Knowledge graphs of ethical concerns of cerebral organoids

Abstract

Objectives The rapid development of cerebral organoid technology and the gradual maturity of cerebral organoids highlight the necessity of foresighted research on relevant ethical concerns. We employed knowledge graphs and conducted statistical analysis with CiteSpace for a comprehensive analysis of the status quo of the research on the ethical concerns of cerebral organoids from a bibliometric perspective. Materials and Methods We performed a statistical analysis of published papers on cerebral organoid ethics, keyword co‐occurrence graph, literature co‐citation and knowledge clustering graph to examine the status of the ethics research, internal relationship between technological development and ethical research, and ethical concerns of the academia. Finally, we used a keyword time zone graph and related statistics to analyze and predict the trends and popular topics of future cerebral organoids ethics research. Results We demonstrated that although the ethical concerns of cerebral organoids have long been discussed, it was not until 2017 that the ethical issues began to receive more attention, when cerebral organoids were gradually mimicking the human brain more closely and increasingly being combined with chimera research. The recent key ethical concerns are primarily divided into three categories: concerns that are common in life sciences, specific to cerebral organoids, and present in cross‐fields. These increasing ethical concerns are inherently related to the continual development of technology. The analysis pointed out that future research should focus on the ethical concerns of consciousness that are unique to cerebral organoids, ethical concerns of cross‐fields, and construction and improvement of legislative and regulatory systems. Conclusions Although research on cerebral organoids can benefit the biomedicine field, the relevant ethical concerns are significant and have received increasing attention, which are inherently related to the continual development of technology. Future studies in ethics regarding cerebral organoid research should focus on the ethical concerns of consciousness, and cross‐fields, as well as the improvement of regulatory systems.

Manufacturing with pluripotent stem cells (PSConf 2021): Key issues for future research and development

“…The Chinese regulatory authorities are also continuing their efforts to address ethical issues in the field of biotechnology, in the light of new developments in science and technology. Dr. Peng has also published in tandem with this report, a more detailed consideration of the issues 12,29,30,33 …”

“…Dr. Peng has also published in tandem with this report, a more detailed consideration of the issues. 12 , 29 , 30 , 33 …”

“…Dr. Peng has also published in tandem with this report, a more detailed consideration of the issues. 12,29,30,33 In open discussion with Prof. Isasi and Dr. Peng, delegates asked about the degree to which governance for individual tissues from donors fell under local or regional/national authorization. Prof. Isasi responded that this depended on whether the tissue in question was somatic or embryonic/foetal, but concluded that national law would dominate.…”

Research Trends in Lung Organoids: Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization

“…H-index [27] is widely accepted as measures of scienti c performance based on how many times papers written by particular scientists have been cited. The top 10 authors with the largest H indices were Clevers, H (11), Spence, JR (9), Hogan, BLM (8), Lee, JH (7), Skardal, A (7), Dye, BR (6), Morrisey, EE (6), Aleman, J (5), Atala, A (5), and Barkauskas, CE (5) (Table 5). Clevers, H., was the most in uential researcher with the highest number of citations in the WOS database.…”

Organoids in the Clinic: A Systematic Review of Outcomes

“…Fourth, as pointed out in a recent review on PDOs as a predictive biomarker for treatment response in cancer patients, "ultimately, the clinical value of using PDO individualized tumor response testing should be proven by comparing clinical outcomes, such as progression-free survival or response rates, in randomized clinical trials comparing physicianguided standard of care treatment versus assay-guided treatment derived from PDO drug screens" [Wensink et al, 2021]. Moreover, graphical presentation of existing research may make knowledge gaps even more visible [Ding et al, 2022].…”