Cited by 19Biomedical Ethics and RegulationCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Initial heritable genome editing: mapping a responsible pathway from basic research to the clinic

Open access
Ranisch, Robert, Trettenbach, Katharina, Arnason, Gardar·2023·Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

Abstract

Following the Second Summit on Human Gene Editing in Hong Kong in 2018, where the birth of two girls with germline genome editing was revealed, the need for a responsible pathway to the clinical application of human germline genome editing has been repeatedly emphasised. This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion on research ethics issues in germline genome editing by exploring key issues related to the initial applications of CRISPR in reproductive medicine. Following an overview of the current discussion on bringing germline genome editing into clinical practice, we outline the specific challenges associated with such interventions and the features that distinguish them from conventional clinical testing of new medical treatments. We then review proposed ethical requirements for initial heritable genome editing, such as the absence of reasonable alternatives, the existence of sufficient and reliable preclinical data, appropriate informed consent, requirements related to safety, and long-term follow-up.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11019-022-10115-x

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2016. Genome editing: An ethical review. https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/assets/pdfs/Genome-editing-an-ethical-review.pdf Accessed 25 December 2021.
  2. Ranisch, Robert. 2020b. The translational dilemma of first-in-human. The CRISPR Journal 3 (5): 348.
  3. Roberts, Melinda A., and David T. Wasserman, eds. 2009. Harming Future Persons: ethics, genetics and the nonidentity problem. Dordrecht: Springer.

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Ranisch, R., Trettenbach, K., & Arnason, G.
Affiliations
University of Potsdam (DE)
Corresponding author
Ranisch, Robert
Venue
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
Published
2022-11-22
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
21-35
ISSN
  • 1386-7423 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8633
OpenAlex
W4309698249
Cited by
19
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4
FWCI
4.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medicine Health Care and Philosophy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Opin vísindi (Opin vísindi) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Opin vísindi (Opin vísindi) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • The Dr. Kurt und Irmgard Meister-Stiftung (The Dr. Kurt und Irmgard Meister-Stiftung)
  • Universität Potsdam
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
germline editing, CRISPR, research ethics, clinical translation, reproductive medicine, informed consent, preclinical evidence, safety requirements, long-term follow-up, responsible innovation
MeSH terms
Gene Editing, Female, Germ Cells, Humans, Research, Genome, Human, Ethics, Research, Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review