ClinicalMetric Research Team · Last Reviewed: June 2026 · Sources: ClinicalTrials.gov · FDA · NIH
◆ Clinical Trial Intelligence — Key Facts
  • 400,000+ active trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov across 200+ countries (2025)
  • Only ~12% of drugs entering clinical trials ultimately receive FDA approval
  • Average clinical trial takes 6–13 years from Phase 1 to regulatory approval
  • ~40% of trials fail to recruit sufficient participants — the #1 reason trials stop early
  • All trials must register on ClinicalTrials.gov under the FDA Amendments Act (FDAAA 2007)
← Back to Insights
Gene Editing Last Reviewed: June 2026 CM-INS-136 // JUNE 2026

CRISPR Clinical Trials 2026: From the First Approved Therapy to Base Editing and Beyond

In December 2023, Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel, exa-cel) became the first CRISPR-based therapy approved by any regulatory authority — licensed simultaneously by the FDA and MHRA for sickle cell disease and transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia. The clinical data that underpins that approval is extraordinary: in the CLIMB-121 trial, 29 of 29 patients treated with exa-cel became transfusion-free, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. What happens next is the more interesting question. CRISPR editing has moved past proof-of-concept into a genuine clinical platform, and the 2026 pipeline extends far beyond hemoglobin disorders.

Medical Notice

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. CRISPR-based therapies currently approved or in trials are available only through qualified medical centers. Consult your physician before making any treatment decisions.

Summary

Casgevy (exa-cel) is the only approved CRISPR therapy, with 100% transfusion independence in the CLIMB-121 sickle cell cohort. Intellia's in vivo CRISPR for transthyretin amyloidosis (NTLA-2001) achieved 87% reduction in TTR protein at 12 months — competitive with approved siRNA therapies. The 2026 active pipeline spans hemoglobinopathies, ATTR amyloidosis, Duchenne muscular dystrophy (exon skipping), HIV latent reservoir elimination, and solid tumor CAR-T enhancement. Base editing (single nucleotide changes without double-strand breaks) and prime editing (search-and-replace capability) are entering Phase 1 with improved safety profiles. Over 50 CRISPR trials are actively recruiting globally as of mid-2026.

ClinicalMetric Analysis

  • The $2.2 million price tag for Casgevy has become a structural test of whether gene editing can work as a healthcare intervention, not just a scientific one. CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex set the price below initial analyst estimates, but it remains among the most expensive therapies ever approved. The real access bottleneck isn't price alone — it's the approximately 50 authorized treatment centers globally, each requiring specialized capability for busulfan conditioning, apheresis, and post-infusion monitoring. Patients who could benefit from a one-time cure are unable to access it not because the treatment doesn't exist but because the infrastructure to deliver it doesn't exist near them. This is primarily a healthcare system problem, not a CRISPR problem, but CRISPR will be blamed for it.
  • In vivo CRISPR delivered via LNP to the liver is clinically mature. In vivo delivery to non-hepatic tissues is not. Intellia's data for NTLA-2001 (targeting the liver for TTR knockdown) and NTLA-2002 (hereditary angioedema) demonstrate that LNP-mediated liver delivery works with acceptable off-target rates. The liver is easy: it has fenestrated sinusoids that allow LNP extravasation, high vascularization, and natural LNP tropism. Muscle, brain, lung, and tumor tissue don't share these properties. Every in vivo CRISPR program outside the liver is still solving a delivery problem that hasn't been solved at clinical scale.
  • Off-target editing anxiety has been disproportionate relative to the clinical evidence to date. The pre-clinical concern — that Cas9 would cut at unintended genomic loci and cause oncogenic mutations — has not materialized in the human data from CLIMB-121 or the Intellia programs, with years of follow-up. This doesn't mean off-target editing is not a risk; it means the risk is lower than the most pessimistic models predicted. Base editing reduces this risk further by avoiding double-strand breaks (which trigger error-prone NHEJ repair). Regulatory agencies now have a more nuanced, data-informed position on off-target risk than they did in 2019. This has accelerated IND approvals for next-generation CRISPR programs.

Casgevy: What the CLIMB Trials Actually Showed

Casgevy uses ex vivo editing of a patient's own hematopoietic stem cells. The mechanism is conceptually clean: sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia are both caused by defects in the adult beta-globin gene. Fetal hemoglobin (HbF) — silenced after birth by the BCL11A transcription factor — is structurally different and not affected by the sickle mutation. By editing the BCL11A enhancer region in patient HSCs to reduce BCL11A expression, exa-cel reactivates HbF production, compensating for the defective adult hemoglobin.

CLIMB-121 (sickle cell, NCT03745287): 29/29 patients were free of vaso-occlusive crises at 12 months minimum follow-up (median 19.3 months). All patients had HbF levels above 20%, which is the empirical threshold for clinical protection. Prior to treatment, the median annual rate of vaso-occlusive crises was 3.9 per year.

CLIMB-111 (beta-thalassemia, NCT03655678): 42 of 44 patients with non-beta0/beta0 genotype became transfusion-free at 12 months. The 2 who didn't still had significant reduction in transfusion burden.

The safety profile showed the expected toxicities from busulfan conditioning (the myeloablative chemotherapy required to create space for the edited cells), not from the CRISPR editing itself. No off-target editing events with clinical significance have been identified.

In Vivo CRISPR: Intellia's Liver Program

While exa-cel requires ex vivo editing and reinfusion, Intellia Therapeutics has demonstrated that CRISPR can be delivered systemically in lipid nanoparticles to edit cells inside the body — without removing cells from the patient. NTLA-2001 targets transthyretin (TTR), a liver-produced protein that misfolds and deposits in heart and nerve tissue in ATTR amyloidosis.

Phase 1 results published in NEJM showed dose-dependent TTR knockdown: at the highest dose cohort (0.9 mg/kg), serum TTR reduction was 87% at 12 months — maintained without additional dosing. This compares favorably with patisiran (80% TTR reduction, repeated IV infusions) and vutrisiran (80%, quarterly SC injection), both approved siRNA therapies. A single-dose or infrequent-dose CRISPR therapy that achieves comparable efficacy would represent a meaningful improvement in patient burden.

NTLA-2002, also from Intellia, targets KLKB1 for hereditary angioedema — a condition with no known cure. Phase 1/2 data showed 94–95% reduction in attack frequency at the higher doses, with 3 of 6 patients attack-free during the observation period after a single dose. An IND for Intellia's CRISPR program for hemophilia A is now in Phase 1.

Base Editing and Prime Editing: The Next Generation

Standard CRISPR-Cas9 creates a double-strand break (DSB) at the target site, which is then repaired by cellular machinery — imprecisely via NHEJ (creating insertions/deletions) or precisely via HDR (using a donor template). DSBs carry theoretical off-target risk. Two newer approaches avoid DSBs entirely.

Base editing, developed from David Liu's laboratory at the Broad Institute, uses a catalytically impaired Cas9 fused to a deaminase enzyme. It converts one DNA base to another (A→G or C→T) without cutting both strands. Beam Therapeutics and Prime Medicine have base editing programs entering Phase 1/2 for sickle cell, alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, and leukemia (anti-CD7 base-edited CAR-T). Base editing is better suited to correcting point mutations — which accounts for a large fraction of monogenic diseases.

Prime editing uses a nickase Cas9 fused to reverse transcriptase and a pegRNA encoding the desired sequence change. It can perform all 12 types of point mutations, small insertions, and small deletions without DSBs or donor templates. Clinical programs are earlier stage — Phase 1 INDs filed in 2025–2026 for rare monogenic diseases. The efficiency gap compared to standard CRISPR has been closing rapidly in preclinical models.

HIV Latency and Duchenne: The Harder Problems

HIV persists in latently infected CD4+ T cells that current antiretroviral therapy cannot eliminate. CRISPR approaches aim to either excise the integrated proviral DNA or disrupt host genes (CCR5, which HIV uses to enter cells) to create HIV-resistant T cells. Sangamo Therapeutics' zinc-finger nuclease program for CCR5 disruption showed detectable engraftment in two patients but has not achieved functional cure. True CRISPR-based HIV eradication — cutting out integrated proviral DNA across the latent reservoir — remains Phase 1 territory, with challenges including the size and diversity of the latent reservoir and delivery to resting CD4+ T cells.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy exon-skipping programs (Solid Biosciences, Sarepta) use AAV-delivered CRISPR to restore a truncated but functional dystrophin reading frame. Early Phase 1 data show detectable dystrophin expression in biopsies, but whether expression levels will be sufficient for clinical benefit in a progressive disease is still being determined.

What CRISPR Trials Are Currently Recruiting

As of mid-2026, the most actively recruiting CRISPR trials on ClinicalTrials.gov include: CLIMB-131 (exa-cel long-term follow-up, NCT04208529); Intellia's NTLA-2001 expanded Phase 2; Graphite Bio's GPH101 for sickle cell (HD-HDR approach, distinct from BCL11A); Editas Medicine EDIT-301 (AsCas12a-based BCL11A editing for sickle cell, NCT04853576); and multiple allogeneic CAR-T programs using CRISPR to delete TRAC and improve persistence. Eligibility for most ex vivo programs requires confirmed genetic diagnosis, age 12 and above, adequate organ function, and ability to tolerate myeloablative conditioning.

EK
◆ Founder & Platform Director
Efi Kara
Electrical & Computer Engineer · 30 years IT management · responsible for platform implementation, editorial direction, and growth strategy.
◆ Research & Analysis
IA
Ioannis Anagnostopoulos
Clinical Research Analyst & ISO Inspector

B.Sc. Agricultural Sciences. ISO inspector and compliance auditor. Researches and writes ClinicalMetric Insights using primary sources: ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EudraCT, PubMed.

◆ Medical Review
GA
Georgios Anagas
Medical Content Reviewer

Physiotherapy student. Reviews Insights articles for medical accuracy and patient relevance — condition descriptions, eligibility language, and treatment context for patients and caregivers.

⚕️ Patient-facing medical accuracy review
◆ Technical Review
AA
Achi Anagas
Platform & Data Infrastructure Lead

B.Sc. Informatics & Communications (in progress). Responsible for ClinicalMetric's technical architecture, API integrations with ClinicalTrials.gov, and data accuracy verification.

🔄 Trial data updated daily from ClinicalTrials.gov
◆ Editorial & Research Standards
Stage 1 — Primary Research
ClinicalTrials.gov registry data (NIH/NLM), FDA documentation, EudraCT, and peer-reviewed literature. Trial status, phase, eligibility, and enrollment data verified at source.
Stage 2 — Medical Accuracy Review
Cross-checked against PubMed/MEDLINE literature and FDA/EMA communications. Eligibility criteria and patient safety information verified for accuracy.
Stage 3 — Registry Verification
Phase classification, enrollment status, sponsor identity, and trial location cross-referenced against official registry records before publication.
⚕️ Medical Disclaimer: ClinicalMetric provides research intelligence only. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider before making clinical decisions or participating in a trial.
Publisher
ClinicalMetric
Independent Clinical Trial Intelligence
Tracks 400,000+ active clinical trials worldwide. Updated daily from ClinicalTrials.gov (NIH/NLM), FDA IND registry, and EudraCT (EU Clinical Trials Register).
Research Methodology
Articles are researched from primary registry sources: ClinicalTrials.gov XML feeds, FDA trial databases, and peer-reviewed literature. Trial status, phase, enrollment, and eligibility data is sourced directly from registry APIs — not secondary aggregators.
Primary Data Sources
Accuracy & Updates
Trial status, enrollment, and eligibility information changes frequently. ClinicalMetric syncs with ClinicalTrials.gov daily. Editorial articles are reviewed quarterly or when major protocol amendments are published. Always verify trial status directly on ClinicalTrials.gov before making clinical decisions.
◆ Live Clinical Trial Feed
Browse 400,000+ Active Clinical Trials
Updated daily from ClinicalTrials.gov · Recruiting trials by condition, phase, sponsor
Search Active Trials →
About ClinicalMetric → Research Methodology → Medical Disclaimer → LinkedIn →

Related Insights

Gene Therapy
Gene Therapy Clinical Trials 2026
Cell Therapy
CAR-T Cell Therapy Clinical Trials 2026
Rare Disease
Finding Rare Disease Clinical Trials
◆ Related Research Guides
Trial DesignAdaptive Clinical Trial Design 2026: Seamless Phases, Response-Adaptive Randomization, and Platform TrialsRead guide →Data ScienceAI in Clinical Data Management 2026: EDC, Risk-Based Monitoring, and eTMF AutomationRead guide →PulmonologyAsthma Clinical Trials 2026: Biologics for Severe Asthma & New TreatmentsRead guide →CardiologyAtrial Fibrillation Clinical Trials 2026: New Ablation Techniques, Anticoagulants & Reversal AgentsRead guide →
ClinicalMetric Intelligence Team
Clinical Trial Research & Analysis · Last updated April 2026
Analysis compiled from ClinicalTrials.gov (NIH/NLM), FDA trial registry data, and peer-reviewed clinical research. ClinicalMetric tracks 400,000+ active clinical trials worldwide, updated daily from the ClinicalTrials.gov AACT database.
Get Weekly Clinical Trial Alerts
New recruiting trials from NIH, NCI, and 40+ sponsors — every Monday. Free forever.
◆ Clinical Trial Intelligence at a Glance
400K+
Active trials tracked
200+
Countries with active trials
4
Clinical trial phases
Daily
Data refresh from ClinicalTrials.gov
◆ Clinical Trial Phase Transition Success Rates
Phase 1 → Phase 2 success ~63%
Phase 2 → Phase 3 success ~32%
Phase 3 → Approval ~58%
Overall FDA approval rate ~12%
Source: Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) Clinical Development Success Rates — approximate industry averages.
◆ Clinical Trial Development Timeline
Mo 1–6
Preclinical + IND Filing
Mo 6–18
Phase 1 (Safety)
Mo 18–48
Phase 2 (Efficacy)
Mo 48–84
Phase 3 (Pivotal)
Mo 84–96
FDA Review / NDA
Mo 96+
Approval + Phase 4
Timeline is approximate. Total development from preclinical to approval averages 6–13 years.
About the Author
ClinicalMetric Research Team
Clinical Trial Intelligence Specialists · clinicalmetric.com
Our analysts monitor 400,000+ clinical trials daily across oncology, neurology, cardiology, and rare diseases. All data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov and FDA.gov.
🔬 400K+ trials tracked 🌍 200+ countries 🔄 Updated: June 2026
◆ Common Questions About Clinical Trials
What is a clinical trial? +
A clinical trial is a research study involving human participants designed to evaluate medical interventions — such as drugs, devices, or behavioral strategies. Trials follow a structured protocol and are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. They progress through phases: Phase 1 (safety), Phase 2 (efficacy), Phase 3 (large-scale comparison), and Phase 4 (post-market surveillance).
How do I find clinical trials I'm eligible for? +
You can search ClinicalTrials.gov or use ClinicalMetric to filter by condition, phase, or location. Each trial listing includes eligibility criteria such as age range, sex, diagnosis, and prior treatment history. Contact the study team directly or ask your physician to refer you to a relevant trial.
Are clinical trials safe to participate in? +
Clinical trials are conducted under strict ethical and regulatory oversight, including IRB approval and FDA regulation in the US. All participants must give informed consent after reviewing potential risks and benefits. Phase 1 trials carry more uncertainty, while Phase 3 trials involve interventions with an established safety profile. Participation is always voluntary and you may withdraw at any time.
What are the phases of clinical trials? +
Clinical trials progress through four main phases. Phase 1 tests safety and dosing in a small group (20–80 people). Phase 2 evaluates efficacy and side effects in a larger group (100–300). Phase 3 compares the intervention against standard treatments in thousands of participants. Phase 4 occurs after approval and monitors long-term effects in the general population.
Do participants get paid for joining clinical trials? +
Many clinical trials offer compensation for time and travel expenses, though payment structures vary widely by study. Compensation is not intended to be coercive. Some trials also cover treatment costs for participants. Always review the consent form carefully and ask the study coordinator about any financial considerations before enrolling.
Browse by Phase
Phase 1Phase 2Phase 3Phase 4
Browse by Condition
CancerDiabetesAlzheimer'sDepressionHeart DiseaseCOVID-19Parkinson'sMultiple Sclerosis
ClinicalMetric — Independent clinical trial intelligence platform. Not affiliated with NIH, ClinicalTrials.gov, the U.S. FDA, or any pharmaceutical company, hospital, or clinical research organization. Trial data is sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Do not make any treatment, enrollment, or health decisions based solely on information found here — always consult a qualified healthcare professional. Full Disclaimer  ·  Last Reviewed: April 2026  ·  Data Methodology