Available
in PDF
In this issue...
Genome Project
U.S.
HGP on Fast Track
DOE
Joint Genome Institute Exceeds Goal
New
5-Year Goals
Faster
Sequencing with BACs
Mapping
with STCs and STSs
Availability
of BAC Clones and STC Data
BAC
Related Websites
BAC
Resource Success Story
Scientists
Hunt SNPs for Variation, Disease
Who's
Sequencing the Human Genome?
Genomics
Progress in Science
EMSL
Promotes Remote Access to Instrumentation
Second
Private-Sector Sequencing Project
GeneMap'98
In the News
Team
Delivers C. elegans Sequence
Why
Sequence Entire Genomes? Worm's Eye View
Embnet.news on
Web
European
Biotech Program
DOE
BER Research Update
Hollaender
Fellows Named
SBIR
1998 Human Genome Awards Announced
Mouse
Resources
Mouse
Consortium for Functional Genomics
Chlamydia Genome
Analysis
HUGO
Merges Offices, Web Sites
Microbial Genomics
Superbug Deinococcus
radiodurans
Unfinished
Microbial Genomes Searchable
TIGR
Releases Chlorobium tepidum Sequence
DOE
MGP Abstracts Online
Microbial
TV Series
Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues
and Educational Resources
Cambridge
ELSI Symposium
Eric
Lander, Genetics in the 21st Century
Mark
Rothstein, Genetic Privacy
James
Wilson, Gene Therapy Present & Future
LeRoy
Walters, Ethical Issues in Gene Therapy
DNA
Files on NPR, Internet
Innovative
Biotechnology Curriculum
Short
Course for Biology Teachers
Microbial
TV Series
Proteomics
Looking
at Proteins to Understand Expression
2-DGE: Protein
Visualization, Modification
Tool
for Protein Analysis
TREMBL
Release 6
R&D
100 Award Goes to LANL's SOLVE
NIH
Awards Proteomics Grant to Axys
E.
coli Proteome Database
Genetics in Medicine
National
Organization for Rare Disorders
Translation
of Genetics to Medicine: New Website
Cancer
Genetics Web Site
HuGem
Website Offers Education in New Genetics
Calculation
of Genetic Risks 2nd Edition
New Genetics
Manual Offered
Mutation
Research Genomics Online
Informatics
GDB
Database Operations Restored
In
Silico Biology: Bioinformatics Journal
Computational
Methods Book Available
Bioinformatics
Guide
BioToolKit
Gene-Finding
Programs at Sanger
New
Sequin Version
Tandem
Repeat Tool
Sequence
Viewer
SmithKline
Licenses Gene Logic Software
Influenza
Database at LANL
TRANSFAC
Database
p53
Mutation Database
TBASE
at Jackson Laboratory
Intein
Database on Web
System
Identifies Polymorphisms
Web, Other Resources, Publications
1999
Oakland Workshop Website
Launchpad
to Human Chromosomes
Nature
Genetics Supplement
Funding
DOE
Office of Science Grants and Contracts
NHGRI
National Service Award Fellowships
NCI
Technologies for Molecular Analysis
NIH:
Netork for Large-Scale Mouse Sequencing
NHGRI:
Genomic Technology Development
US
Genome Research Funding
Meeting Calendars & Acronyms
Genome
and Biotechnology Meetings
Training
Courses and Workshops
Acronyms
HGN archives
and subscriptions
HGP
Information home
|
"Ethical Issues in Human Gene Therapy"
LeRoy Walters
Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University
LeRoy Walters provided a valuable perspective on some of the lessons learned by scientists and ethicists over the 18 years since the first human gene therapy protocol was approved. He also offered his predictions for future gene-therapy interventions and discussed some associated ethical dilemmas that society may be facing.
Walters began his talk with two case studies. The first was about David, known as "the boy in the bubble." He was born in 1971 with X-linked severe combined immune deficiency and died 12 years later after receiving a bone marrow transplant that, unknown to doctors, carried a silent Epstein-Barr virus.
In contrast to David's story, Walters continued, is the story of Ashanti, who was born in 1986 with an autosomal recessive form of severe combined immune deficiency. In Ashanti's early years, every environmental microbe attacked her body and made her sick. She was treated with a synthetic enzyme called PEG-ADA, which gradually decreased in efficacy, and in 1990 she became the first patient to receive gene therapy in an approved protocol. She is now almost 13 years old and living a normal life.
In reviewing the history of gene therapy in the United States, Walters referred to a document prepared by an interdisciplinary group in 1984 and 1985. Called "The Points to Consider," it contained 110 questions that investigators were asked to answer as they thought about performing gene therapy on human patients. The questions covered such topics as gene therapy's potential benefits and harms, fairness in selection of recipients, procedures to be followed, recipients' privacy and confidentiality, and possible alternative therapies. The same questions could constitute a checklist for gene therapy today, Walters said.
The review process in the early days was transparent and public, a fact that was important to gene therapy's acceptance. Policymakers knew exactly what was happening, and any member of the public could attend a meeting, see the investigators, hear the questions, and have access to a public list of approved gene therapy protocols.
Walters stated that as of February 1998, 200 therapeutic protocols had been formally reviewed: 23 dealing with HIV infection or AIDS; 33 with single-gene diseases, especially cystic fibrosis; 138 with cancer; and 6 with other diseases. Reviewing what has been learned from the past 18years, he listed the following points:
- Somatic cell gene therapy has been successfully distinguished from more ambitious plans for human genetic engineering.
- The more neutral term "human gene transfer" might have been used, rather than "human gene therapy." "Therapy" seems to promise benefits to the patient; "gene transfer" covers even the PhaseIstudies that test a product's toxicity and are unlikely to be therapeutic to the subjects.
- The success of human gene therapy has been quite modest in the first 8years; unfortunately, some researchers and companies have overstated the early results.
- An optimum location will be needed for a national public review body to examine new biomedical technologies.
Looking to the future, Walters said he thinks we will see prenatal interventions to prevent severe and irreversible damage to fetuses and gene transfer to prevent or treat neurological disease. In studies affecting the brain, the question of what is enhancement and what is cure, treatment, or prevention of disease will arise in an acute form, he said. For example, is it remediation or enhancement to intervene so that a child would have an IQ of 100 instead of 60 or 70?
Walters predicted that, in the next 18years, proposals will emerge for germline genetic intervention, which will require a great deal of preliminary technical work. Instead of the current technologies of adding genes, something analogous to the "search and replace" function on a word processor will be needed to find the malfunctioning gene, splice it out, and replace it with the properly functioning gene.
He pointed out that there are some good moral arguments in favor of germline genetic intervention, whose goal is to prevent or alleviate disease or disability. Such intervention is more efficient than repeating gene therapy generation after generation, and even in utero gene therapy is too late for some diseases. The one case that could justify nuclear transfer in the early embryonic stage, Walters thought, is that in which a woman is likely to pass on a mitochondrial disease to her offspring. In such a situation, he said, after in vitro fertilization it would be justified at perhaps the four-cell stage to remove all the cells' nuclei and fuse them with enucleated egg cells from a donor. Because mitochondria are in the cytoplasm and would be derived from the donor, the resulting embryos would be free from mitochondrial disease. This type of case would involve simultaneous germline intervention and cloning in the technical sense.
Walters ended with a warning against repeating mistakes made in the time of the eugenics movement and the Third Reich. "We can applaud the war on disease that genetic research is waging. It will be a great day when a child is definitively cured of cystic fibrosis or when a particular family line is liberated from the burden of fragileX syndrome. But we will be humane warriors only if, in the midst of the battle, we also show respect for those who courageously cope with disability and for those who cannot yet be cured."
[LeRoy Walters]
Return toCambridge Symposium introductory article
The electronic form of the newsletter may be cited in the following style:
Human Genome Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Human Genome News (v10n1-2).
Return to Top of Page
Acronym List
|