Suppr超能文献

遗传学专业学会成员对人类基因编辑的态度。

Attitudes of Members of Genetics Professional Societies Toward Human Gene Editing.

机构信息

Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.

Department of Cardiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.

出版信息

CRISPR J. 2019 Oct;2(5):331-339. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2019.0020.

Abstract

Gene-editing technologies have improved in ease, efficiency, and precision. Although discussions are occurring around acceptable uses of human gene editing, limited data exist on the views of genetics-trained individuals. In 2017, we distributed an anonymous online survey to assess the attitudes of members of genetics professional societies toward gene editing ( = 500). Virtually all respondents were supportive of somatic editing in basic-science (99.2%) and clinical (87.4%) research on nonreproductive human cells. Only 57.2% were supportive of germline-editing basic-science research; 31.9% supported the transfer of viable embryos to humans for clinical research. While most favored future therapeutic uses of somatic (96.6%) and germline (77.8%) editing, there was little support for enhancement in somatic (13.0%) or germline (8.6%) cells. This study describes attitudes toward gene editing from genetics professionals worldwide and contributes to ongoing discourse and policy guidance in this domain.

摘要

基因编辑技术在易用性、效率和精确性方面都有所提高。尽管人们正在讨论人类基因编辑的可接受用途,但关于受过遗传学训练的个人观点的数据有限。2017 年,我们分发了一份匿名在线调查,以评估遗传学会员对基因编辑的态度( = 500)。几乎所有的受访者都支持对非生殖性人类细胞进行基础科学(99.2%)和临床(87.4%)研究的体细胞编辑。只有 57.2%的人支持生殖系编辑基础科学研究;31.9%的人支持将可存活的胚胎转移到人类进行临床研究。虽然大多数人赞成未来对体细胞(96.6%)和生殖系(77.8%)编辑的治疗应用,但对体细胞(13.0%)或生殖系(8.6%)细胞的增强几乎没有支持。这项研究描述了来自全球遗传学专业人士对基因编辑的态度,并为该领域的持续讨论和政策指导做出了贡献。

相似文献

6
Revising, Correcting, and Transferring Genes.基因的修订、修正和转移。
Am J Bioeth. 2020 Aug;20(8):7-18. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1783024.
8
Prioritizing Women's Health in Germline Editing Research.在生殖系编辑研究中优先考虑女性健康。
AMA J Ethics. 2019 Dec 1;21(12):E1071-1078. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2019.1071.

引用本文的文献

3
Experts' perspectives on human gene editing in Switzerland.瑞士专家对人类基因编辑的看法。
J Community Genet. 2025 Feb;16(1):83-90. doi: 10.1007/s12687-024-00757-0. Epub 2024 Dec 19.
5
Survey of attitude to human genome modification in Nigeria.尼日利亚对人类基因组编辑的态度调查。
J Community Genet. 2024 Feb;15(1):1-11. doi: 10.1007/s12687-023-00689-1. Epub 2023 Nov 23.

本文引用的文献

2
Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing.暂停可遗传的基因组编辑。
Nature. 2019 Mar;567(7747):165-168. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5.
6
Human germline gene editing: Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE.人类生殖细胞系基因编辑:ESHRE 和 ESHG 的建议。
Eur J Hum Genet. 2018 Apr;26(4):445-449. doi: 10.1038/s41431-017-0076-0. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
7
U.S. attitudes on human genome editing.美国对人类基因组编辑的态度。
Science. 2017 Aug 11;357(6351):553-554. doi: 10.1126/science.aan3708.
8
Human Germline Genome Editing.人类种系基因组编辑
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Aug 3;101(2):167-176. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.012.
9
Public Attitudes toward Gene Therapy in China.中国公众对基因治疗的态度。
Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2017 Jun 20;6:40-42. doi: 10.1016/j.omtm.2017.05.008. eCollection 2017 Sep 15.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验