Literature DB >> 33044907

The Meaning of Informed Consent: Genome Editing Clinical Trials for Sickle Cell Disease.

Stacy Desine1, Brittany M Hollister1, Khadijah E Abdallah1, Anitra Persaud1, Sara Chandros Hull2,3, Vence L Bonham1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A first therapeutic target of somatic genome editing (SGE) is sickle cell disease (SCD), the most commonly inherited blood disorders, affecting more than 100,000 individuals in the United States. Advancement of SGE is contingent on patient participation in first in human clinical trials. However, seriously ill patients may be vulnerable to overestimating the benefits of early phase studies while underestimating the risks. Therefore, ensuring potential clinical trial participants are fully informed prior to participating in a SGE clinical trial is critical.
Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study of adults with SCD as well as parents and physicians of individuals with SCD. Participants were asked to complete a genetic literacy survey, watch an educational video about genome editing, complete a two-part survey, and take part in focus group discussions. Focus groups addressed topics on clinical trials, ethics of gene editing, and what is not understood regarding gene editing. All focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using conventional content analysis techniques to identify major themes.
Results: Our study examined the views of SCD stakeholders regarding what they want and need to know about genome editing to make an informed decision to participate in a SGE clinical trial. Prominent themes included stakeholders' desire to understand treatment side effects, mechanism of action of SGE, trial qualification criteria, and the impact of SGE on quality of life. In addition, some physicians expressed concerns about the extent to which their patients would understand concepts related to SGE; however, individuals with SCD demonstrated higher levels of genetic literacy than estimated by physicians. Conclusions: Designing ethically robust genome editing clinical trials for the SCD population will require, at a minimum, addressing the expressed information needs of the community through culturally sensitive engagement, so that they can make informed decisions to consider participation in clinical trials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRISPR; Sickle cell disease; clinical trials; informed consent; somatic genome editing

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33044907      PMCID: PMC7710006          DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2020.1818876

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth        ISSN: 2329-4515


  33 in total

1.  Consent forms and the therapeutic misconception: the example of gene transfer research.

Authors:  Nancy M P King; Gail E Henderson; Larry R Churchill; Arlene M Davis; Sara Chandros Hull; Daniel K Nelson; P Christy Parham-Vetter; Barbara Bluestone Rothschild; Michele M Easter; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb

2.  Genome-edited baby claim provokes international outcry.

Authors:  David Cyranoski; Heidi Ledford
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Justice in CRISPR/Cas9 Research and Clinical Applications.

Authors:  Clara C Hildebrandt; Jonathan M Marron
Journal:  AMA J Ethics       Date:  2018-09-01

4.  Are genetic approaches still needed to cure sickle cell disease?

Authors:  Robert A Brodsky; Michael R DeBaun
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 14.808

5.  Therapeutic misconception, misestimation, and optimism in participants enrolled in phase 1 trials.

Authors:  Rebecca D Pentz; Margaret White; R Donald Harvey; Zachary Luke Farmer; Yuan Liu; Colleen Lewis; Olga Dashevskaya; Taofeek Owonikoko; Fadlo R Khuri
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Exploring Understanding of "Understanding": The Paradigm Case of Biobank Consent Comprehension.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Kevin P Weinfurt
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 11.229

7.  Patient Perspectives on Gene Transfer Therapy for Sickle Cell Disease.

Authors:  Heather Strong; Monica J Mitchell; Alana Goldstein-Leever; Lisa Shook; Punam Malik; Lori E Crosby
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 3.845

Review 8.  Acute Chest Syndrome in Children with Sickle Cell Disease.

Authors:  Shilpa Jain; Nitya Bakshi; Lakshmanan Krishnamurti
Journal:  Pediatr Allergy Immunol Pulmonol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.349

9.  A CRISPR focus on attitudes and beliefs toward somatic genome editing from stakeholders within the sickle cell disease community.

Authors:  Anitra Persaud; Stacy Desine; Katherine Blizinsky; Vence L Bonham
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-12-24       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 10.  The impact of socioeconomic status on access to cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  K Sharrocks; J Spicer; D R Camidge; S Papa
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Editing outside the body: Ex vivo gene-modification for β-hemoglobinopathy cellular therapy.

Authors:  Tolulope O Rosanwo; Daniel E Bauer
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 11.454

Review 2.  Restoring vision using optogenetics without being blind to the risks.

Authors:  Alexander R Harris; Frederic Gilbert
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.117

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.