Bioethical issues in genome editing by CRISPR-Cas9 technology

Abstract

Biology and function of CRISPR-Cas9 technologyGenome editing technologies often work by creating fractures in chromosomal DNA. ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR-Cas9 are all based solely on nucleases (Kim and Kim, 2014;Roh et al., 2018). The strength of these technologies stems from the ability to create fractures in the desired region of a specific target sequence as determined by the researcher. This allows researchers to modify the genome in practice in any region (Memi et al., 2018).The creation of changes in the genome depends mainly on the DNA repair capacity of the cells (Lau et al., 2018). All cells have two basic mechanisms for the repair of doubleAbstract: Genome editing technologies have led to fundamental changes in genetic science. Among them, CRISPR-Cas9 technology particularly stands out due to its advantages such as easy handling, high accuracy, and low cost. It has made a quick introduction in fields related to humans, animals, and the environment, while raising difficult questions, applications, concerns, and bioethical issues to be discussed. Most concerns stem from the use of CRISPR-Cas9 to genetically alter human germline cells and embryos (called germline genome editing). Germline genome editing leads to serial bioethical issues, such as the occurrence of undesirable changes in the genome, from whom and how informed consent is obtained, and the breeding of the human species (eugenics). However, the bioethical issues that CRISPR-Cas9 technology could cause in the environment, agriculture and livestock should also not be forgotten. In order for CRISPR-Cas9 to be used safely in all areas and to solve potential issues, worldwide legislation should be prepared, taking into account the opinions of both life and social scientists, policy makers, and all other stakeholders of the sectors, and CRISPR-Cas9 applications should be implemented according to such legislations. However, these controls should not restrict scientific freedom. Here, various applications of CRISPR-Cas9 technology, especially in medicine and agriculture, are described and ethical issues related to genome editing using CRISPR-Cas9 technology are discussed. The social and bioethical concerns in relation to human beings, other organisms, and the environment are addressed.

From Descriptive to Functional Genomics of Leukemias Focusing on Genome Engineering Techniques

“…Utilizing CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing tools is associated with a variety of ethical concerns, including its application to germline cells, embryos, and humans [ 155 , 156 ]. While the clinical application of CRISPR in human somatic cells with the intention of treating hematologic diseases is generally accepted, the consensus among geneticists is that its application in human germline cells and embryos (apart from research purposes), in which future generations would inherit genetic changes, should be impermissible [ 68 ].…”

Novel CRISPR–Cas Systems: An Updated Review of the Current Achievements, Applications, and Future Research Perspectives

“…Potential applications of gene editing technology emerge from CRISPR science and technology, raising serious concerns on biosecurity as a “double-edged sword”. The potential nefarious biosecurity threats of CRISPR-mediated gene edits include the creation of novel neurotoxins/neuroweapons; virulence-enhanced de novo human and plant pathogens; increased human tolerance for soldiers against biological and chemical warfare; and bio-agents that cause human illness, degradation, disability, and lethality [ 267 , 268 ]. In comparison to the other genome/gene-editing technologies, CRISPR offers affordability, ease of use, and economical and extensive availability.…”

Xenogeneic support for the recovery of human donor organs

“…Due to the potential lifesaving benefits for patients whose needs cannot be otherwise met, the development of genetically modified swine to supply organs for xenotransplantation has been ethically justified. 19 Key ethical considerations for swine genome editing have been extensively reviewed [20][21][22] and include human health, risks and uncertainty, animal welfare and dignity, environmental issues, and public acceptability. Notably, in 2020, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved "for both human food and potential therapeutic uses" the first intentional genomic alteration in a line of domestic pigs, 23 underscoring the acceptability of swine genome editing for therapeutic use.…”