Literature DB >> 31802714

Public Acceptability of Gene Therapy and Gene Editing for Human Use: A Systematic Review.

Juliette Delhove1,2,3, Ivana Osenk4, Ivanka Prichard4, Martin Donnelley1,2,3.   

Abstract

Gene therapy and gene editing technologies are complex and it can be difficult for the public to understand their possible benefits or side effects. However, patient and public support is critical for the successful adoption of any new technology. Given the recent advances in gene therapy and gene editing, their potential clinical benefits, and the significant attention that has been given to the first-known successful attempt at permanent and heritable changes to the human genome, a systematic review was performed to assess beliefs and attitudes toward gene therapy and gene editing for human use, and to highlight the factors that influence acceptability. A systematic search following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was undertaken in April 2018 to identify articles examining opinions and attitudes regarding the acceptability of gene therapy and gene editing. Overall, 1,561 records were retrieved from 4 databases (Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science). Duplicates were removed, and titles and abstracts independently screened, leaving 86 full-text articles assessed for eligibility. Following full-text review, 33 were included, with 5 articles added after forward/backward searching. An additional three articles were added following an updated search in March 2019 (total n = 41). Findings from the studies were integrated according to common themes: the impact of demographics; risks versus benefits of success; treatment specifics (e.g., medical vs. other reasons; disease severity and status; somatic vs. germ line; and mode of delivery); moral or ethical issues; and changes with time. In general, perceptions were positive, particularly for medical reasons and fatal diseases, but were also influenced by perceived risk. Somatic therapies had higher levels of acceptability than germ line therapies. While available in various forms, limitations exist in the measurement of perceptions of gene therapy and gene editing. Treatment acceptability is essential for future clinical trials, so it is important for scientists and clinicians to be clear about the risks and benefits of these technologies, and how these are communicated to the public, while encouraging education about genetic therapies to a broad range of individuals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acceptability; communication; education; gene editing; gene therapy; perceptions

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31802714     DOI: 10.1089/hum.2019.197

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Gene Ther        ISSN: 1043-0342            Impact factor:   5.695


  18 in total

1.  An exploration of how gender, political affiliation, or religious identity is associated with comfort and perceptions of controversial topics in bioethics.

Authors:  Baylee A Edwards; Julie A Roberts; Chloe Bowen; Sara E Brownell; M Elizabeth Barnes
Journal:  Adv Physiol Educ       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 2.288

2.  The View from the Benches: Scientists' Perspectives on the Uses and Governance of Human Gene-Editing Research.

Authors:  Margaret Waltz; Eric T Juengst; Teresa Edwards; Gail E Henderson; Kristine J Kuczynski; John M Conley; Paige Della-Penna; R Jean Cadigan
Journal:  CRISPR J       Date:  2021-08

3.  Starting the conversation on gene therapy for phenylketonuria: Current perspectives of patients, caregivers, and advocates.

Authors:  Debra S Regier; Agata Bąk; Heather Bausell; Emer O'Reilly; Lex M Cowsert
Journal:  Mol Genet Metab Rep       Date:  2022-03-08

4.  The therapeutic potential of attenuated diphtheria toxin delivered by an adenovirus vector with survivin promoter on human lung cancer cells.

Authors:  Lvxia Dai; Xiaoping Yu; Sizhou Huang; Yanjuan Peng; Jianmin Liu; Tian Chen; Xin Wang; Qiaofeng Liu; Yanfeng Zhu; Dengbang Chen; Xiaohua Li; Yu Ou; Yi Zou; Qu Pan; Kang Cao
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 4.742

5.  Co-transfection with BMP2 and FGF2 via chitosan nanoparticles potentiates osteogenesis in human adipose-derived stromal cells in vitro.

Authors:  Ying Hu; Qing-Wei Zhao; Zheng-Cai Wang; Qing-Qing Fang; He Zhu; Dong-Sheng Hong; Xing-Guang Liang; Dong Lou; Wei-Qiang Tan
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 1.671

6.  Attitudes of Indonesian Medical Doctors and Medical Students Toward Genome Editing.

Authors:  Safira Nur Izzah; Dimas Setyanto; Nurina Hasanatuludhhiyah; Danti Nur Indiastuti; Zamal Nasution; Annette d'Arqom
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2021-05-04

7.  Students' attitudes towards somatic genome editing versus genome editing of the germline using an example of familial leukemia.

Authors:  Beate Vajen; Joelle Ronez; Wiebke Rathje; Laura Heinisch; Smilla Ebeling; Ulrich Gebhard; Corinna Hößle; Brigitte Schlegelberger
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-05-08

8.  Avatar acceptability: views from the Australian Cystic Fibrosis community on the use of personalised organoid technology to guide treatment decisions.

Authors:  Laura K Fawcett; Claire E Wakefield; Sheila Sivam; Peter G Middleton; Peter Wark; John Widger; Adam Jaffe; Shafagh A Waters
Journal:  ERJ Open Res       Date:  2021-01-18

Review 9.  The impact of COVID-19 on the cell and gene therapies industry: disruptions, opportunities, and future prospects.

Authors:  Tingting Qiu; Yitong Wang; Shuyao Liang; Ru Han; Mondher Toumi
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 7.851

10.  Adipose-specific ATGL ablation reduces burn injury-induced metabolic derangements in mice.

Authors:  Supreet Kaur; Christopher Auger; Dalia Barayan; Priyal Shah; Anna Matveev; Carly M Knuth; Thurl E Harris; Marc G Jeschke
Journal:  Clin Transl Med       Date:  2021-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.