Abstract
Much of the international community opposes editing the human germline. Yet, given enough experience to become better acquainted with strengths and limitations, prominent international figures are cautiously optimistic about using CRISPR-like novel technologies for clinical applications. Not only might such applications be morally (ethically) permissible, but clinical trials for therapeutic aims could be necessary. Here, we assess critical dimensions of early-phase trials deploying germline-editing technologies for “bench-to-bedside” translation. While assuming no overarching position favoring or opposing such research, our discussion primarily focuses on normative considerations. First, we evaluate the imperative of conducting trials to produce reliable, reproducible knowledge and advancement, if possible, for human diseases that are incurable and/or whose treatments are deficient. Second, we address complexities in assessing risk and potential-benefit profiles. Third, we review the moral foundations of trial participation through well-established and accepted bioethical principles: autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and distributive justice. Finally, we raise critical questions about the scope of regulatory authority and investigator and funder accountability for these applications that could have everlasting impacts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
