [143], m.8993T>G [144], and the CD4977 “common deletion” [144].
An alternative approach utilizes Transcription Activator-Like Effectors (TALEs) combined with the same FokI catalytic domain. These platforms, originally discovered in the proteobacteria Xanthomonas, were among the first versatile gene-editing tools [145]. The DNA-binding domain of TALEs comprises a modular and highly repetitive region where 33–35 consecutive amino acids (TALE repeats) possess specific residues at positions 12 and 13, known as Repeat Variable Di-residues (RVDs). TALENs were adapted for mitochondrial DNA (mitoTALENs) by incorporating an MTS, a specialized TALE DNA-binding domain, and the obligate heterodimeric FokI cleavage domain. This system has successfully shifted heteroplasmy for the m.5024C>T [146], m.3243A>G [147], and m.8344A>G [148] mutations. Notably, for reasons that remain not fully understood, some mutations could be successfully edited with ZFNs but not with TALENs [149]. Conversely, TALENs are generally considered to exhibit significantly lower off-target activity compared to ZFNs [150].
A major shared disadvantage of both systems is their dimeric architecture and the substantial size of the DNA-binding domains, which limits their compatibility with delivery vectors of restricted packaging capacity, such as adeno-associated viruses (AAV). To circumvent this limitation, Precision Biosciences developed the mitoARCUS system, based on the I-CreI meganuclease derived from the Chlamydomonas reinhardtii chloroplast genome. Unlike the large, dimeric ZFNs and TALENs, ARCUS operates as a monomer. Its coding sequence spans approximately 1100 bp, facilitating efficient packaging into AAV vectors. This engineered endonuclease was initially developed to target the m.3243A>G mutation, though it can potentially be reprogrammed to recognize and cleave a wide array of DNA sequences [151]. Recently, Bacman et al. utilized mitoARCUS to edit the m.5024C>T mutation (mt-tRNA(Ala) in murine skeletal muscle. The tool was administered via intramuscular injection of lipid nanoparticle complexes. Transient expression of mitoARCUS in the *tibialis anterior* (TA) muscle led to a substantial reduction in the mtDNA mutation load, which persisted for up to 42 weeks post-injection. In this model, the depleted level of mt-tRNA(Ala) serves as a molecular marker of mitochondrial dysfunction; notably, these levels were significantly restored in the treated muscles. Furthermore, in situ muscle force assessments following repetitive stimulation revealed that fatigability was markedly reduced in the treated TA muscle. These results demonstrate that transient expression of mitoARCUS via LNP/mRNA intramuscular injections exerts a sustained positive impact on muscles afflicted by mitochondrial myopathy [152]. Nevertheless, ARCUS targeting remains a significant challenge, as proper positioning of the active site requires the central region of the target sequence to consist of a pyrimidine followed by a purine [153]. This requirement somewhat constrains the selection of viable target sequences within the mitochondrial genome.

8. Mitochondrial Base Editors

In 2020, a breakthrough was achieved with the introduction of DdCBE (DddA-derived cytosine base editor) technology, the first tool capable of precise mitochondrial base editing. This system is based on the catalytic domain of the DddA deaminase from the Gram-negative bacterium Burkholderia cenocepacia. DddA exhibits deaminase activity toward cytosine, specifically targeting 5′-TC contexts, thereby inducing C-to-T transitions in double-stranded DNA. To mitigate the inherent cytotoxicity of the enzyme, a split-DddA architecture was developed: the enzyme is divided into two inactive halves, each fused to the C-terminus of a TALE (Transcription Activator-Like Effector) domain. To enhance editing efficiency by suppressing DNA repair mechanisms, a Uracil Glycosylase Inhibitor (UGI) was appended to the N-terminal DddA half [154]. TALE-mitoDdCBE has demonstrated success not only in cell cultures but also in editing mitochondrial DNA in embryos, facilitating the generation of animal models with specific mtDNA mutations [155,156,157].
Subsequent research has led to the development of various DddAtox variants with improved precision and relaxed sequence-context requirements (beyond the 5′-TC motif). Mi et al. identified a DddA homolog from Simiaoa sunii capable of efficient deamination within the 5′-GC context, which was previously recalcitrant to editing [158]. Similarly, Sun et al. proposed DddAs from Streptomyces sp. BK438 and Lachnospiraceae sunii NSJ-8 for 5′-GC targets, and a DddA from Ruminococcus sp. AF17-6 for 5′-AC motifs [159]. Furthermore, an ortholog from Burkholderia gladioli (BgDddA) demonstrated higher editing frequencies at 5′-TC sites compared to the canonical DdCBE, and its fusion with the Rta transactivator significantly bolstered editing efficiency at non-5′-TC targets [159]. By 2024, Castillo et al. achieved context-independent editing, effectively neutralizing the influence of the 5′-flanking nucleotide [160]. Additionally, Lee et al. (2023) successfully reduced off-target mutations through targeted amino acid substitutions within the DddA domain [161].
Barrera-Paez et al. employed DdCBE to address the m.5024C>T mutation in a C57BL/6N mt-tRNA(Ala) mouse line. Since DdCBE induces C-to-T transitions and can-not facilitate the reverse T-to-C correction, the authors utilized a creative approach: they introduced a compensatory mutation (m.5081G>A). This was designed to restore critical base-pairing within the mt-tRNA(Ala) molecule, mimicking natural evolutionary “rescue” events. For delivery, a dual-AAV system was used, with each DdCBE subunit packaged into a separate AAV9 vector under the control of a CMV promoter and administered systemically. While high-efficiency editing was observed in the heart, there was virtually no effect in the brain, kidneys, or liver. The lack of editing in the liver is particularly paradoxical given the high tropism of AAV serotypes for this organ; the authors attributed this to an unexplained failure in the synthesis of the TALE DNA-binding domain in hepatic tissue. This phenomenon represents a significant hurdle for DdCBE applications and warrants further independent investigation [162].
A critical and relatively understudied risk associated with DdCBE is the accelerated generation of NUMTs (Nuclear mitochondrial DNA). NUMTs are fragments of mtDNA that have integrated into the nuclear genome, a process known as numtogenesis. This process occurs spontaneously throughout the human lifespan and is linked to the continuous translocation of mitochondrial material into the nucleus [163,164,165]. While often benign, NUMT insertions can cause genetic disorders, such as Pallister–Hall syndrome [166], severe Factor VII deficiency [167], and mucolipidosis type IV [168]. Recent evidence also highlights the role of NUMTs in oncogenesis [169,170,171]. Alarmingly, Wu et al. observed that the use of DdCBE can increase the frequency of NUMTogenesis 11-fold, posing a potential threat to genomic stability that must be addressed in future therapeutic developments. Intriguingly, although DdCBE-mediated editing does not involve direct DNA cleavage, the emergence of NUMTs is likely associated with mtDNA degradation and the subsequent release of fragmented mitochondrial DNA into the cytoplasm [172]. Nevertheless, when mitoTALEN—which functions specifically by inducing double-strand breaks—was targeted to the ND4 gene, the frequency of NUMTogenesis increased only 4-fold. This is nearly three times lower than the frequency observed with DdCBE. This paradoxical result is likely attributable to the instability of uracil-containing DNA generated during the DdCBE editing process [154]. To mitigate this issue, Wu et al. proposed the incorporation of exonucleases TREX1n or TREX2, which efficiently degrade linear DNA. These enzymes can be either fused directly to DdCBE or targeted to the mitochondria independently via an MTS; this strategy has been shown to reduce the probability of NUMT integration by more than 2-fold [173].
Commonly, these data suggest that while DdCBEs hold significant therapeutic potential, further refinements in precision and the development of robust dose-control strategies are required before clinical translation. In a related development, Yin et al. have reported the use of DddB for cytosine deamination in dsDNA, which exhibits sub-stantially higher activity toward non-5′-TC targets compared to the canonical DddA [174].
Shortly after the discovery of mitoDdCBE, an A-to-G mitochondrial base editor named TALED was introduced [175]. The TALED architecture is broadly similar to DdCBE, incorporating TALE domains, an MTS, and BcDddA in either full-length or split forms. However, it replaces the UGI with TadA8e—an adenine deaminase engineered from the E. coli TadA enzyme that induces A-to-G transitions in single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) [176,177].
Based on these components, three distinct TALED configurations have been developed: monomeric TALEDs (mTALEDs), consisting of a single TALE array fused to TadA8e, followed by a full-length BcDddA variant; dimeric TALEDs (dTALEDs), where BcDddA and TadA8e integrated into separate TALE arrays; split TALEDs (sTALEDs), which utilizes G1397-split BcDddA variants combined with separate TALE arrays, where the deaminase domains follow the split segments. These three architectures exhibit different preferences for adenosine editing positions and distinct shifts in their respective editing windows [175]. TALEDs have demonstrated successful editing at 17 human mitochondrial loci, with frequencies reaching up to 49% [175].
TadA8e, much like its natural counterpart TadA, exhibits high off-target activity on both DNA and RNA. Interestingly, TadA8e showed a much greater propensity for inducing RNA mutations when directed to the nucleus via a nuclear localization signal (NLS) than when targeted to the mitochondria via an MTS. Nevertheless, the introduction of specific point mutations allowed for the development of variants with editing precision exceeding 99%. Using the mutant sTALED-V28R variant, researchers successfully generated mice carrying mitochondrial mutations m.8585T>C and m.8591T>C (corresponding to human mutations m.T9185C and m.T9191C). The reported mutation frequency was approximately 20%, with off-target mitochondrial mutations limited to ~1% and no detectable nuclear off-target effects [178]. To further reduce cellular toxicity, it was found necessary to incorporate the E1347A amino acid substitution in BcDddA. Additionally, Wang et al. recently reported the creation of mtDNA-mutant rabbit models using sTALEDs in embryos [179].
Both DdCBE and TALED perform base deamination on both strands of double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) within the editing window. However, single TALE tethering can lead to unintended effects in split-DddA systems [180]. Since the deamination of neither cytosine nor adenine should occur in a base-paired state [181], it was hypothesized that inducing single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) exposure around the target loci could facilitate more efficient and targeted mitochondrial deamination. Consequently, numerous research groups have focused on developing base editors that target single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). To this end, methods for efficient and precise mtDNA base editing have been developed by combining deaminases with nickases. In 2025, Zhang et al. utilized the SsdA deaminase from Pseudomonas syringae for C-to-T base editing. SsdA is a deaminase toxin that specifically acts on ssDNA. When fused with nCas9-UGI, SsdA demonstrated successful nuclear genome editing in 293T and K562 cells [182]. Subsequently, Kweon et al. employed SsdA targeted to four mitochondrial genome loci via TALE domains. Although its efficiency is currently lower than that of TALE-DdCBE, its monomeric nature—contrasting with the dimeric DdCBE architecture—and potential for optimization make it a promising candidate for further development. Interestingly, TALE-SsdA showed low but detectable mitochondrial editing (up to 5%), while remaining completely ineffective in the nucleus. However, since the specific targeting signals and localization data were not provided, suboptimal organelle targeting remains a plausible explanation for this low efficiency [183].
Hu et al. developed CyDENT, a platform comprising a pair of TALE domains fused to a FokI nickase, an ssDNA-specific cytidine deaminase (such as Sdd7 or Sdd3), and an exonuclease to generate the ssDNA substrate required for deamination. Specifically, the Trex2 exonuclease was fused to the N-terminus of a TALE array linked to a FokI nickase domain to facilitate nucleotide cleavage around the nick site, while the ssDNA-specific cytosine deaminases were fused in a similar position on the partner TALE array. Additionally, UGIs were linked to the C-terminus of FokI-L and the N-terminus of FokI-R, respectively. The average editing frequency of mtCyDENT across seven endogenous mtDNA sites in HEK293T cells ranged from 1.16% to 11.7%. Notably, the incorporation of a viral RNA silencing suppressor peptide γb (generating the mtCyDENT1b variant) further increased the average editing efficiency by 2.42–6.18-fold, reaching levels of 4.55–39.3% [184]. Another research group developed mitoBes (mitochondrial base editors) by combining various nickases and deaminases. In this strategy, one TALE array is fused to a nickase that generates a transient ssDNA region without the requirement for an exonuclease. Meanwhile, the second TALE array, fused to an ssDNA deaminase, mediates base editing on the exposed strand. To enhance efficiency and precision, several highly efficient nickases were evaluated, including MutH (5′-↓GATC-3′), MutH* (E91A, F94A) (5′-↓GAT-3′), and Nt.BspD6I(C). MutH functions as a sequence-specific nickase recognizing the 5′-GATC motif, with its preferences shaped by both the structural characteristics of the target sequence and the spatial distance between the TALE binding site and the motif [185]. The MutH variant, containing E91A and F94A mutations, significantly expanded the targetable range by recognizing a broader 5′-GATN motif [186]. In contrast, Nt.BspD6I(C), derived from the C-terminal cleavage domain of Nt.BspD6I [187], exhibited no sequence or context restrictions.
Leveraging highly efficient ssDNA deaminases—TadA8e-V106W for adenine and APOBEC1 for cytosine—new tools designated mitoABE and mitoCBE, respectively, were developed. These systems enable efficient and selective base editing in mitochondria. These systems exhibit a superior specificity profile, as the deaminases employed exhibit high activity exclusively on single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), with negligible or non-existent activity on double-stranded DNA. The specificity of dimeric mitoBEs is further bolstered by the requirement that both TALE-fusion proteins bind to their respective target sites; neither the TALE-deaminase nor the TALE-nickase can initiate base editing independently. Furthermore, mitoBEs demonstrate high strand-selectivity.
The editing window of dimeric mitoBEs can be precisely controlled, as it is defined by the two flanking TALE binding sequences. Researchers screened 70 homologous loci in mouse cells corresponding to pathogenic human mtDNA mutations, successfully editing 68 sites, with 8 sites achieving editing efficiencies of approximately 20%. Notably, no off-target effects were detected in either the mitochondrial or nuclear genomes. Building on these optimizations, preliminary analyses of these enhanced mitoBEs confirmed high editing efficiency (averaging ~20% in mtDNA) for at least 8 pathogenic point mutations in mouse models. Furthermore, this system was successfully employed to generate a mouse model harboring the MT-ND5 m.12784A>G mutation, which exhibited disease-relevant phenotypes. This study confirms the efficacy of this strategy for generating mitochondrial disease models and highlights the broad therapeutic potential of optimized mitoBEs, although clinical translation remains contingent on further validation of in vivo delivery and editing specificity for a wider spectrum of pathogenic mutations [186,188,189].
Remarkably, despite the high specificity for mtDNA, numerous reports indicate that mitoABE induces significant off-target effects throughout the transcriptome during the editing process. This finding underscores the necessity for further precision engineering of the base editor [190]. Based on structural optimizations of TALED, the TadA8e-V106W component in mitoABE was replaced with TadA8e-V106W-V28F.
While mitoCBE demonstrates higher editing efficiency compared to mitoABE, it also triggers increased off-target editing events within the mitochondrial genome. Crucially, this increase in off-target effects is independent of the TALE array specificity and is likely attributable to stochastic deamination mediated by rAPOBEC1 [191]. To resolve this issue, APOBEC1 was replaced with CBE6d—a cytidine deaminase derived from the TadA enzyme family [192]. This modification not only ensured robust editing efficiency but also narrowed the editing window and minimized mitochondrial off-target effects during cytosine base editing [191]. The various mitochondrial genome editing tools are listed in Table 4.

9. Conclusions

Although the drug based on allotopic expression of MT-ND4 for the treatment of LHON has successfully navigated clinical trials, it remains uncertain whether this approach will prove equally effective for other mitochondrial genes. A potential explanation for the success of MT-ND4 therapy relative to other targets lies in the fact that, in Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON), the therapeutic agent is administered directly via intravitreal injection. In contrast, most other mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations manifest with neurological symptoms necessitating brain targeting—a far more formidable challenge. However, rapidly advancing brain-targeting strategies, such as synthetic adeno-associated virus (AAV) serotypes with enhanced blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability [193] and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) delivery [194], may alter this landscape. A primary driver for allotopic expression is its fundamental advantage over genome editing: while editing tools require labor-intensive design for each specific mutation—and some mtDNA defects, such as large-scale deletions, remain refractory to current editing technologies—an optimized copy of the target gene can be utilized to address any functional impairment within that gene, regardless of the mutation type or location.
CRISPR-based editors, which initially sparked significant optimism [103], have demonstrated limited efficacy in mitochondria [106,137]. While recombination deficiency in mitochondria affects all editing platforms, the inefficient transport of RNA—often precluding successful sgRNA delivery—is a hurdle unique to CRISPR systems that other editing modalities circumvent. Nonetheless, RNA-guided targeting remains attractive due to its programmable simplicity. Emerging systems like Cas12 and Argonaute, which utilize shorter and (in the case of Argonaute) PAM-independent RNAs, may provide robust alternatives to traditional Cas9 [141]. Platforms utilizing programmable protein domains for DNA recognition predated CRISPR [195] but faced long-standing obstacles, such as complex design requirements and the necessity for dimeric subunits. The rise of CRISPR likely led to a temporary decline in interest in TALEN- and ZFN-based tools. However, traditional nuclease approaches have regained prominence with the recent development of compact, monomeric programmable nucleases like ARCUS [151]. Furthermore, advances in mitochondrial delivery methods may facilitate the entry of larger or poorly permeable components.
Another breakthrough in recent years has been the advent of base editors [154,178]. Although these tools encounter significant clinical translation barriers—notably off-target editing and strong context dependency [196]—the last five years have yielded impressive milestones, including the creation of animal models [155,178] and the correction of mutations in patient-derived cells [154]. Nevertheless, given their current low editing efficiency and high frequency of off-target events [154,178], base editors are not yet sufficiently precise for clinical applications. It is noteworthy, however, that these disruptive technologies have enabled the introduction of specific mtDNA mutations in model animals—a process that was previously arduous and time-consuming [190]. Consequently, they will significantly streamline the development and validation of future therapies while deepening our understanding of how these mutations influence systemic physiological processes.
In conclusion, allotopic expression of protein-coding genes represents the most promising near-term approach with the highest probability of clinical implementation in the coming years. Meanwhile, therapies based on programmable nucleases and base editors—technologies in which target DNA sequence recognition is performed via RNA-independent mechanisms—can induce double-strand breaks (DSBs) in mtDNA to drive heteroplasmy shifts or facilitate the precise correction of genetic defects, respectively. Clinical translation will necessitate the development of base editors that combine high precision and specificity, as well as programmable nucleases characterized by ease of targeting and efficient mitochondrial import.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.S. and S.R.; writing, V.S.; supervision, S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (Strategic Academic Leadership Program Priority 2030, Agreement 075-15-2025-200/GTR-C).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AAVAdeno-associated virus
BBBBlood–brain barrier
CNSCentral nervous system
CRISPRClustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats
sgRNASingle-guide RNA
MELASMitochondrial encephalomyopathy with lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes
MERREMyoclonic Epilepsy with Ragged Red Fibers
mtDNAMitochondrial DNA
MTSMitochondria targeting signal
PAMProtospacer adjacent motif
NARPNeurogenic muscle weakness, ataxia, and retinitis pigmentosa
lncRNALong non-coding RNA
LHONLeber hereditary optic neuropathy
TALENTranscription Activator-Like Effector Nucleases
rAAVRecombinant Adeno-associated virus
RICRNA Import Complex
OxPhosOxidative phosphorylation
ZFNZinc-finger nucleases
UTRUntranslated Regions

References

  1. Anderson, S.; Bankier, A.T.; Barrell, B.G.; De Bruijn, M.H.L.; Coulson, A.R.; Drouin, J.; Eperon, I.C.; Nierlich, D.P.; Roe, B.A.; Sanger, F.; et al. Sequence and Organization of the Human Mitochondrial Genome. Nature 1981, 290, 457–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Schon, E.A.; DiMauro, S.; Hirano, M. Human Mitochondrial DNA: Roles of Inherited and Somatic Mutations. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2012, 13, 878–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Lake, N.J.; Compton, A.G.; Rahman, S.; Thorburn, D.R. Leigh Syndrome: One Disorder, More than 75 Monogenic Causes. Ann. Neurol. 2016, 79, 190–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Chinnery, P.F.; Turnbull, D.M. Mitochondrial DNA Mutations in the Pathogenesis of Human Disease. Mol. Med. Today 2000, 6, 425–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Rahman, S. Mitochondrial Disease in Children. J. Intern. Med. 2020, 287, 609–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Stefano, G.B.; Bjenning, C.; Wang, F.; Wang, N.; Kream, R.M. Mitochondrial Heteroplasmy. In Mitochondrial Dynamics in Cardiovascular Medicine; Santulli, G., Ed.; Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume 982, pp. 577–594. ISBN 978-3-319-55329-0. [Google Scholar]
  7. Naeem, M.M.; Sondheimer, N. Heteroplasmy Shifting as Therapy for Mitochondrial Disorders. In Mitochondria in Health and in Sickness; Urbani, A., Babu, M., Eds.; Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Springer: Singapore, 2019; Volume 1158, pp. 257–267. ISBN 978-981-13-8366-3. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cao, L.; Shitara, H.; Sugimoto, M.; Hayashi, J.-I.; Abe, K.; Yonekawa, H. New Evidence Confirms That the Mitochondrial Bottleneck Is Generated without Reduction of Mitochondrial DNA Content in Early Primordial Germ Cells of Mice. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5, e1000756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Gropman, A.L. Diagnosis and Treatment of Childhood Mitochondrial Diseases. Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2001, 1, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Nishioka, T.; Tasaki, M.; Soemantri, A.; Dyat, M.; Susanto, J.C.; Tamam, M.; Sudarmanto, B.; Ishida, T. Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy with 14484 Mutation in Central Java, Indonesia. J. Hum. Genet. 2003, 48, 385–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Howell, N.; Oostra, R.-J.; Bolhuis, P.A.; Spruijt, L.; Clarke, L.A.; Mackey, D.A.; Preston, G.; Herrnstadt, C. Sequence Analysis of the Mitochondrial Genomes from Dutch Pedigrees with Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2003, 72, 1460–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Gámez, J.; Playán, A.; Andreu, A.L.; Bruno, C.; Navarro, C.; Cervera, C.; Arbós, M.A.; Schwartz, S.; Enriquez, J.A.; Montoya, J. Familial Multiple Symmetric Lipomatosis Associated with the A8344G Mutation of Mitochondrial DNA. Neurology 1998, 51, 258–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sue, C.M.; Bruno, C.; Andreu, A.L.; Cargan, A.; Mendell, J.R.; Tsao, C.-Y.; Luquette, M.; Paolicchi, J.; Shanske, S.; DiMauro, S.; et al. Infantile Encephalopathy Associated with the MELAS A3243G Mutation. J. Pediatr. 1999, 134, 696–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Dvorakova, V.; Kolarova, H.; Magner, M.; Tesarova, M.; Hansikova, H.; Zeman, J.; Honzik, T. The Phenotypic Spectrum of Fifty Czech m.3243A>G Carriers. Mol. Genet. Metab. 2016, 118, 288–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Ferlin, T.; Landrieu, P.; Rambaud, C.; Fernandez, H.; Dumoulin, R.; Rustin, P.; Mousson, B. Segregation of the G8993 Mutant Mitochondrial DNA through Generations and Embryonic Tissues in a Family at Risk of Leigh Syndrome. J. Pediatr. 1997, 131, 447–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ciafaloni, E.; Santorelli, F.M.; Shanske, S.; Deonna, T.; Roulel, E.; Janzer, C.; Pescia, G.; DiMauro, S. Maternally Inherited Leigh Syndrome. J. Pediatr. 1993, 122, 419–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Newman, N.J.; Lott, M.T.; Wallace, D.C. The Clinical Characteristics of Pedigrees of Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy With the 11778 Mutation. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1991, 111, 750–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kormann, B.A.; Schuster, H.; Berninger, T.A.; Leo-Kottler, B. Detection of the G to A Mitochondrial DNA Mutation at Position 11778 in German Families with Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy. Hum. Genet. 1991, 88, 98–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Electron Transfer Properties of NADH: Ubiquinone Reductase in the ND1/3460 and the ND4/11778 Mutations of the Leber Hereditary Optic Neuroretinopathy (LHON). FEBS Lett. 1991, 292, 289–292. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Santorelli, F.M.; Tanji, K.; Kulikova, R.; Shanske, S.; Vilarinho, L.; Hays, A.P.; DiMauro, S. Identification of a Novel Mutation in the mtDNA ND5 Gene Associated with MELAS. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1997, 238, 326–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Dickerson, B.C.; Holtzman, D.; Grant, P.E.; Tian, D. Case 36-2005: A 61-Year-Old Woman with Seizure, Disturbed Gait, and Altered Mental Status. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005, 353, 2271–2280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Wang, K.; Takahashi, Y.; Gao, Z.-L.; Wang, G.-X.; Chen, X.-W.; Goto, J.; Lou, J.-N.; Tsuji, S. Mitochondrial ND3 as the Novel Causative Gene for Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy and Dystonia. Neurogenetics 2009, 10, 337–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Smith, P.M.; Ross, G.F.; Taylor, R.W.; Turnbull, D.M.; Lightowlers, R.N. Strategies for Treating Disorders of the Mitochondrial Genome. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Bioenerg. 2004, 1659, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Claros, M.G. MitoProt, a Macintosh Application for Studying Mitochondrial Proteins. Bioinformatics 1995, 11, 441–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Boominathan, A.; Vanhoozer, S.; Basisty, N.; Powers, K.; Crampton, A.L.; Wang, X.; Friedricks, N.; Schilling, B.; Brand, M.D.; O’Connor, M.S. Stable Nuclear Expression of ATP8 and ATP6 Genes rescues a mtDNA Complex V null mutant. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, 9342–9357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Manfredi, G.; Fu, J.; Ojaimi, J.; Sadlock, J.E.; Kwong, J.Q.; Guy, J.; Schon, E.A. Rescue of a Deficiency in ATP Synthesis by Transfer of MTATP6, a Mitochondrial DNA-Encoded Gene, to the Nucleus. Nat. Genet. 2002, 30, 394–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Bonnet, C.; Augustin, S.; Ellouze, S.; Bénit, P.; Bouaita, A.; Rustin, P.; Sahel, J.-A.; Corral-Debrinski, M. The Optimized Allotopic Expression of ND1 or ND4 Genes Restores Respiratory Chain Complex I Activity in Fibroblasts Harboring Mutations in These Genes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Mol. Cell Res. 2008, 1783, 1707–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Carelli, V.; Newman, N.J.; Yu-Wai-Man, P.; Biousse, V.; Moster, M.L.; Subramanian, P.S.; Vignal-Clermont, C.; Wang, A.-G.; Donahue, S.P.; Leroy, B.P.; et al. Indirect Comparison of Lenadogene Nolparvovec Gene Therapy Versus Natural History in Patients with Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A MT-ND4 Mutation. Ophthalmol. Ther. 2023, 12, 401–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Begelman, D.V.; Dixit, B.; Truong, C.; King, C.D.; Watson, M.A.; Schilling, B.; Brand, M.D.; Boominathan, A. Exogenous Expression of ATP8, a Mitochondrial Encoded Protein, from the Nucleus in Vivo. Mol. Ther. Methods Clin. Dev. 2024, 32, 101372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Borna, N.N.; Kishita, Y.; Shimura, M.; Murayama, K.; Ohtake, A.; Okazaki, Y. Identification of a Novel MT-ND3 Variant and Restoring Mitochondrial Function by Allotopic Expression of MT-ND3 Gene. Mitochondrion 2024, 76, 101858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Liu, Q.; Fong, B.; Yoo, S.; Unruh, J.R.; Guo, F.; Yu, Z.; Chen, J.; Si, K.; Li, R.; Zhou, C. Nascent Mitochondrial Proteins Initiate the Localized Condensation of Cytosolic Protein Aggregates on the Mitochondrial Surface. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2023, 120, e2300475120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Maruszczak, K.K.; Chacinska, A. Monitoring and Analysis of Mitochondrial Precursor Protein Aggregates in the Cytosol. In Methods in Enzymology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2024; Volume 706, pp. 287–311. ISBN 978-0-443-29330-6. [Google Scholar]
  33. Oca-Cossio, J.; Kenyon, L.; Hao, H.; Moraes, C.T. Limitations of Allotopic Expression of Mitochondrial Genes in Mammalian Cells. Genetics 2003, 165, 707–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Perales-Clemente, E.; Fernández-Silva, P.; Acín-Pérez, R.; Pérez-Martos, A.; Enríquez, J.A. Allotopic Expression of Mitochondrial-Encoded Genes in Mammals: Achieved Goal, Undemonstrated Mechanism or Impossible Task? Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, 225–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Rubalcava-Gracia, D.; García-Rincón, J.; Pérez-Montfort, R.; Hamel, P.P.; González-Halphen, D. Key Within-Membrane Residues and Precursor Dosage Impact the Allotopic Expression of Yeast Subunit II of Cytochrome c Oxidase. MBoC 2019, 30, 2358–2366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Björkholm, P.; Ernst, A.M.; Hagström, E.; Andersson, S.G.E. Why Mitochondria Need a Genome Revisited. FEBS Lett. 2017, 591, 65–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Jomaa, A.; Gamerdinger, M.; Hsieh, H.-H.; Wallisch, A.; Chandrasekaran, V.; Ulusoy, Z.; Scaiola, A.; Hegde, R.S.; Shan, S.; Ban, N.; et al. Mechanism of Signal Sequence Handover from NAC to SRP on Ribosomes during ER-Protein Targeting. Science 2022, 375, 839–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Engel, A.J.; Paech, S.; Langhans, M.; Van Etten, J.L.; Moroni, A.; Thiel, G.; Rauh, O. Combination of Hydrophobicity and Codon Usage Bias Determines Sorting of Model K+ Channel Protein to Either Mitochondria or Endoplasmic Reticulum. Traffic 2023, 24, 533–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Kanaji, S.; Iwahashi, J.; Kida, Y.; Sakaguchi, M.; Mihara, K. Characterization of the Signal That Directs Tom20 to the Mitochondrial Outer Membrane. J. Cell Biol. 2000, 151, 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Zhao, J. Dual Subcellular Distribution of Cytochrome B5 in Plant, Cauliflower, Cells. J. Biochem. 2003, 133, 115–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Colombo, S.; Longhi, R.; Alcaro, S.; Ortuso, F.; Sprocati, T.; Flora, A.; Borgese, N. N-Myristoylation Determines Dual Targeting of Mammalian NADH-Cytochrome b(5) Reductase to ER and Mitochondrial Outer Membranes by a Mechanism of Kinetic Partitioning. J. Cell Biol. 2005, 168, 735–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Knöringer, K.; Groh, C.; Krämer, L.; Stein, K.C.; Hansen, K.G.; Zimmermann, J.; Morgan, B.; Herrmann, J.M.; Frydman, J.; Boos, F. The Unfolded Protein Response of the Endoplasmic Reticulum Supports Mitochondrial Biogenesis by Buffering Nonimported Proteins. Mol. Biol. Cell 2023, 34, ar95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Björkholm, P.; Harish, A.; Hagström, E.; Ernst, A.M.; Andersson, S.G.E. Mitochondrial Genomes Are Retained by Selective Constraints on Protein Targeting. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 10154–10161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Sharma, S.; Fazal, F.M. Localization of RNAs to the Mitochondria–Mechanisms and Functions. RNA 2024, 30, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Matsumoto, S.; Uchiumi, T.; Saito, T.; Yagi, M.; Takazaki, S.; Kanki, T.; Kang, D. Localization of mRNAs Encoding Human Mitochondrial Oxidative Phosphorylation Proteins. Mitochondrion 2012, 12, 391–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Bonnet, C.; Kaltimbacher, V.; Ellouze, S.; Forster, V.; Sahel, J.-A.; Corral-Debrinski, M. Localisation Des ARNm Sur La Surface Mitochondriale: Outil Pour Le Traitement de Pathologies Rétiniennes Dues à Des Mutations de l’ADN Mitochondrial. J. Soc. Biol. 2007, 201, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Kaltimbacher, V.; Bonnet, C.; Lecoeuvre, G.; Forster, V.; Sahel, J.-A.; Corral-Debrinski, M. mRNA Localization to the Mitochondrial Surface Allows the Efficient Translocation inside the Organelle of a Nuclear Recoded ATP6 Protein. RNA 2006, 12, 1408–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Chin, R.M.; Panavas, T.; Brown, J.M.; Johnson, K.K. Optimized Mitochondrial Targeting of Proteins Encoded by Modified mRNAs Rescues Cells Harboring Mutations in mtATP6. Cell Rep. 2018, 22, 2818–2826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Lewis, C.J.; Dixit, B.; Batiuk, E.; Hall, C.J.; O’Connor, M.S.; Boominathan, A. Codon Optimization Is an Essential Parameter for the Efficient Allotopic Expression of mtDNA Genes. Redox Biol. 2020, 30, 101429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Figueroa-Martínez, F.; Vázquez-Acevedo, M.; Cortés-Hernández, P.; García-Trejo, J.J.; Davidson, E.; King, M.P.; González-Halphen, D. What Limits the Allotopic Expression of Nucleus-Encoded Mitochondrial Genes? The Case of the Chimeric Cox3 and Atp6 Genes. Mitochondrion 2011, 11, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Yu-Wai-Man, P.; Newman, N.J.; Biousse, V.; Carelli, V.; Moster, M.L.; Vignal-Clermont, C.; Klopstock, T.; Sadun, A.A.; Sergott, R.C.; Hage, R.; et al. Five-Year Outcomes of Lenadogene Nolparvovec Gene Therapy in Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2025, 143, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Wen, H.; Deng, H.; Li, B.; Chen, J.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, X.; Yoshida, S.; Zhou, Y. Mitochondrial Diseases: From Molecular Mechanisms to Therapeutic Advances. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2025, 10, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Keshavan, N.; Minczuk, M.; Viscomi, C.; Rahman, S. Gene Therapy for Mitochondrial Disorders. J. Inher. Metab. Dis. 2024, 47, 145–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Lu, Y.; Brommer, B.; Tian, X.; Krishnan, A.; Meer, M.; Wang, C.; Vera, D.L.; Zeng, Q.; Yu, D.; Bonkowski, M.S.; et al. Reprogramming to Recover Youthful Epigenetic Information and Restore Vision. Nature 2020, 588, 124–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Lopes, V.S.; Boye, S.E.; Louie, C.M.; Boye, S.; Dyka, F.; Chiodo, V.; Fofo, H.; Hauswirth, W.W.; Williams, D.S. Retinal Gene Therapy with a Large MYO7A cDNA Using Adeno-Associated Virus. Gene Ther. 2013, 20, 824–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Chicherin, I.V.; Levitskii, S.A.; Krasheninnikov, I.A.; Tarassov, I.; Kamenski, P. The Prospects of Gene Therapy for Mitochondrial Diseases: Can’t We Do without CRISPR/Cas9? Bull. RSMU 2017, 6, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  57. Viscomi, C.; Moore, A.L.; Zeviani, M.; Szibor, M. Xenotopic Expression of Alternative Oxidase (AOX) to Study Mechanisms of Mitochondrial Disease. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Bioenerg. 2023, 1864, 148947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Yagi, T.; Seo, B.B.; Nakamaru-Ogiso, E.; Marella, M.; Barber-Singh, J.; Yamashita, T.; Matsuno-Yagi, A. Possibility of Transkingdom Gene Therapy for Complex I Diseases. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Bioenerg. 2006, 1757, 708–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  59. Pérez-Martínez, X.; Vázquez-Acevedo, M.; Tolkunova, E.; Funes, S.; Claros, M.G.; Davidson, E.; King, M.P.; González-Halphen, D. Unusual Location of a Mitochondrial Gene. J. Biol. Chem. 2000, 275, 30144–30152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Cardol, P.; Lapaille, M.; Minet, P.; Franck, F.; Matagne, R.F.; Remacle, C. ND3 and ND4L Subunits of Mitochondrial Complex I, Both Nucleus Encoded in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, Are Required for Activity and Assembly of the Enzyme. Eukaryot. Cell 2006, 5, 1460–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  61. Daley, D.O.; Clifton, R.; Whelan, J. Intracellular Gene Transfer: Reduced Hydrophobicity Facilitates Gene Transfer for Subunit 2 of Cytochrome c Oxidase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 10510–10515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Funes, S.; Davidson, E.; Claros, M.G.; Van Lis, R.; Pérez-Martínez, X.; Vázquez-Acevedo, M.; King, M.P.; González-Halphen, D. The Typically Mitochondrial DNA-Encoded ATP6 Subunit of the F1F0-ATPase Is Encoded by a Nuclear Gene in Chlamydomonas Reinhardtii. J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 6051–6058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Vázquez-Acevedo, M.; Rubalcava-Gracia, D.; González-Halphen, D. In Vitro Import and Assembly of the Nucleus-Encoded Mitochondrial Subunit III of Cytochrome c Oxidase (Cox3). Mitochondrion 2014, 19, 314–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Pérez-Martínez, X.; Antaramian, A.; Vázquez-Acevedo, M.; Funes, S.; Tolkunova, E.; d’Alayer, J.; Claros, M.G.; Davidson, E.; King, M.P.; González-Halphen, D. Subunit II of Cytochrome c Oxidase in Chlamydomonad Algae Is a Heterodimer Encoded by Two Independent Nuclear Genes. J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 11302–11309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. González-Halphen, D.; Funes, S.; Pérez-Martínez, X.; Reyes-Prieto, A.; Claros, M.G.; Davidson, E.; King, M.P. Genetic Correction of Mitochondrial Diseases: Using the Natural Migration of Mitochondrial Genes to the Nucleus in Chlorophyte Algae as a Model System. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1019, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Ojaimi, J.; Pan, J.; Santra, S.; Snell, W.J.; Schon, E.A. An Algal Nucleus-Encoded Subunit of Mitochondrial ATP Synthase Rescues a Defect in the Analogous Human Mitochondrial-Encoded Subunit. MBoC 2002, 13, 3836–3844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  67. Lorandi, I.; Hernández-Zúñiga, J.A.; Esparza-Perusquía, M.; Matus-Ortega, G.; Vázquez-Meza, H.; Flores-Herrera, H.; Pardo, J.P.; Martínez, F.; Flores-Herrera, O. The Internal Alternative NADH Dehydrogenase (Ndi1) Is the Electron Input in the Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Respirasome. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Bioenerg. 2026, 1867, 149574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Chadderton, N.; Palfi, A.; Millington-Ward, S.; Gobbo, O.; Overlack, N.; Carrigan, M.; O’Reilly, M.; Campbell, M.; Ehrhardt, C.; Wolfrum, U.; et al. Intravitreal Delivery of AAV-NDI1 Provides Functional Benefit in a Murine Model of Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2013, 21, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Millington-Ward, S.; Palfi, A.; Shortall, C.; Finnegan, L.K.; Bargroff, E.; Post, I.J.M.; Maguire, J.; Irnaten, M.; O′Brien, C.; Kenna, P.F.; et al. AAV-NDI1 Therapy Provides Significant Benefit to Murine and Cellular Models of Glaucoma. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Barber-Singh, J.; Boo Seo, B.; Nakamaru-Ogiso, E.; Lau, Y.-S.; Matsuno-Yagi, A.; Yagi, T. Neuroprotective Effect of Long-Term NDI1 Gene Expression in a Chronic Mouse Model of Parkinson Disorder. Rejuvenation Res. 2009, 12, 259–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. McFarland, R.; Elson, J.L.; Taylor, R.W.; Howell, N.; Turnbull, D.M. Assigning Pathogenicity to Mitochondrial tRNA Mutations: When ‘Definitely Maybe’ Is Not Good Enough. Trends Genet. 2004, 20, 591–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Brandina, I.; Smirnov, A.; Kolesnikova, O.; Entelis, N.; Krasheninnikov, I.A.; Martin, R.P.; Tarassov, I. tRNA Import into Yeast Mitochondria Is Regulated by the Ubiquitin-proteasome System. FEBS Lett. 2007, 581, 4248–4254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Kolesnikova, O.A.; Entelis, N.S.; Jacquin-Becker, C.; Goltzene, F.; Chrzanowska-Lightowlers, Z.M.; Lightowlers, R.N.; Martin, R.P.; Tarassov, I. Nuclear DNA-Encoded tRNAs Targeted into Mitochondria Can Rescue a Mitochondrial DNA Mutation Associated with the MERRF Syndrome in Cultured Human Cells. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2004, 13, 2519–2534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Karicheva, O.Z.; Kolesnikova, O.A.; Schirtz, T.; Vysokikh, M.Y.; Mager-Heckel, A.-M.; Lombes, A.; Boucheham, A.; Krasheninnikov, I.A.; Martin, R.P.; Entelis, N.; et al. Correction of the Consequences of Mitochondrial 3243A>G Mutation in the MT-TL1 Gene Causing the MELAS Syndrome by tRNA Import into Mitochondria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, 8173–8186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Wang, G.; Shimada, E.; Zhang, J.; Hong, J.S.; Smith, G.M.; Teitell, M.A.; Koehler, C.M. Correcting Human Mitochondrial Mutations with Targeted RNA Import. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 4840–4845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Mukherjee, S.; Basu, S.; Home, P.; Dhar, G.; Adhya, S. Necessary and Sufficient Factors for the Import of Transfer RNA into the Kinetoplast Mitochondrion. EMBO Rep. 2007, 8, 589–595, Erratum in EMBO Rep. 2011, 12, 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2011.94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Adhya, S. Leishmania Mitochondrial tRNA Importers. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2008, 40, 2681–2685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Mahata, B.; Mukherjee, S.; Mishra, S.; Bandyopadhyay, A.; Adhya, S. Functional Delivery of a Cytosolic tRNA into Mutant Mitochondria of Human Cells. Science 2006, 314, 471–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Mahata, B.; Bhattacharyya, S.N.; Mukherjee, S.; Adhya, S. Correction of Translational Defects in Patient-Derived Mutant Mitochondria by Complex-Mediated Import of a Cytoplasmic tRNA. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 5141–5144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Sieber, F.; Placido, A.; El Farouk-Ameqrane, S.; Duchêne, A.-M.; Maréchal-Drouard, L. A Protein Shuttle System to Target RNA into Mitochondria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011, 39, e96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Tonin, Y.; Heckel, A.-M.; Vysokikh, M.; Dovydenko, I.; Meschaninova, M.; Rötig, A.; Munnich, A.; Venyaminova, A.; Tarassov, I.; Entelis, N. Modeling of Antigenomic Therapy of Mitochondrial Diseases by Mitochondrially Addressed RNA Targeting a Pathogenic Point Mutation in Mitochondrial DNA. J. Biol. Chem. 2014, 289, 13323–13334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Sasarman, F.; Antonicka, H.; Shoubridge, E.A. The A3243G tRNALeu(UUR) MELAS Mutation Causes Amino Acid Misincorporation and a Combined Respiratory Chain Assembly Defect Partially Suppressed by Overexpression of EFTu and EFG2. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2008, 17, 3697–3707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Tomoda, E.; Nagao, A.; Shirai, Y.; Asano, K.; Suzuki, T.; Battersby, B.J.; Suzuki, T. Restoration of Mitochondrial Function through Activation of Hypomodified tRNAs with Pathogenic Mutations Associated with Mitochondrial Diseases. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023, 51, 7563–7579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Limongelli, A.; Schaefer, J.; Jackson, S.; Invernizzi, F.; Kirino, Y.; Suzuki, T.; Reichmann, H.; Zeviani, M. Variable Penetrance of a Familial Progressive Necrotising Encephalopathy Due to a Novel tRNAIle Homoplasmic Mutation in the Mitochondrial Genome. J. Med. Genet. 2004, 41, 342–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Perli, E.; Giordano, C.; Tuppen, H.A.L.; Montopoli, M.; Montanari, A.; Orlandi, M.; Pisano, A.; Catanzaro, D.; Caparrotta, L.; Musumeci, B.; et al. Isoleucyl-tRNA Synthetase Levels Modulate the Penetrance of a Homoplasmic m.4277T>C Mitochondrial tRNAIle Mutation Causing Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2012, 21, 85–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Rorbach, J.; Yusoff, A.A.; Tuppen, H.; Abg-Kamaludin, D.P.; Chrzanowska-Lightowlers, Z.M.A.; Taylor, R.W.; Turnbull, D.M.; McFarland, R.; Lightowlers, R.N. Overexpression of Human Mitochondrial Valyl tRNA Synthetase Can Partially Restore Levels of Cognate Mt-tRNAVal Carrying the Pathogenic C25U Mutation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008, 36, 3065–3074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Gong, S.; Wang, X.; Meng, F.; Cui, L.; Yi, Q.; Zhao, Q.; Cang, X.; Cai, Z.; Mo, J.Q.; Liang, Y.; et al. Overexpression of Mitochondrial Histidyl-tRNA Synthetase Restores Mitochondrial Dysfunction Caused by a Deafness-Associated tRNAHis Mutation. J. Biol. Chem. 2020, 295, 940–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zhao, X.; Han, J.; Zhu, L.; Xiao, Y.; Wang, C.; Hong, F.; Jiang, P.; Guan, M.-X. Overexpression of Human Mitochondrial Alanyl-tRNA Synthetase Suppresses Biochemical Defects of the Mt-tRNAAla Mutation in Cybrids. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2018, 14, 1437–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Park, H.; Davidson, E.; King, M.P. Overexpressed Mitochondrial Leucyl-tRNA Synthetase Suppresses the A3243G Mutation in the Mitochondrial tRNALeu(UUR) Gene. RNA 2008, 14, 2407–2416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Perli, E.; Giordano, C.; Pisano, A.; Montanari, A.; Campese, A.F.; Reyes, A.; Ghezzi, D.; Nasca, A.; Tuppen, H.A.; Orlandi, M.; et al. The Isolated Carboxy-terminal Domain of Human Mitochondrial Leucyl-tRNA Synthetase Rescues the Pathological Phenotype of Mitochondrial tRNA Mutations in Human Cells. EMBO Mol. Med. 2014, 6, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Capriglia, F.; Rizzo, F.; Petrosillo, G.; Morea, V.; d’Amati, G.; Cantatore, P.; Roberti, M.; Loguercio Polosa, P.; Bruni, F. Exploring the Ability of LARS2 Carboxy-Terminal Domain in Rescuing the MELAS Phenotype. Life 2021, 11, 674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Perli, E.; Pisano, A.; Pignataro, M.G.; Campese, A.F.; Pelullo, M.; Genovese, I.; De Turris, V.; Ghelli, A.M.; Cerbelli, B.; Giordano, C.; et al. Exogenous Peptides Are Able to Penetrate Human Cell and Mitochondrial Membranes, Stabilize Mitochondrial tRNA Structures, and Rescue Severe Mitochondrial Defects. FASEB J. 2020, 34, 7675–7686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Richter, U.; Evans, M.E.; Clark, W.C.; Marttinen, P.; Shoubridge, E.A.; Suomalainen, A.; Wredenberg, A.; Wedell, A.; Pan, T.; Battersby, B.J. RNA Modification Landscape of the Human Mitochondrial tRNALys Regulates Protein Synthesis. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 3966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Rajendran, V.; Kalita, P.; Shukla, H.; Kumar, A.; Tripathi, T. Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetases: Structure, Function, and Drug Discovery. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 111, 400–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Rubio Gomez, M.A.; Ibba, M. Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetases. RNA 2020, 26, 910–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Chadderton, N.; Palfi, A.; Maloney, D.M.; Carrigan, M.; Finnegan, L.K.; Hanlon, K.S.; Shortall, C.; O’Reilly, M.; Humphries, P.; Cassidy, L.; et al. Optimisation of AAV-NDI1 Significantly Enhances Its Therapeutic Value for Correcting Retinal Mitochondrial Dysfunction. Pharmaceutics 2023, 15, 322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Yamada, Y.; Maruyama, M.; Kita, T.; Usami, S.; Kitajiri, S.; Harashima, H. The Use of a MITO-Porter to Deliver Exogenous Therapeutic RNA to a Mitochondrial Disease’s Cell with a A1555G Mutation in the Mitochondrial 12S rRNA Gene Results in an Increase in Mitochondrial Respiratory Activity. Mitochondrion 2020, 55, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Lyrawati, D.; Trounson, A.; Cram, D. Expression of GFP in the Mitochondrial Compartment Using DQAsome-Mediated Delivery of an Artificial Mini-Mitochondrial Genome. Pharm. Res. 2011, 28, 2848–2862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Yu, H.; Koilkonda, R.D.; Chou, T.-H.; Porciatti, V.; Ozdemir, S.S.; Chiodo, V.; Boye, S.L.; Boye, S.E.; Hauswirth, W.W.; Lewin, A.S.; et al. Gene Delivery to Mitochondria by Targeting Modified Adenoassociated Virus Suppresses Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy in a Mouse Model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, E1238–E1247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Yamada, Y.; Ishikawa, T.; Harashima, H. Validation of the Use of an Artificial Mitochondrial Reporter DNA Vector Containing a Cytomegalovirus Promoter for Mitochondrial Transgene Expression. Biomaterials 2017, 136, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Yasuzaki, Y.; Yamada, Y.; Ishikawa, T.; Harashima, H. Validation of Mitochondrial Gene Delivery in Liver and Skeletal Muscle via Hydrodynamic Injection Using an Artificial Mitochondrial Reporter DNA Vector. Mol. Pharm. 2015, 12, 4311–4320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Kaeppel, C.; Beattie, S.; Fronza, R.; van Logtenstein, R.; Salmon, F.; Schmidt, S.; Wolf, S.; Nowrouzi, A.; Glimm, H.; von Kalle, C.; et al. 274. AAV Integrates Randomly into the Nuclear and Mitochondrial Genome after LPLD Gene Therapy. Mol. Ther. 2013, 21, S104–S105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Jo, A.; Ham, S.; Lee, G.H.; Lee, Y.I.; Kim, S.; Lee, Y.S.; Shin, J.H.; Lee, Y. Efficient Mitochondrial Genome Editing by CRISPR/Cas9. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 305716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  104. Norota, K.; Ishizuka, S.; Hirose, M.; Sato, Y.; Maeki, M.; Tokeshi, M.; Ibrahim, S.M.; Harashima, H.; Yamada, Y. Lipid Nanoparticle Delivery of the CRISPR/Cas9 System Directly into the Mitochondria of Cells Carrying m.7778G>T Mutation in MtDNA (Mt-Atp8). Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 18717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Wang, B.; Lv, X.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Liu, Q.; Lu, B.; Liu, Y.; Gu, F. CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Mutagenesis at Microhomologous Regions of Human Mitochondrial Genome. Sci. China Life Sci. 2021, 64, 1463–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Schmiderer, L.; Yudovich, D.; Oburoglu, L.; Hjort, M.; Larsson, J. Site-Specific CRISPR-Based Mitochondrial DNA Manipulation Is Limited by gRNA Import. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 18687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Peeva, V.; Blei, D.; Trombly, G.; Corsi, S.; Szukszto, M.J.; Rebelo-Guiomar, P.; Gammage, P.A.; Kudin, A.P.; Becker, C.; Altmüller, J.; et al. Linear Mitochondrial DNA Is Rapidly Degraded by Components of the Replication Machinery. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 1727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Moretton, A.; Morel, F.; Macao, B.; Lachaume, P.; Ishak, L.; Lefebvre, M.; Garreau-Balandier, I.; Vernet, P.; Falkenberg, M.; Farge, G. Selective Mitochondrial DNA Degradation Following Double-Strand Breaks. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0176795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Hussain, S.-R.A.; Yalvac, M.E.; Khoo, B.; Eckardt, S.; McLaughlin, K.J. Adapting CRISPR/Cas9 System for Targeting Mitochondrial Genome. Front. Genet. 2021, 12, 627050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Bi, R.; Li, Y.; Xu, M.; Zheng, Q.; Zhang, D.-F.; Li, X.; Ma, G.; Xiang, B.; Zhu, X.; Zhao, H.; et al. Direct Evidence of CRISPR-Cas9-Mediated Mitochondrial Genome Editing. Innovation 2022, 3, 100329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Wang, M.Z.; Jiang, H.F.; Song, T.Y.; Xu, C.L.; Li, H.; Song, M.H.; Fang, F. Clinical characteristics of children with MT-TK gene m.8344A>G variation. Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi 2024, 62, 1056–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Niinuma, S.; Wake, Y.; Nakagawa, Y.; Kaneko, T. Importance of Nuclear Localization Signal-Fused Cas9 in the Production of Genome-Edited Mice via Embryo Electroporation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2023, 685, 149140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Hansen, K.G.; Herrmann, J.M. Transport of Proteins into Mitochondria. Protein J. 2019, 38, 330–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Mao, S.; Wu, R.; Luo, W.; Qin, J.; Chen, A.K. Spuriously Transcribed RNAs from CRISPR-sgRNA Expression Plasmids Scaffold Biomolecular Condensate Formation and Hamper Accurate Genomic Imaging. Nucleic Acids Res. 2025, 53, gkaf192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Kim, K.M.; Noh, J.H.; Abdelmohsen, K.; Gorospe, M. Mitochondrial Noncoding RNA Transport. BMB Rep. 2017, 50, 164–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Guerrier-Takada, C.; Gardiner, K.; Marsh, T.; Pace, N.; Altman, S. The RNA Moiety of Ribonuclease P Is the Catalytic Subunit of the Enzyme. Cell 1983, 35, 849–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Puranam, R.S.; Attardi, G. The RNase P Associated with HeLa Cell Mitochondria Contains an Essential RNA Component Identical in Sequence to That of the Nuclear RNase P. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2001, 21, 548–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Holzmann, J.; Frank, P.; Löffler, E.; Bennett, K.L.; Gerner, C.; Rossmanith, W. RNase P without RNA: Identification and Functional Reconstitution of the Human Mitochondrial tRNA Processing Enzyme. Cell 2008, 135, 462–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Rosenblad, M.A.; López, M.D.; Piccinelli, P.; Samuelsson, T. Inventory and Analysis of the Protein Subunits of the Ribonucleases P and MRP Provides Further Evidence of Homology between the Yeast and Human Enzymes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006, 34, 5145–5156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Chang, D.D.; Clayton, D.A. A Mammalian Mitochondrial RNA Processing Activity Contains Nucleus-Encoded RNA. Science 1987, 235, 1178–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Jacobson, M.R.; Cao, L.G.; Wang, Y.L.; Pederson, T. Dynamic Localization of RNase MRP RNA in the Nucleolus Observed by Fluorescent RNA Cytochemistry in Living Cells. J. Cell Biol. 1995, 131, 1649–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Kiss, T.; Filipowicz, W. Evidence against a Mitochondrial Location of the 7-2/MRP RNA in Mammalian Cells. Cell 1992, 70, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Goldfarb, K.C.; Cech, T.R. Targeted CRISPR Disruption Reveals a Role for RNase MRP RNA in Human Preribosomal RNA Processing. Genes Dev. 2017, 31, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Cheng, Y.; Liu, P.; Zheng, Q.; Gao, G.; Yuan, J.; Wang, P.; Huang, J.; Xie, L.; Lu, X.; Tong, T.; et al. Mitochondrial Trafficking and Processing of Telomerase RNA TERC. Cell Rep. 2018, 24, 2589–2595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Sharma, N.K.; Reyes, A.; Green, P.; Caron, M.J.; Bonini, M.G.; Gordon, D.M.; Holt, I.J.; Santos, J.H. Human Telomerase Acts as a hTR-Independent Reverse Transcriptase in Mitochondria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40, 712–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Chernega, T.; Choi, J.; Salmena, L.; Andreazza, A.C. Mitochondrion-Targeted RNA Therapies as a Potential Treatment Strategy for Mitochondrial Diseases. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2022, 30, 359–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Vendramin, R.; Verheyden, Y.; Ishikawa, H.; Goedert, L.; Nicolas, E.; Saraf, K.; Armaos, A.; Delli Ponti, R.; Izumikawa, K.; Mestdagh, P.; et al. SAMMSON Fosters Cancer Cell Fitness by Concertedly Enhancing Mitochondrial and Cytosolic Translation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2018, 25, 1035–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Han, Y.; Cai, Y.; Lai, X.; Wang, Z.; Wei, S.; Tan, K.; Xu, M.; Xie, H. lncRNA RMRP Prevents Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Cardiomyocyte Apoptosis via the miR-1-5p/Hsp70 Axis in LPS-Induced Sepsis Mice. Inflammation 2020, 43, 605–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Barrey, E.; Saint-Auret, G.; Bonnamy, B.; Damas, D.; Boyer, O.; Gidrol, X. Pre-microRNA and Mature microRNA in Human Mitochondria. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e20220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Silver, J.L.; Lamon, S.; Loke, S.; Mazzarino, G.; Croft, L.; Ziemann, M.; Soria, M.; Wadley, G.D.; Trewin, A.J. Skeletal Muscle Mitochondria Contain Nuclear-Encoded RNA Species Prior to and Following Adaptation to Exercise Training in Rats. FASEB J. 2025, 39, e70702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Sripada, L.; Singh, K.; Lipatova, A.V.; Singh, A.; Prajapati, P.; Tomar, D.; Bhatelia, K.; Roy, M.; Singh, R.; Godbole, M.M.; et al. Hsa-miR-4485 Regulates Mitochondrial Functions and Inhibits the Tumorigenicity of Breast Cancer Cells. J. Mol. Med. 2017, 95, 641–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Sang, L.; Ju, H.; Yang, Z.; Ge, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, F.; Yang, L.; Gong, H.; Shi, C.; Qu, L.; et al. Mitochondrial Long Non-Coding RNA GAS5 Tunes TCA Metabolism in Response to Nutrient Stress. Nat. Metab. 2021, 3, 90–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Mohammad, G.; Kowluru, R.A. Nuclear Genome-Encoded Long Noncoding RNAs and Mitochondrial Damage in Diabetic Retinopathy. Cells 2021, 10, 3271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Zhan, J.; Jin, K.; Xie, R.; Fan, J.; Tang, Y.; Chen, C.; Li, H.; Wang, D.W. AGO2 Protects Against Diabetic Cardiomyopathy by Activating Mitochondrial Gene Translation. Circulation 2024, 149, 1102–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Shepherd, D.L.; Hathaway, Q.A.; Pinti, M.V.; Nichols, C.E.; Durr, A.J.; Sreekumar, S.; Hughes, K.M.; Stine, S.M.; Martinez, I.; Hollander, J.M. Exploring the Mitochondrial microRNA Import Pathway through Polynucleotide Phosphorylase (PNPase). J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2017, 110, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Wang, G.; Chen, H.-W.; Oktay, Y.; Zhang, J.; Allen, E.L.; Smith, G.M.; Fan, K.C.; Hong, J.S.; French, S.W.; McCaffery, J.M.; et al. PNPASE Regulates RNA Import into Mitochondria. Cell 2010, 142, 456–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Gammage, P.A.; Moraes, C.T.; Minczuk, M. Mitochondrial Genome Engineering: The Revolution May Not Be CRISPR-Ized. Trends Genet. 2018, 34, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Wang, Y.; Su, X.; Chen, Y.; Chen, Y.; Shi, C.; Liu, F.; Ye, Y.; Sun, P.; Tan, M.; Yu, M.; et al. A CRISPR-Based Mitochondrial Gene Therapy Tool Derived by Engineering Guide RNAs. Cell Rep. 2026, 45, 116958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Antón, Z.; Mullally, G.; Ford, H.C.; Van Der Kamp, M.W.; Szczelkun, M.D.; Lane, J.D. Mitochondrial Import, Health and mtDNA Copy Number Variability Seen When Using Type II and Type V CRISPR Effectors. J. Cell Sci. 2020, 133, jcs248468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Nikitchina, N.; Heckel, A.-M.; Shebanov, N.; Mazunin, I.; Tarassov, I.; Entelis, N. Targeted Deletions in Human Mitochondrial DNA Engineered by Type V CRISPR–Cas12a System. NAR Mol. Med. 2025, 2, ugaf021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Rimskaya, B.; Kropocheva, E.; Shchukina, E.; Ulashchik, E.; Gelfenbein, D.; Lisitskaya, L.; Shmanai, V.; Smirnikhina, S.; Kulbachinskiy, A.; Mazunin, I. Targeting of Human Mitochondrial DNA with Programmable pAgo Nuclease. Cells 2026, 15, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Alexeyev, M.F.; Venediktova, N.; Pastukh, V.; Shokolenko, I.; Bonilla, G.; Wilson, G.L. Selective Elimination of Mutant Mitochondrial Genomes as Therapeutic Strategy for the Treatment of NARP and MILS Syndromes. Gene Ther. 2008, 15, 516–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Nash, P.A.; Turner, K.M.; Powell, C.A.; Van Haute, L.; Silva-Pinheiro, P.; Bubeck, F.; Wiedtke, E.; Marques, E.; Ryan, D.G.; Grimm, D.; et al. Clinically Translatable Mitochondrial Gene Therapy in Muscle Using Tandem mtZFN Architecture. EMBO Mol. Med. 2025, 17, 1222–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Gammage, P.A.; Rorbach, J.; Vincent, A.I.; Rebar, E.J.; Minczuk, M. Mitochondrially Targeted ZFN s for Selective Degradation of Pathogenic Mitochondrial Genomes Bearing Large-scale Deletions or Point Mutations. EMBO Mol. Med. 2014, 6, 458–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Christian, M.; Cermak, T.; Doyle, E.L.; Schmidt, C.; Zhang, F.; Hummel, A.; Bogdanove, A.J.; Voytas, D.F. Targeting DNA Double-Strand Breaks with TAL Effector Nucleases. Genetics 2010, 186, 757–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Bacman, S.R.; Barrera-Paez, J.D.; Pinto, M.; Van Booven, D.; Stewart, J.B.; Griswold, A.J.; Moraes, C.T. mitoTALEN Reduces the Mutant mtDNA Load in Neurons. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2024, 35, 102132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Yang, Y.; Wu, H.; Kang, X.; Liang, Y.; Lan, T.; Li, T.; Tan, T.; Peng, J.; Zhang, Q.; An, G.; et al. Targeted Elimination of Mutant Mitochondrial DNA in MELAS-iPSCs by mitoTALENs. Protein Cell 2018, 9, 283–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Hashimoto, M.; Bacman, S.R.; Peralta, S.; Falk, M.J.; Chomyn, A.; Chan, D.C.; Williams, S.L.; Moraes, C.T. MitoTALEN: A General Approach to Reduce Mutant mtDNA Loads and Restore Oxidative Phosphorylation Function in Mitochondrial Diseases. Mol. Ther. 2015, 23, 1592–1599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Gammage, P.A.; Gaude, E.; Van Haute, L.; Rebelo-Guiomar, P.; Jackson, C.B.; Rorbach, J.; Pekalski, M.L.; Robinson, A.J.; Charpentier, M.; Concordet, J.-P.; et al. Near-Complete Elimination of Mutant mtDNA by Iterative or Dynamic Dose-Controlled Treatment with mtZFNs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, 7804–7816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Mussolino, C.; Alzubi, J.; Fine, E.J.; Morbitzer, R.; Cradick, T.J.; Lahaye, T.; Bao, G.; Cathomen, T. TALENs Facilitate Targeted Genome Editing in Human Cells with High Specificity and Low Cytotoxicity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, 6762–6773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Shoop, W.K.; Lape, J.; Trum, M.; Powell, A.; Sevigny, E.; Mischler, A.; Bacman, S.R.; Fontanesi, F.; Smith, J.; Jantz, D.; et al. Efficient Elimination of MELAS-Associated m.3243G Mutant Mitochondrial DNA by an Engineered mitoARCUS Nuclease. Nat. Metab. 2023, 5, 2169–2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Bacman, S.R.; Shoop, W.; Henley-Beasley, C.S.; Thompson, R.; Barrera-Paez, J.D.; Theard, L.-M.; Rodriguez-Silva, M.; Gorsuch, C.; Barton, E.R.; Moraes, C.T. Transient Muscle Expression of mitoARCUS in Mice Leads to Sustained Reductions in Pathogenic mtDNA and Reduces Fatigability. Mol. Ther. 2026, 34, 2119–2133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Molina, R.; Redondo, P.; Stella, S.; Marenchino, M.; D’Abramo, M.; Gervasio, F.L.; Charles Epinat, J.; Valton, J.; Grizot, S.; Duchateau, P.; et al. Non-Specific Protein–DNA Interactions Control I-CreI Target Binding and Cleavage. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40, 6936–6945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Mok, B.Y.; De Moraes, M.H.; Zeng, J.; Bosch, D.E.; Kotrys, A.V.; Raguram, A.; Hsu, F.; Radey, M.C.; Peterson, S.B.; Mootha, V.K.; et al. A Bacterial Cytidine Deaminase Toxin Enables CRISPR-Free Mitochondrial Base Editing. Nature 2020, 583, 631–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Qi, X.; Tan, L.; Zhang, X.; Jin, J.; Kong, W.; Chen, W.; Wang, J.; Dong, W.; Gao, L.; Luo, L.; et al. Expanding DdCBE-Mediated Targeting Scope to aC Motif Preference in Rat. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2023, 32, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Guo, J.; Chen, X.; Liu, Z.; Sun, H.; Zhou, Y.; Dai, Y.; Ma, Y.; He, L.; Qian, X.; Wang, J.; et al. DdCBE Mediates Efficient and Inheritable Modifications in Mouse Mitochondrial Genome. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2022, 27, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Xie, Q.; Wu, H.; Long, H.; Xiao, C.; Qiu, J.; Yu, W.; Jiang, X.; Liu, J.; Zhang, S.; Lyu, Q.; et al. Secondary Follicles Enable Efficient Germline mtDNA Base Editing at Hard-to-Edit Site. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 2024, 35, 102170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Mi, L.; Shi, M.; Li, Y.-X.; Xie, G.; Rao, X.; Wu, D.; Cheng, A.; Niu, M.; Xu, F.; Yu, Y.; et al. DddA Homolog Search and Engineering Expand Sequence Compatibility of Mitochondrial Base Editing. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Sun, H.; Wang, Z.; Shen, L.; Feng, Y.; Han, L.; Qian, X.; Meng, R.; Ji, K.; Liang, D.; Zhou, F.; et al. Developing Mitochondrial Base Editors with Diverse Context Compatibility and High Fidelity via Saturated Spacer Library. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 6625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Castillo, S.R.; Simone, B.W.; Clark, K.J.; Devaux, P.; Ekker, S.C. Unconstrained Precision Mitochondrial Genome Editing with αDdCBEs. Hum. Gene Ther. 2024, 35, 798–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Lee, S.; Lee, H.; Baek, G.; Kim, J.-S. Precision Mitochondrial DNA Editing with High-Fidelity DddA-Derived Base Editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 2023, 41, 378–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Barrera-Paez, J.D.; Bacman, S.R.; Balla, T.; Van Booven, D.; Gannamedi, D.P.; Stewart, J.B.; Mok, B.; Liu, D.R.; Lombard, D.B.; Griswold, A.J.; et al. Correcting a Pathogenic Mitochondrial DNA Mutation by Base Editing in Mice. Sci. Transl. Med. 2025, 17, eadr0792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Bakeeva, L.E.; Skulachev, V.P.; Sudarikova, Y.V.; Tsyplenkova, V.G. Mitochondria Enter the Nucleus (One Further Problem in Chronic Alcoholism). Biochemistry 2001, 66, 1335–1341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Bloom, G.D. A nucleus with cytoplasmic features. J. Cell Biol. 1967, 35, 266–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Brandes, D.; Schofield, B.H.; Anton, E. Nuclear Mitochondria? Science 1965, 149, 1373–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Van Gent, D.C.; Hoeijmakers, J.H.J.; Kanaar, R. Chromosomal Stability and the DNA Double-Stranded Break Connection. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2001, 2, 196–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Borensztajn, K.; Chafa, O.; Alhenc-Gelas, M.; Salha, S.; Reghis, A.; Fischer, A.; Tapon-Bretaudière, J. Characterization of Two Novel Splice Site Mutations in Human Factor VII Gene Causing Severe Plasma Factor VII Deficiency and Bleeding Diathesis. Br. J. Haematol. 2002, 117, 168–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Goldin, E.; Stahl, S.; Cooney, A.M.; Kaneski, C.R.; Gupta, S.; Brady, R.O.; Ellis, J.R.; Schiffmann, R. Transfer of a Mitochondrial DNA Fragment toMCOLN1 Causes an Inherited Case of Mucolipidosis IV. Hum. Mutat. 2004, 24, 460–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Harutyunyan, T. The Known Unknowns of Mitochondrial Carcinogenesis: De Novo NUMTs and Intercellular Mitochondrial Transfer. Mutagenesis 2024, 39, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Ju, Y.S.; Tubio, J.M.C.; Mifsud, W.; Fu, B.; Davies, H.R.; Ramakrishna, M.; Li, Y.; Yates, L.; Gundem, G.; Tarpey, P.S.; et al. Frequent Somatic Transfer of Mitochondrial DNA into the Nuclear Genome of Human Cancer Cells. Genome Res. 2015, 25, 814–824, Erratum in Genome Res. 2016, 26, 717.2. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.206557.116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Srinivasainagendra, V.; Sandel, M.W.; Singh, B.; Sundaresan, A.; Mooga, V.P.; Bajpai, P.; Tiwari, H.K.; Singh, K.K. Migration of Mitochondrial DNA in the Nuclear Genome of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma. Genome Med. 2017, 9, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Gaziev, A.I.; Shaĭkhaev, G.O. [Ionizing radiation can activate the insertion of mitochondrial DNA fragments in the nuclear genome]. Radiats Biol. Radioecol. 2007, 47, 673–683. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  173. Wu, J.; Liu, Y.; Ou, L.; Gan, T.; Zhangding, Z.; Yuan, S.; Liu, X.; Liu, M.; Li, J.; Yin, J.; et al. Transfer of Mitochondrial DNA into the Nuclear Genome during Induced DNA Breaks. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 9438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Yin, L.; Lim, C.J.; Shi, K.; Yoon, J.H.; Ko, B.-K.; Ryou, S.; Kim, J.-S.; Aihara, H. Structural Basis for Double-Stranded DNA Cytosine Deamination by BaDTF3 and Its Application in Mitochondrial Genome Editing. Nat. Commun. 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Cho, S.-I.; Lee, S.; Mok, Y.G.; Lim, K.; Lee, J.; Lee, J.M.; Chung, E.; Kim, J.-S. Targeted A-to-G Base Editing in Human Mitochondrial DNA with Programmable Deaminases. Cell 2022, 185, 1764–1776.e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Richter, M.F.; Zhao, K.T.; Eton, E.; Lapinaite, A.; Newby, G.A.; Thuronyi, B.W.; Wilson, C.; Koblan, L.W.; Zeng, J.; Bauer, D.E.; et al. Phage-Assisted Evolution of an Adenine Base Editor with Improved Cas Domain Compatibility and Activity. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020, 38, 883–891, Erratum in Nat. Biotechnol. 2020, 38, 901. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0562-8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Chen, L.; Zhang, S.; Xue, N.; Hong, M.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, D.; Yang, J.; Bai, S.; Huang, Y.; Meng, H.; et al. Engineering a Precise Adenine Base Editor with Minimal Bystander Editing. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2023, 19, 101–110, Ettatum in Nat. Chem. Biol. 2024, 20, 1094. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-024-01622-4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Cho, S.-I.; Lim, K.; Hong, S.; Lee, J.; Kim, A.; Lim, C.J.; Ryou, S.; Lee, J.M.; Mok, Y.G.; Chung, E.; et al. Engineering TALE-Linked Deaminases to Facilitate Precision Adenine Base Editing in Mitochondrial DNA. Cell 2024, 187, 95–109.e26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Wang, D.; Qian, Y.; Niu, W.; Gong, H.; Zhao, D.; Gao, X.; Kong, D.; Zhou, J.; Han, Y.; Lai, L.; et al. Efficient Mitochondrial DNA Editing in Rabbits with Engineered sTALED Base Editors. Sci. China Life Sci. 2026, 69, 1420–1423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  180. Lei, Z.; Meng, H.; Liu, L.; Zhao, H.; Rao, X.; Yan, Y.; Wu, H.; Liu, M.; He, A.; Yi, C. Mitochondrial Base Editor Induces Substantial Nuclear Off-Target Mutations. Nature 2022, 606, 804–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  181. Anzalone, A.V.; Koblan, L.W.; Liu, D.R. Genome Editing with CRISPR–Cas Nucleases, Base Editors, Transposases and Prime Editors. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020, 38, 824–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  182. Zhang, D.; Parth, F.; Da Silva, L.M.; Ha, T.-C.; Schambach, A.; Boch, J. Engineering a Bacterial Toxin Deaminase from the DYW-Family into a Novel Cytosine Base Editor for Plants and Mammalian Cells. Genome Biol. 2025, 26, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  183. Kweon, J.; Park, S.; Jeon, M.Y.; Lim, K.; Jang, G.; Jang, A.-H.; Lee, M.; Seok, C.; Lee, C.; Park, S.; et al. High-Efficiency Base Editing for Nuclear and Mitochondrial DNA with an Optimized DYW-like Deaminase. Mol. Ther. 2025, 33, 5611–5623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Hu, J.; Sun, Y.; Li, B.; Liu, Z.; Wang, Z.; Gao, Q.; Guo, M.; Liu, G.; Zhao, K.T.; Gao, C. Strand-Preferred Base Editing of Organellar and Nuclear Genomes Using CyDENT. Nat. Biotechnol. 2024, 42, 936–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Gabsalilow, L.; Schierling, B.; Friedhoff, P.; Pingoud, A.; Wende, W. Site- and Strand-Specific Nicking of DNA by Fusion Proteins Derived from MutH and I-SceI or TALE Repeats. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41, e83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  186. Yi, Z.; Zhang, X.; Tang, W.; Yu, Y.; Wei, X.; Zhang, X.; Wei, W. Strand-Selective Base Editing of Human Mitochondrial DNA Using mitoBEs. Nat. Biotechnol. 2024, 42, 498–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Zheleznaya, L.A.; Perevyazova, T.A.; Alzhanova, D.V.; Matvienko, N.I. Site-Specific Nickase from Bacillus Species Strain D6. Biochemistry 2001, 66, 989–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Wei, Y.; Jin, M.; Huang, S.; Yao, F.; Ren, N.; Xu, K.; Li, S.; Gao, P.; Zhou, Y.; Chen, Y.; et al. Enhanced C-To-T and A-To-G Base Editing in Mitochondrial DNA with Engineered DdCBE and TALED. Adv. Sci. 2024, 11, 2304113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Zhang, X.; Wei, W. CRISPR-Free, Strand-Selective Mitochondrial DNA Base Editing Using a Nickase. Nat. Biotechnol. 2024, 42, 392–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  190. Kauppila, J.H.K.; Baines, H.L.; Bratic, A.; Simard, M.-L.; Freyer, C.; Mourier, A.; Stamp, C.; Filograna, R.; Larsson, N.-G.; Greaves, L.C.; et al. A Phenotype-Driven Approach to Generate Mouse Models with Pathogenic mtDNA Mutations Causing Mitochondrial Disease. Cell Rep. 2016, 16, 2980–2990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  191. Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; Ren, J.; Li, J.; Wei, X.; Yu, Y.; Yi, Z.; Wei, W. Precise Modelling of Mitochondrial Diseases Using Optimized mitoBEs. Nature 2025, 639, 735–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Zhang, E.; Neugebauer, M.E.; Krasnow, N.A.; Liu, D.R. Phage-Assisted Evolution of Highly Active Cytosine Base Editors with Enhanced Selectivity and Minimal Sequence Context Preference. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Chuapoco, M.R.; Flytzanis, N.C.; Goeden, N.; Christopher Octeau, J.; Roxas, K.M.; Chan, K.Y.; Scherrer, J.; Winchester, J.; Blackburn, R.J.; Campos, L.J.; et al. Adeno-Associated Viral Vectors for Functional Intravenous Gene Transfer throughout the Non-Human Primate Brain. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2023, 18, 1241–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Klinger, L.; Siegert, A.S.M.; Holzinger, R.; Trofimova, L.; Ada, S.; Drdla-Schutting, R. An Evaluation of Distinct Adeno-Associated Virus Vector Strategies for Driving Transgene Expression in Spinal Inhibitory Neurons of the Rat. Front. Neurosci. 2025, 19, 1558581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Minczuk, M.; Papworth, M.A.; Kolasinska, P.; Murphy, M.P.; Klug, A. Sequence-Specific Modification of Mitochondrial DNA Using a Chimeric Zinc Finger Methylase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 19689–19694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  196. Barrera-Paez, J.D.; Moraes, C.T. Mitochondrial Genome Engineering Coming-of-Age. Trends Genet. 2022, 38, 869–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Some of the most common mutations in the mitochondrial genome.
Table 1. Some of the most common mutations in the mitochondrial genome.
MutationGeneDisease
m14484T>CMT-ND6LHON [10,11]
m.8344A>GMT-TKMERRF [12]
m.3243A>GMT-TL1MELAS [13,14]
m.8993T>GMT-ATP6LEIGH SYNDROME [15,16]
m.11778G>AMT-ND4LHON [17,18]
m.3460G>AMT-ND1LHON [19]
m.13513G>AMT-ND5MELAS [20,21]
m10197G>AMT-ND3Marsden syndrome [22]
Table 3. Expression of protein-coding genes (including allotopic and xenotopic approaches) for rescue the mitochondrial genome mutation.
Table 3. Expression of protein-coding genes (including allotopic and xenotopic approaches) for rescue the mitochondrial genome mutation.
Target GeneTherapeutic GeneTarget MutationReference
MT-TVVARS2 (Homo sapiens)m.1624C>T[86]
MT-THHARS2 (Homo sapiens) m.12201T>C[87]
MT-TAAARS2 (Homo sapiens) m.5655A>G[88]
MT-TL1LARS2 (Homo sapiens) m.3243A>G[89]
MT-TL1EFTu, EFG2 (Homo sapiens) m.3243A>G[82]
MT-TKMTO1 (Homo sapiens) m.8344A>G[83]
MT-TKTRMT61B (Homo sapiens) m.8344A>G[94]
MT-ND1NDI1 (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) m.3460G>A[68]
MT-ND4Optimized ND4 (Homo sapiens)m.11778G>A[27]
MT-ATP6, MT-ATP8Optimized ATP6 (Homo sapiens),
Optimized ATP8 (Homo sapiens)
m.8529G → A[96]
MT-ATP6Optimized ATP6 (Homo sapiens)8993T>G[26]
MT-ND3Optimized ND3 (Homo sapiens)m.10197G>C,
m.10191T>C
[30]
MT-ATP6ATP6 (Chlamydomonas reinhardtii) m.8993T>G[66]
MT-ND1Optimized ND1 (Homo sapiens)m.3460G>A[27]
Table 4. Tools for editing the mitochondrial genome.
Table 4. Tools for editing the mitochondrial genome.
ToolMechanism of ActionStructureLimitationsAdvantagesReferences
MitoZFNElimination of specific mtDNAHeterodi meric proteinNon-compactRNA-free[143,144]
MitoTALENElimination of specific mtDNAHeterodi meric proteinNon-compactRNA-free, high-precision[146,147,148]
MitoARCUSElimination of specific mtDNAMonomeric proteinTargeting is limitedRNA-free, compact[151]
AmAgoElimination of specific mtDNAMonomeric protein + 18 bp RNARNA-dependentPam-independent, compact, easily programmable[141]
CRISPR/Cas9Elimination of specific mtDNAMonomeric protein + 100 bp RNARNA-dependentEasily programmable[87,88,103,105]
CRISPR/Cas12aElimination of specific mtDNAMonomeric protein + 40 bp RNARNA-dependentEasily programmable[139,140]
DdCBEmtDNA point mutation (C-to-T)Heterodimeric proteinOff-targeting effect, non-compactHigh flexibility[154,155]
TALEDmtDNA point mutation (A-to-G)Heterodimeric or monomeric proteinBystander editingHigh flexibility[175,176,177,178]
CyDENTmtDNA point mutation (C-to-T)Heterodimeric proteinNon-compact, low efficientyHigh flexibility and accuracy[184]
mitoBEsmtDNA point mutation (C-to-T) or (A-to-G)Heterodimeric proteinNon-compactHigh flexibility and accuracy[186,189]
SsdAmtDNA point mutation (C-to-T)Monomeric proteinLow efficiencyHigh flexibility and accuracy[183]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Simonov, V.; Rastorguev, S. Gene Therapy Tools for Diseases Caused by Mutations of the Mitochondrial Genome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 5517. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27125517

AMA Style

Simonov V, Rastorguev S. Gene Therapy Tools for Diseases Caused by Mutations of the Mitochondrial Genome. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026; 27(12):5517. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27125517

Chicago/Turabian Style

Simonov, Vladislav, and Sergey Rastorguev. 2026. "Gene Therapy Tools for Diseases Caused by Mutations of the Mitochondrial Genome" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 27, no. 12: 5517. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27125517

APA Style

Simonov, V., & Rastorguev, S. (2026). Gene Therapy Tools for Diseases Caused by Mutations of the Mitochondrial Genome. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 27(12), 5517. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27125517

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop