Earlier this month I posted an article on CRISPR and asked if it would be the answer we are waiting for in the Kennedy's Disease and other rare disease communities. The opportunity for human gene editing has generated a lot of interest and questions concerning its use. Below are two comments concerning this potential breakthrough.
______
May 18, 2015
National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine Announce Initiative on Human Gene Editing
National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine Announce Initiative on Human Gene Editing
Joint Statement by Ralph J. Cicerone
and Victor J. Dzau
WASHINGTON -- The National Academy
of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine are launching a major initiative
to guide decision making about controversial new research involving human gene
editing. Human gene-editing
technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas9, may lead to promising new treatments for
disease. However, recent experiments to
attempt to edit human genes also have raised important questions about the
potential risks and ethical concerns of altering the human germline. Future advances are likely to raise new
questions.
Our initiative will include an
international summit this fall to convene researchers and other experts to
explore the scientific, ethical, and policy issues associated with human
gene-editing research. In addition, we
will appoint a multidisciplinary, international committee to begin a comprehensive
study of the scientific underpinnings and clinical, ethical, legal, and social
implications of human gene editing. The
committee will consider and recommend standards, guidelines, and practices
governing the use of gene-editing technologies in biomedical research and
medicine. An advisory group to steer the
overall initiative will soon be announced.
We provided leadership in the past
on emerging, controversial new areas of genetic research, such as human
embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and “gain-of-function”
research. In 1975, the Asilomar
conference convened by the National Academy of Sciences led to guidelines for
recombinant DNA research. In keeping
with these past efforts, we are prepared to work with the scientific and
medical communities to achieve a comprehensive understanding of human gene
editing and its implications in order to help guide researchers, clinicians,
policy makers, and the public, here and around the world.
Ralph J. Cicerone is the president
of the National Academy of Sciences, a private, nonprofit institution that
provides science policy advice to the nation under an 1863 congressional
charter. Victor J. Dzau is the president of the Institute of Medicine, which
was founded as the health arm of the NAS in 1970. Effective July 1, 2015, the IOM will become
the National Academy of Medicine, and Dzau will be its first president.
April 29, 2015
Genomic editing is an area of research
seeking to modify genes of living organisms to improve our understanding of
gene function and advance potential therapeutic applications to correct genetic
abnormalities. Researchers in China have recently described their experiments
in a nonviable human embryo to modify the gene responsible for a potentially
fatal blood disorder using a gene-editing technology called CRISPR/Cas9.
CRISPR-Cas9 is a customizable tool that
lets scientists cut and insert small pieces of DNA at precise areas along a DNA
strand. The tool is composed of two basic parts: the Cas9 protein, which acts
like the wrench, and the specific RNA guides, CRISPRs, which act as the set of
different socket heads. These guides direct the Cas9 protein to the correct
gene, or area on the DNA strand, that controls a particular trait. This lets
scientists study our genes in a specific, targeted way and in real-time.
Genomic editing is already widely
studied in a variety of organisms. For example, CRISPR/Cas9 has greatly
shortened the time it takes to produce knockout mouse models of disease,
enabling researchers to study more easily the underlying genetic causes of
those diseases. This technology is also being used to develop the next
generation of antimicrobials, which can specifically target harmful strains of
bacteria and viruses. In the first clinical application of genomic editing, a
related genome editing technique (using a zinc finger nuclease) was used to
create HIV-1 resistance in human immune cells, bringing HIV viral load down to
undetectable levels in at least one individual. All of these examples of
research using genomic editing technologies can and are being funded by NIH.
However, NIH will not fund any use of
gene-editing technologies in human embryos. The concept of altering the human
germline in embryos for clinical purposes has been debated over many years from
many different perspectives, and has been viewed almost universally as a line
that should not be crossed. Advances in technology have given us an elegant new
way of carrying out genome editing, but the strong arguments against engaging
in this activity remain. These include the serious and unquantifiable safety
issues, ethical issues presented by altering the germline in a way that affects
the next generation without their consent, and a current lack of compelling
medical applications justifying the use of CRISPR/Cas9 in embryos.
Practically, there are multiple
existing legislative and regulatory prohibitions against this kind of work. The
Dickey-Wicker amendment prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the
creation of human embryos for research purposes or for research in which human
embryos are destroyed (H.R. 2880, Sec. 128). Furthermore, the NIH Guidelines
state that the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, “…will not at
present entertain proposals for germ line alteration”. It is also important
to note the role of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in this arena,
which applies not only to federally funded research, but to any research in the
U.S. The Public Health Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
give the FDA the authority to regulate cell and gene therapy products as biological
products and/or drugs, which would include oversight of human germline
modification. During development, biological products may be used in humans
only if an investigational new drug application is in effect (21 CFR Part 312).
NIH will continue to support a wide
range of innovations in biomedical research, but will do so in a fashion that
reflects well-established scientific and ethical principles.
Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.
Director, National Institutes of Health
Director, National Institutes of Health