Genome editing: US could apply UK's approach to evaluate safety, ethics

February 25, 2016 by David Orenstein, Brown University
Rapidly advancing technologies allow for editing genetic material in embryos. But will the U.S. allow that? Credit: National Human Genome Research Institute

This winter has provided several dramatic developments in the ongoing debate about whether altering the "germline" - that is, the genome of a new embryo - should be allowed. Employing the technique could permanently alter not just an individual, but also that person's future genetic lineage. In a new research essay in the journal Cell, a duo of medical and legal experts from Brown and Harvard Universities argues that if the U.S. decides to consider the practice, it has a well-drawn regulatory roadmap to follow, courtesy of the United Kingdom.

A year ago, the UK approved a medical treatment called mitochondrial replacement (MR) therapy. The mitochondria are parts within each cell that have their own small genome - distinct from that in the nucleus. Sometimes errant mitochondrial genes can cause serious health diseases. MR therapy proposes to take an egg cell from a woman donor with healthy and to swap in the nucleus of an affected mother-to-be. Once fertilized in the lab with the father's sperm, the resulting embryo would have the donor's healthful mitochondria, and the needed mix of mom and dad's nuclear DNA.

In the Cell essay, Dr. Eli Adashi, former dean of medicine and biological sciences at Brown and Glenn Cohen, professor of law at Harvard, argue that - in which scientists would alter the nuclear genome of an embryo - and MR therapy are similar enough that the principles the UK used to consider and approve MR therapy give the U.S. a ready-made framework for evaluating germline editing.

"Both must contend with breaching the germline barrier," Adashi and Cohen wrote. "Both entail the manipulation of a human embryo. Both must address significant safety concerns. Both must engage a skeptical public. Both must face up to the first-in-human imponderable. Both must grapple with ethical concerns. Both must stamp out unease with technology running unchecked. And both must assuage fears of an altered natural order known to man for millennia."

"It follows that key insights derived from the MR experience may well prove applicable and potentially helpful to deliberating the challenge."

Contradictory context

The essay appears amid rapid-fire bouts of news, some supportive and some discouraging, from the debates swirling around MR therapy and germline editing.

Earlier this month, the U.S. National Academies issued a report advising the U.S. government to follow the UK's lead - for the most part - on MR therapy. A key difference, though, was approving only the transfer of male embryos, because men don't pass on mitochondrial DNA to their offspring.

A few days before that, the UK approved editing the genomes of - those produced but not used for in vitro fertilization - for research purposes. In this case, however, the experimental embryos would be destroyed at the conclusion of the study, again preventing genetic changes from appearing in an individual or being handed down through generations.

If the U.S. government is going to consider therapeutic MR or germline editing like the U.K., Adashi said, it won't actually be able to approve any of the needed preclinical research, because of provisions tucked into to a spending law passed in December 2015. The act prohibits the Food and Drug Administration from using any appropriated monies to accept or approve any project "in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification."

That law passed within two weeks of a major summit on genome editing that brought numerous prominent scientists together in Washington DC to debate the future of the technology.

What the UK did right

In Cell, Adashi and Cohen praise how the UK grappled with five prevailing concerns during the decade-long process that led to approving MR therapy: "the presence of a compelling medical rationale, the safety and efficacy of the preclinical science, the rigor of the ethical framework, the scope of the public engagement, and the soundness of the regulatory constructs."

These same principles could guide assessments of germline editing, they wrote.

The UK, through specially convened expert panels and studies; parliamentary debate; and public forums, meetings and interviews invested heavily in examining MR therapy's ethics, safety and public concerns, they wrote.

"Applying the principles relied upon on in the regulatory evaluation of MR will go a long way towards assuring that the prospect of therapeutic genome editing in the human is the subject of a thorough, inclusive, ethical, safety-minded and confidence-inspiring process," Adashi and Cohen wrote.

Explore further: Guidelines for human genome editing

More information: Going Germline: Mitochondrial Replacement as a Guide to Genome Editing, dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.02.018, www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S00 … -8674%2816%2930120-9

Related Stories

Guidelines for human genome editing

January 21, 2016
Human genome editing for both research and therapy is progressing, raising ethical questions among scientists around the world.

Is UK evaluation of reproductive tech a model for US?

April 10, 2015
When the United Kingdom resoundingly approved mitochondrial replacement therapy in February, it became the first country to give people this new medical option. In parallel it gave the United States serious cause to reflect ...

New gene editing tools force renewed debate over therapeutic germline alteration

May 1, 2015
Recent evidence demonstrating the feasibility of using novel CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology to make targeted changes in the DNA of human embryos is forcing researchers, clinicians, and ethicists to revisit the highly ...

Why treat gene editing differently in two types of human cells?

December 7, 2015
At the conclusion of the recent International Summit on Human Gene Editing in Washington, DC, its organizing committee released a much-anticipated statement recommending how human genetic engineering should be regulated. ...

Gene editing in embryos is fraught with scientific and ethical issues

December 2, 2015
Recent technological advances have revolutionised our ability to manipulate the genetic code, allowing us to specifically edit individual genes. Gene editing offers exciting potential for disease therapies but application ...

Recommended for you

Discovery of the 'pioneer' that opens the genome

January 23, 2018
Our genome contains all the information necessary to form a complete human being. This information, encoded in the genome's DNA, stretches over one to two metres long but still manages to squeeze into a cell about 100 times ...

Researchers identify gene responsible for mesenchymal stem cells' stem-ness'

January 22, 2018
Many doctors, researchers and patients are eager to take advantage of the promise of stem cell therapies to heal damaged tissues and replace dysfunctional cells. Hundreds of ongoing clinical trials are currently delivering ...

Genes contribute to biological motion perception and its covariation with autistic traits

January 22, 2018
Humans can readily perceive and recognize the movements of a living creature, based solely on a few point-lights tracking the motion of the major joints. Such exquisite sensitivity to biological motion (BM) signals is essential ...

Peers' genes may help friends stay in school, new study finds

January 18, 2018
While there's scientific evidence to suggest that your genes have something to do with how far you'll go in school, new research by a team from Stanford and elsewhere says the DNA of your classmates also plays a role.

Two new breast cancer genes emerge from Lynch syndrome gene study

January 18, 2018
Researchers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center and NewYork-Presbyterian have identified two new breast cancer genes. Having one of the genes—MSH6 and PMS2—approximately doubles a woman's risk of developing breast ...

A centuries-old math equation used to solve a modern-day genetics challenge

January 18, 2018
Researchers developed a new mathematical tool to validate and improve methods used by medical professionals to interpret results from clinical genetic tests. The work was published this month in Genetics in Medicine.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.