Responsible Translational Pathways for Germline Gene Editing?

Mapping the 'Ethical' Controversy of Human Heritable Genome Editing: a Multidisciplinary Approach

Genome editing, for instance by CRISPR-Cas, is a major advancement of the last 10 years in medicine but questions ethically our practices. In particular, human embryo heritable genome editing is a source of great controversy. We explored how this ethical question was debated in the literature from PubMed database, in a period of 4 years (2016-2020) around the announcement of the 'CRISPR babies' Chinese experiment in November 2018. We evaluated the weight of the arguments for and against this topic, through an analysis of reviews published on this question. The most important arguments come from the technical perspective: safety issues and benefits, putative long-term effects on the future generations and the need to assess this aspect. Next, foreseeable clinical benefits and the alternatives to these methods are discussed. The number of people that would benefit from such techniques is also considered. However, social and anthropological issues are addressed in a more disparate way. Parenthood and desire for children are sometimes overlooked. Few authors mention social justice, stigmatisation and equality of access. Consent and information are more clearly addressed, as well as the question of the relationship between generations. Finally, the effects on the nature of humankind or human species are far from being consensual; the risks of enhancement, eugenics and transhumanism are raised. We conclude that the risks associated with the immaturity of the technique were at the forefront of the ethical debate on human embryo heritable genome editing. Their consequences were seen as more immediate and easier to handle than those of sociological or anthropological projections, which are more speculative in nature.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41649-022-00234-1.

Initial heritable genome editing: mapping a responsible pathway from basic research to the clinic

Following the Second Summit on Human Gene Editing in Hong Kong in 2018, where the birth of two girls with germline genome editing was revealed, the need for a responsible pathway to the clinical application of human germline genome editing has been repeatedly emphasised. This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion on research ethics issues in germline genome editing by exploring key issues related to the initial applications of CRISPR in reproductive medicine. Following an overview of the current discussion on bringing germline genome editing into clinical practice, we outline the specific challenges associated with such interventions and the features that distinguish them from conventional clinical testing of new medical treatments. We then review proposed ethical requirements for initial heritable genome editing, such as the absence of reasonable alternatives, the existence of sufficient and reliable preclinical data, appropriate informed consent, requirements related to safety, and long-term follow-up.

Gene Editing: How Can You Ask "Whether" If You Don't Know "How"?

Though questions about whether gene editing should be done at all have dominated ethical discussion, a literature about how it can be done ethically has been growing. Work on responsible translational pathways for human germline gene editing has been criticized for focusing on the wrong questions. But questions about responsible translational pathways-questions about how gene editing could be done ethically-are, in an important sense, prior to questions about whether it is desirable and permissible. Asking "whether" questions about gene editing requires a model of what responsible clinical use of gene editing would look like.

Gene editing and modulation for Duchenne muscular dystrophy

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a progressive muscle disease caused by loss of dystrophin protein, encoded by the DMD gene. DMD manifests early in childhood as difficulty walking, progresses to loss of ambulation by the teens, and leads to death in early adulthood. Adeno-associated virus-vectorized gene therapies to restore dystrophin protein expression using gene replacement or antisense oligonucleotide-mediated pre-mRNA splicing modulation have emerged, making great strides in uncovering barriers to gene therapies for DMD and other genetic diseases. While this first-generation of DMD therapies are being evaluated in ongoing clinical trials, uncertainties regarding durability and therapeutic efficacy prompted the development of new experimental therapies for DMD that take advantage of somatic cell gene editing. These experimental therapies continue to advance toward clinic trials, but questions remain unanswered regarding safety and translatable efficacy. Here we review the advancements toward treatment of DMD using gene editing and modulation therapies, with an emphasis on those nearest to clinical applications.