Advanced search
1 file | 439.79 KB

Human germline gene editing : recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE

Author
Organization
Abstract
Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, first of all for somatic gene editing but in theory also for germline gene editing (GLGE). GLGE is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if GLGE would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique can help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. After consulting its membership and experts, this final version of the Recommendations was endorsed by the Executive Committee and the Board of the respective Societies in May 2017. Taking account of ethical arguments, we argue that both basic and preclinical research regarding GLGE can be justified, with conditions. Furthermore, while clinical GLGE would be totally premature, it might become a responsible intervention in the future, but only after adequate pre-clinical research. Safety of the child and future generations is a major concern. Future discussions must also address priorities among reproductive and potential non-reproductive alternatives, such as PGD and somatic editing, if that would be safe and successful. The prohibition of human germline modification, however, needs renewed discussion among relevant stakeholders, including the general public and legislators.

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 439.79 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
de Wert, Guido, Guido Pennings, Angus Clarke, Ursula Eichenlaub-Ritter, Carla G van El, Francesca Forzano, Mariëtte Goddijn, et al. 2018. “Human Germline Gene Editing : Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE.” European Journal of Human Genetics 26 (4): 445–449.
APA
de Wert, G., Pennings, G., Clarke, A., Eichenlaub-Ritter, U., van El, C. G., Forzano, F., Goddijn, M., et al. (2018). Human germline gene editing : recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 26(4), 445–449.
Vancouver
1.
de Wert G, Pennings G, Clarke A, Eichenlaub-Ritter U, van El CG, Forzano F, et al. Human germline gene editing : recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS. 2018;26(4):445–9.
MLA
de Wert, Guido et al. “Human Germline Gene Editing : Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE.” EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS 26.4 (2018): 445–449. Print.
@article{8600057,
  abstract     = {Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, first of all for somatic gene editing but in theory also for germline gene editing (GLGE). GLGE is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if GLGE would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique can help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. After consulting its membership and experts, this final version of the Recommendations was endorsed by the Executive Committee and the Board of the respective Societies in May 2017. Taking account of ethical arguments, we argue that both basic and preclinical research regarding GLGE can be justified, with conditions. Furthermore, while clinical GLGE would be totally premature, it might become a responsible intervention in the future, but only after adequate pre-clinical research. Safety of the child and future generations is a major concern. Future discussions must also address priorities among reproductive and potential non-reproductive alternatives, such as PGD and somatic editing, if that would be safe and successful. The prohibition of human germline modification, however, needs renewed discussion among relevant stakeholders, including the general public and legislators.},
  author       = {de Wert, Guido and Pennings, Guido and Clarke, Angus and Eichenlaub-Ritter, Ursula and van El, Carla G and Forzano, Francesca and Goddijn, Mari{\"e}tte and Heindryckx, Bj{\"o}rn and Howard, Heidi C and Radojkovic, Dragica and Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle and Tarlatzis, Basil C and Cornel, Martina C},
  issn         = {1018-4813},
  journal      = {EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {445--449},
  title        = {Human germline gene editing : recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-017-0076-0},
  volume       = {26},
  year         = {2018},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: