Zoeller Katharina
ScienceDialogue , Weilheim, Germany .
Tissue Eng Part A. 2014 Oct;20(19-20):2561-6. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2013.0292. Epub 2013 Nov 26.
Tissue engineering (TE) is a scientific field that will have an influence on our daily lives. It has the potential to revolutionize medical treatments, but it has also an impact on our human image and is associated with potential risks and ethical aspects. Among the publicly controversial issues are embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells, cloning, uncertainties regarding risks and informed consent issues. To maintain public confidence in the science of TE, a good solution is public dialogues with patients and other interested lay people that gives the public the chance to independently evaluate TE issues and build their own opinion based on information from different perspectives. The article describes public participation projects in TE on stem cell research and gene therapy and presents the case study of the EU-Gene Activated Matrices for Bone and Cartilage Regeneration on Arthritis (GAMBA) panels, a dialogue with patient and citizen panels in three European countries. In the GAMBA panels, lay participants assessed the basic research project aimed at finding ways of healing osteoarthritis through a matrix composed of adult stem cells, gene vectors, nanoparticles, and biomaterials. The results of the dialogues in different countries, such as Denmark, Japan, Ireland, Switzerland, and Germany, are compared and the evaluation criteria for high quality dialogues are presented, including multiperspectivity, openness of results, a clear mandate, impartial facilitation of the panels, and transparency.
组织工程学(TE)是一个将对我们日常生活产生影响的科学领域。它有潜力彻底改变医学治疗方式,但也会对我们的人类形象产生影响,并涉及潜在风险和伦理问题。公众争议较大的问题包括胚胎干细胞和诱导多能干细胞、克隆、风险的不确定性以及知情同意问题。为了保持公众对组织工程学科学的信心,一个好的解决办法是与患者及其他感兴趣的普通民众进行公开对话,让公众有机会独立评估组织工程学问题,并基于来自不同视角的信息形成自己的观点。本文描述了组织工程学中关于干细胞研究和基因治疗的公众参与项目,并介绍了欧盟用于关节炎骨与软骨再生的基因激活基质(GAMBA)小组的案例研究,该小组是与三个欧洲国家的患者和公民小组进行的对话。在GAMBA小组中,普通参与者评估了旨在通过由成体干细胞、基因载体、纳米颗粒和生物材料组成的基质来寻找治愈骨关节炎方法的基础研究项目。比较了丹麦、日本、爱尔兰、瑞士和德国等不同国家的对话结果,并提出了高质量对话的评估标准,包括多视角性、结果的开放性、明确的任务授权、小组的公正引导以及透明度。