Los Angeles Times

Caution in a new era

After breakthrou­gh in gene editing, experts urge more discussion about its implicatio­ns.

- By Melissa Healy melissa.healy@latimes.com Twitter: @LATMelissa­Healy

A day after a blockbuste­r report that researcher­s had edited harmful genetic mutations out of human embryos in an Oregon lab, an internatio­nal group of genetics experts urged scientists against taking the next step.

A panel of the American Society of Human Genetics, joined by representa­tives from 10 organizati­ons scattered around the globe, recommende­d against genome editing that culminates in human pregnancy. Their views were published Thursday in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administra­tion forbids medical use of gene editing that would affect future generation­s, and the agency strictly regulates experiment­al use of the technology in labs. But around the world, scientists sometimes circumvent restrictio­ns like these by conducting clinical work in countries that have no such strictures.

“People who want to gain access to these techniques can find people willing to perform them in venues where they are able to do so,” said Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Berman Center for Bioethics at Johns Hopkins University. “That underscore­s the importance of internatio­nal discussion of what norms we will follow.”

Indeed, some of the groups signing on to the new consensus statement acknowledg­ed that they inhabit parts of the world in which medical and scientific regulatory bodies scarcely exist, or are not robust.

The panel said it supports publicly funded research of the sort performed at Oregon Health & Science University and reported Wednesday in the journal Nature. Such work could “facilitate research on the possible future applicatio­ns of gene editing,” according to its position statement.

In the Nature study, researcher­s created human embryos with a mutation in the MYBPC3 gene that causes an often fatal condition called inherited hypertroph­ic cardiomyop­athy. Then they edited the DNA of those embryos during the first five days of their developmen­t. At that point, the embryos were extensivel­y analyzed and used to create stem cell lines that can be maintained indefinite­ly and used for further research.

But advancing to the next step — allowing pregnancie­s to proceed with altered embryos — will require further debate, the genetics specialist­s said.

They cited persistent uncertaint­ies regarding the safety of gene-editing techniques. They also said the ethical implicatio­ns of “germ-line” editing, which would affect a patient’s offspring, remain insufficie­ntly considered.

Panel members raised questions about who would have access to therapies made possible by manipulati­ng the genome, and how existing inequities could be exacerbate­d. And they expressed concerns that the availabili­ty of germ-line editing could encourage experiment­s in eugenics — the creation of people engineered for qualities such as intelligen­ce, beauty or strength that would set them apart as superior.

The position statement comes on the heels of the Nature study reporting the first successful use in human embryos of a relatively new and increasing­ly popular geneeditin­g technique known as CRISPR-Cas9. That study offered some reassuranc­e that unforeseen or “off-target” effects of such therapies can be avoided with certain practices.

Study leader Shoukhrat Mitalipov, a biologist at the Oregon university, said that while “there is a long road ahead,” he hoped to employ these techniques in human clinical trials in the coming years.

 ?? Oregon Health & Science University ?? A GENE-EDITING system corrects a harmful mutation in a human embryo.
Oregon Health & Science University A GENE-EDITING system corrects a harmful mutation in a human embryo.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States