Dataset Information

The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.

ABSTRACT:

Study question

What are the reasons for or against the future clinical application of germline genome modification (GGM)?

Summary answer

A total of 169 reasons were identified, including 90 reasons for and 79 reasons against future clinical application of GGM.

What is known already

GGM is still unsafe and insufficiently effective for clinical purposes. However, the progress made using Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)- CRISPR-associated system (Cas) has led scientists to expect to overcome the technical hurdles in the foreseeable future. This has invited a debate on the socio-ethical and legal implications and acceptability of clinical applications of GGM. However, an overview of the reasons presented in this debate is missing.

Study design, size, duration

MEDLINE was systematically searched for articles published between January 2011 and June 2016. Articles covering reasons for or against clinical application of intentional modification of the nuclear DNA of the germline were included.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

Two researchers independently extracted the reported reasons from the articles and grouped them into categories through content analysis.

Main results and the role of chance

The systematic search yielded 1179 articles and 180 articles were included. Most papers were written by professionals in ethics, (science) journalism and biomedical sciences. Overall, 169 reasons were identified, including 90 reasons for, and 79 reasons against future clinical application of GGM. None of the included articles mentioned more than 60/169 reasons. The reasons could be categorized into: (i) quality of life of affected individuals; (ii) safety; (iii) effectiveness; (iv) existence of a clinical need or alternative; (v) costs; (vi) homo sapiens as a species (i.e. relating to effects on our species); (vii) social justice; (viii) potential for misuse; (ix) special interests exercising influence; (x) parental rights and duties; (xi) comparability to acceptable processes; (xii) rights of the unborn child; and (xiii) human life and dignity. Considerations relating to the implementation processes and regulation were reported.

Limitations, reasons for caution

We cannot ensure completeness as reasons may have been omitted in the reviewed literature and our search was limited to MEDLINE and a 5-year time period.

Wider implications of the findings

Besides needing (pre)clinical studies on safety and effectiveness, authors call for a sound pre-implementation process. This overview of reasons may assist a thorough evaluation of the responsible introduction of GGM.

Study funding/competing interest(s)

University of Amsterdam, Alliance Grant of the Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute (I.D.), and Clinical Center, Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program (S.H.). There are no competing interests.

SUBMITTER: van Dijke I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6454467 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.

van Dijke Ivy I Bosch Lance L Bredenoord Annelien L AL Cornel Martina M Repping Sjoerd S Hendriks Saskia S

Human reproduction (Oxford, England) 20180901 9

<h4>Study question</h4>What are the reasons for or against the future clinical application of germline genome modification (GGM)?<h4>Summary answer</h4>A total of 169 reasons were identified, including 90 reasons for and 79 reasons against future clinical application of GGM.<h4>What is known already</h4>GGM is still unsafe and insufficiently effective for clinical purposes. However, the progress made using Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)- CRISPR-associated syst ...[more]

PMID: 30085071

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMolding competent clinicians capable of applying ethics principles in their practice is a challenging task, compounded by wide variations in the teaching and assessment of ethics in the postgraduate setting. Despite these differences, ethics training programs should recognise that the transition from medical students to healthcare professionals entails a longitudinal process where ethics knowledge, skills and identity continue to build and deepen over time with clinical exposure. A systematic scoping review is proposed to analyse current postgraduate medical ethics training and assessment programs in peer-reviewed literature to guide the development of a local physician training curriculum.MethodsWith a constructivist perspective and relativist lens, this systematic scoping review on postgraduate medical ethics training and assessment will adopt the Systematic Evidence Based Approach (SEBA) to create a transparent and reproducible review.ResultsThe first search involving the teaching of ethics yielded 7669 abstracts with 573 full text articles evaluated and 66 articles included. The second search involving the assessment of ethics identified 9919 abstracts with 333 full text articles reviewed and 29 articles included. The themes identified from the two searches were the goals and objectives, content, pedagogy, enabling and limiting factors of teaching ethics and assessment modalities used. Despite inherent disparities in ethics training programs, they provide a platform for learners to apply knowledge, translating it to skill and eventually becoming part of the identity of the learner. Illustrating the longitudinal nature of ethics training, the spiral curriculum seamlessly integrates and fortifies prevailing ethical knowledge acquired in medical school with the layering of new specialty, clinical and research specific content in professional practice. Various assessment methods are employed with special mention of portfolios as a longitudinal assessment modality that showcase the impact of ethics training on the development of professional identity formation (PIF).ConclusionsOur systematic scoping review has elicited key learning points in the teaching and assessment of ethics in the postgraduate setting. However, more research needs to be done on establishing Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA)s in ethics, with further exploration of the use of portfolios and key factors influencing its design, implementation and assessment of PIF and micro-credentialling in ethics practice.

Project description:Background and objectivePublished works have discussed the pharmacokinetic interactions of drugs with pregnancy, but none comprehensively identify all the approved United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Administration (EMA) drugs that have a pregnancy-related intervention. The objective of this systematic review is to comprehensively identify medications that have clinically meaningful interventions due to pharmacokinetic reasons.MethodsAn in-depth search of clinical data using the PDR3D: Reed Tech Navigator™ for Drug Labels was conducted from 1 June to 12 August 2022. The PDR3D was analyzed using the search terms "pregnant" and "pregnancy" within the proper label section. Regarding the US labels, the terms were searched under the "dosage and administration" section, whereas with the EU labels, the terms were searched within the "posology and method of administration" section. If a finding was discovered within the search, the rest of the label was analyzed for further information. Clinical relevance was based on whether an intervention was needed.ResultsUsing the search strategy, 139 US and 20 EU medications were found to have clinically meaningful interventions in pregnancy. The most common explanations for clinical relevance included hepatic metabolism, protein binding, renal elimination, and P-gp influence. Of the US labels: 40 were found to undergo hepatic metabolism, 11 were found to be influenced by renal elimination, 12 were found to be influenced by protein binding, 7 were found to be influenced by P-gp, and the remaining drugs required further research. Of the EU labels: 11 were found to undergo hepatic metabolism, 3 were found to be influenced by renal elimination, 3 were found to be influenced by protein binding, 1 was found to be influenced by P-gp, and the remaining drugs required further research.ConclusionThis comprehensive review of clinically relevant interventions in pregnancy will potentially aid in the treatment of pregnant females when they are undergoing therapy, provide intervention and dosing guidance for physicians, and save time for prescribers and pharmacists. Advances in non-clinical predictions for pregnancy dosing may guide the need for a future clinical evaluation.

Project description:Background:Many authors choose to work with professional medical writers when reporting the results of clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review to examine the relationship between professional medical writing support (PMWS) and the quality, ethics and timeliness of publications reporting clinical trials. Methods:Using terms related to 'medical writer' and 'observational study', we searched MEDLINE and Embase (no date limits), as well as abstracts and posters from meetings of the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP; 2014-2018). We also hand-searched the journals Medical Writing and The Write Stuff (2014-2018) and the bibliographies of studies identified in the electronic searches. We screened the results to identify studies that compared the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial publications written with and without declared PMWS. Results:Our searches identified 97 potentially relevant studies, of which 89 were excluded during screening and full paper review. The remaining eight studies compared 849 publications with PMWS with 2073 articles developed without such support. In these eight studies, PMWS was shown to be associated with increased adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines (in 3/3 studies in which this was assessed), publication in journals with an impact factor (one study), a higher quality of written English (one study), and a lower likelihood of reporting non-pre-specified outcomes (one study). PMWS was not associated with increased adherence to CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines (one study) or with the impact of published articles (mean number of citations per year, mean number of article views per year and Altmetric score; one study). In studies that assessed timeliness of publication, PMWS was associated with a reduced time from last patient visit in clinical trials to primary publication (one study), whereas time from submission to acceptance showed inconsistent results (two studies). Conclusions:This systematic review of eight observational studies suggests that PMWS is positively associated with measures of overall quality of reporting of clinical trials and may improve the timeliness of publication.

Dataset Information

The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.

Study question

Summary answer

What is known already

Study design, size, duration

Participants/materials, setting, methods

Main results and the role of chance

Limitations, reasons for caution

Wider implications of the findings

Study funding/competing interest(s)

Publications

The ethics of clinical applications of germline genome modification: a systematic review of reasons.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets