Progress and Criteria in Public Health Applications of Gene Therapy and Gene Editing: Beyond the White Paper.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Stephen M Modell, Jennifer A Smith, Sharon L R Kardia
{"title":"Progress and Criteria in Public Health Applications of Gene Therapy and Gene Editing: Beyond the White Paper.","authors":"Stephen M Modell, Jennifer A Smith, Sharon L R Kardia","doi":"10.1159/000546850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This Review examines the pace of public health-related gene therapy and gene editing development since the publication of a key British white paper in 2003.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A case approach to assessing progress is used, where the cases represent illustrative health conditions we have discussed with our public health students. Three overarching baskets are considered: (1) gene therapy and editing for rare, single gene disorders (e.g., homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and hereditary amyloidosis polyneuropathy); (2) gene therapy and editing for high prevalence conditions (e.g., sickle cell disease); and (3) genetic engineering and gene editing of mosquitoes transmitting tropical disease.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The largest number of public health-related trials listed in this purposive inspection have made Phase III (comparing treatments), with several in Phase II (establishing efficacy) and Phase I (assessing safety). Cost-benefit considerations will limit the bulk of gene therapies from receiving Medicaid support which would benefit diverse groups, though criteria do exist for public backing.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>A scenario is described where several gene therapies relating to public health conditions could be supported by public insurance and justifiably meet the public health goals of effectiveness and equity. These instances are contrasted with human germline gene editing using CRISPR/Cas9 technology, and localized efforts to control vector populations with gene drives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Future debates will reflect extensions of the current applications, with secondary research undertaking cross-sectional inspections of sets of gene therapy and gene editing clinical trials. A limited number of protocols could advance to public financing and receive public health support; indications for such usage need further defining. Considerations of benefit to diverse populations are an important hallmark of public health-related regimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":49650,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Genomics","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546850","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This Review examines the pace of public health-related gene therapy and gene editing development since the publication of a key British white paper in 2003.

Methods: A case approach to assessing progress is used, where the cases represent illustrative health conditions we have discussed with our public health students. Three overarching baskets are considered: (1) gene therapy and editing for rare, single gene disorders (e.g., homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and hereditary amyloidosis polyneuropathy); (2) gene therapy and editing for high prevalence conditions (e.g., sickle cell disease); and (3) genetic engineering and gene editing of mosquitoes transmitting tropical disease.

Results: The largest number of public health-related trials listed in this purposive inspection have made Phase III (comparing treatments), with several in Phase II (establishing efficacy) and Phase I (assessing safety). Cost-benefit considerations will limit the bulk of gene therapies from receiving Medicaid support which would benefit diverse groups, though criteria do exist for public backing.

Discussion: A scenario is described where several gene therapies relating to public health conditions could be supported by public insurance and justifiably meet the public health goals of effectiveness and equity. These instances are contrasted with human germline gene editing using CRISPR/Cas9 technology, and localized efforts to control vector populations with gene drives.

Conclusion: Future debates will reflect extensions of the current applications, with secondary research undertaking cross-sectional inspections of sets of gene therapy and gene editing clinical trials. A limited number of protocols could advance to public financing and receive public health support; indications for such usage need further defining. Considerations of benefit to diverse populations are an important hallmark of public health-related regimens.

基因治疗和基因编辑在公共卫生应用中的进展和标准:超越白皮书。
引言:本综述回顾了自2003年英国一份重要白皮书发表以来,公共健康相关基因治疗和基因编辑的发展步伐。方法:使用案例方法来评估进展,这些案例代表了我们与公共卫生专业学生讨论过的说明性健康状况。考虑了三个总体篮子:(1)罕见的单基因疾病的基因治疗和编辑(例如,纯合子家族性高胆固醇血症和遗传性淀粉样变性多神经病);(2)针对高患病率疾病(如镰状细胞病)的基因治疗和编辑;(3)传播热带病蚊子的基因工程和基因编辑。结果:在本次目的性检查中列出的与公共卫生相关的试验中,最多的是进入了III期(比较治疗),还有一些进入了II期(确定疗效)和I期(评估安全性)。成本效益的考虑将限制大部分基因疗法获得医疗补助的支持,这将使不同的群体受益,尽管确实存在公共支持的标准。讨论:描述了一种情景,其中几种与公共卫生状况有关的基因疗法可以得到公共保险的支持,并合理地满足有效性和公平性的公共卫生目标。这些实例与使用CRISPR/Cas9技术的人类种系基因编辑以及使用基因驱动控制载体种群的局部努力进行了对比。结论:未来的辩论将反映当前应用的延伸,二级研究将对一系列基因治疗和基因编辑临床试验进行横断面检查。数量有限的议定书可以推进公共筹资并获得公共卫生支持;这种用法的适应症需要进一步确定。考虑到不同人群的利益是公共健康相关方案的一个重要标志。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health Genomics
Public Health Genomics 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Public Health Genomics'' is the leading international journal focusing on the timely translation of genome-based knowledge and technologies into public health, health policies, and healthcare as a whole. This peer-reviewed journal is a bimonthly forum featuring original papers, reviews, short communications, and policy statements. It is supplemented by topic-specific issues providing a comprehensive, holistic and ''all-inclusive'' picture of the chosen subject. Multidisciplinary in scope, it combines theoretical and empirical work from a range of disciplines, notably public health, molecular and medical sciences, the humanities and social sciences. In so doing, it also takes into account rapid scientific advances from fields such as systems biology, microbiomics, epigenomics or information and communication technologies as well as the hight potential of ''big data'' for public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信