Ormond Kelly E, Mortlock Douglas P, Scholes Derek T, Bombard Yvonne, Brody Lawrence C, Faucett W Andrew, Garrison Nanibaa' A, Hercher Laura, Isasi Rosario, Middleton Anna, Musunuru Kiran, Shriner Daniel, Virani Alice, Young Caroline E
Department of Genetics and Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Vanderbilt Genetics Institute and Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37232, USA.
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Aug 3;101(2):167-176. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.012.
With CRISPR/Cas9 and other genome-editing technologies, successful somatic and germline genome editing are becoming feasible. To respond, an American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) workgroup developed this position statement, which was approved by the ASHG Board in March 2017. The workgroup included representatives from the UK Association of Genetic Nurses and Counsellors, Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors, International Genetic Epidemiology Society, and US National Society of Genetic Counselors. These groups, as well as the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Asia Pacific Society of Human Genetics, British Society for Genetic Medicine, Human Genetics Society of Australasia, Professional Society of Genetic Counselors in Asia, and Southern African Society for Human Genetics, endorsed the final statement. The statement includes the following positions. (1) At this time, given the nature and number of unanswered scientific, ethical, and policy questions, it is inappropriate to perform germline gene editing that culminates in human pregnancy. (2) Currently, there is no reason to prohibit in vitro germline genome editing on human embryos and gametes, with appropriate oversight and consent from donors, to facilitate research on the possible future clinical applications of gene editing. There should be no prohibition on making public funds available to support this research. (3) Future clinical application of human germline genome editing should not proceed unless, at a minimum, there is (a) a compelling medical rationale, (b) an evidence base that supports its clinical use, (c) an ethical justification, and (d) a transparent public process to solicit and incorporate stakeholder input.
借助CRISPR/Cas9及其他基因组编辑技术,成功实现体细胞和生殖系基因组编辑正变得可行。作为回应,美国人类遗传学学会(ASHG)的一个工作组制定了本立场声明,并于2017年3月获得ASHG理事会批准。该工作组包括来自英国遗传护士与顾问协会、加拿大遗传顾问协会、国际遗传流行病学学会以及美国国家遗传顾问协会的代表。这些团体以及美国生殖医学学会、亚太人类遗传学学会、英国遗传医学学会、澳大利亚人类遗传学学会、亚洲遗传顾问专业学会和南部非洲人类遗传学学会均认可了最终声明。声明包括以下立场。(1)目前,鉴于尚未解答的科学、伦理和政策问题的性质及数量,进行导致人类怀孕的生殖系基因编辑是不合适的。(2)当前,在有适当监督并获得捐赠者同意的情况下,没有理由禁止对人类胚胎和配子进行体外生殖系基因组编辑,以促进对基因编辑未来可能的临床应用的研究。不应禁止提供公共资金来支持这项研究。(3)人类生殖系基因组编辑的未来临床应用不应进行,除非至少满足以下条件:(a)有令人信服的医学依据,(b)有支持其临床应用的证据基础,(c)有伦理依据,以及(d)有一个透明的公开程序来征求并纳入利益相关者的意见。