Science

Rain (AM and PM) 7° London Hi 9°C / Lo 7°C

Gene therapy for the unborn

Successful trials raise hopes for end to inherited human disorders

By Steve Connor, Science Editor

Spindler was the third monkey born from the technique

GETTY IMAGES

Spindler was the third monkey born from the technique

Scientists are on the verge of ridding inherited diseases from future generations with a new technique for swapping genes between unfertilised human eggs before the resulting IVF embryos are implanted into the womb.

The technique has been successfully tested on laboratory monkeys and researchers believe it is now safe enough to apply for clinical trials on the many thousands of women at risk of giving birth to babies with some of the most debilitating inherited disorders.

Such a procedure would break new ground and raise fresh ethical concerns over the direction of IVF research because it would lead to permanent changes to the genetic make-up of children that would be passed on to subsequent generations of the same families.

This form of gene therapy, known as germline gene therapy, alters the DNA of sperm or eggs and is banned in Britain because of fears over its safety as well as the prospect of it leading to the creation of "designer babies". However, a clause in the new Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which comes into force on 1 October, could permit a type of germline gene therapy involving mitochondrial DNA – which exists outside the chromosomes – without the need for changes to primary legislation and a parliamentary vote.

Mitochondria, the tiny "power houses" of cells and their DNA, which lies outside the nucleus, is inherited solely down the maternal line. It is estimated that 1 in every 200 babies are born with mitochondrial mutations, some of which can lead to serious, life-long illnesses, such as diseases of muscles and nerves, as well as diabetes and cancer. The study on monkeys involved "renewing" the mitochondria of their eggs by the wholesale transfer of the chromosomes of one of their eggs into the egg of a donor female that had its own chromosomes removed so that only her mitochondrial DNA was left.

The aim was to test the feasibility of taking eggs from women with one of the 150 known mitochondrial DNA disorders and using them to create healthy eggs by transferring their chromosomes into donor eggs with no chromosomes of their own. The resulting egg would have DNA from two females and, when fertilised with a sperm, would result in an embryo which has three genetic parents.

In the latest study, four healthy macaque monkeys have been born using the technique. The scientists involved said yesterday there is no evidence that the procedure is unsafe and that they were planning to apply for ethical approval to conduct clinical trials in humans within a few years.

"In theory, this research has demonstrated it is possible to use this therapy in mothers carrying mitochondrial DNA diseases so that we can prevent those diseases from being passed on to their offspring," said Shoukhrat Mitalipov, of Oregon Health and Science University in Beaverton, Oregon.

"We believe with proper governmental approvals, our work can rapidly be translated into clinical trials for humans, and approved therapies," said Dr Mitalipov, whose study with colleague Masahito Tachibana is published in the journal Nature.

Conventional gene therapy has been tried in humans for 20 years but changing the DNA of mitochrondria would raise new ethical concerns. "This is not a simple form of gene therapy. This type involves replacing genes in the germline which will of course transmit it to the next generation and there are concerns," Dr Mitalipov said.

"We are talking of gene defects that cause terrible diseases. So the only way to prevent these genetic defects is to replace these genes whether we like it or not. We realise it's gene therapy involving the germline."

Professor Peter Braude, a specialist in reproductive medicine at King's College London and director of the Centre for Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis at Guy's Hospital, said that the study involved a series of technically difficult experiments that were meticulously executed. "For the first time, proof of principle has been demonstrated that transmission of mitochondrial disease might be avoided. It is a first step toward preimplantation correction of the serious medical disorders caused by defective DNA inherited maternally in the mitochondria," Professor Braude said.

"The transfer of the normal genetic material from a mother who has defective mitochondria, to a clean donated oocyte [egg] with normal mitochondria would allow it to be fertilised with her partner's sperm and for them to have a child free of the mitochondrial disease with the genetic material of the couple."

A spokesman for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority said: "If, in the future, safe and effective treatments are then developed to prevent the transmission of mitochondrial disease, Parliament would have to pass secondary legislation to allow that treatment to take place under HFEA licence. Any specific proposals would be closely examined by a Licence Committee to ensure that appropriate safeguards were in place."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

But is it covered?
[info]hombreraza wrote:
Wednesday, 26 August 2009 at 11:47 pm (UTC)
The question is: since unborn human children aren't really "people" deserving of any rights, will Obamacare cover therapy for them? Presumably, Obamacare only covers people...
If the price is right...
[info]thomasgoodey wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 07:37 am (UTC)
So we can expect that the eggs of a woman whose mitochondrial DNA is absolutely perfect will command a very high price?

Does not this development risk reducing the variability of mitochondrial DNA significantly? I don't suppose the situation could ever become a monoculture, but - especially if techniques to produce eggs outside the womb are developed - any problems with the possibility of thousands of children having the same mitochondrial-mother should be carefully evaluated.
Re: If the price is right...
[info]drolii wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 09:30 am (UTC)
Most people have, essentially perfect mitochondrial DNA. Finding a donor cell would not be hard, and may possibly be available from general cell cultures. MtDNA changes very little, apparently derived from symbiotic bacteria, millions of years ago, to allow nucleated cells to thrive, in which the evidence is very strong. As it has been derived from, essentially a few bacteria in a couple of cells, there is generally little change in their code across species. For instance, all humans only variate between seven different mtDNA sequences. Showing, that there were seven original ancestors of our species. It's insignificant as a contributor to DNA in a cell as it contains only genes associated with it's self and as the mitochondria is an organelle, secluded to an extent from the rest of the cell, there is no real danger associated.
[info]ajwimble wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:18 am (UTC)
I think we have to welcome any treatment that can allow a mother to have a healthy baby rather than one that is destined to live a short and unhealthy life. This does however cross over into very dangerous territoriy. Swapping genes to prevent a serious desease may be justified but the same techniques could potentially be used to swap genes to give a cchild enhanced endurance if a hother wants an athlete or whatever. If this kind of treatment is allowed to go ahead, strict regulation is required to ensure that it is only used to cure serious illness.
Restrictions
[info]had_it wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:42 am (UTC)
Please define "illness" and "serious".
Does it include, e.g. Albinism, Ambliopia aand Albinisim?
How about Bi-polar Disorder?
Low I.Q. (say, below 80)?
Ethical Issues
[info]had_it wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:31 am (UTC)
Few would argue that a gene-defective child conceived by accident and destined for a short and painful life is ethically superior to a healthy IVF child. So the ethical issue is....?
Re: Ethical Issues
[info]adampooler wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC)
I haven't the least idea what you are trying to say.
Spindler was the third monkey born from the technique
[info]famulla wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC)
Spindler was the third monkey born from the technique. Very nice photo Yes? No?
Ed Next time give us a wall paper size ao I can hang this in front of my aunt.
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
DrEdu
[info]dredu wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 04:07 pm (UTC)
The one important thing missing in this article is a reference to the embryos that are being destroyed in the process.
But then again...I guess nobody really wants to thnk about that.
[info]dredu wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 04:09 pm (UTC)
The article did not mention the destruction of human embryos in the process.
I guess nobody wants to think about that: out of sight out of mind.
Gene Therapy??
[info]jackolantyrn356 wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 08:30 pm (UTC)
If this means we cn change the outcome for the normally Downs child or even by happenstance the Autistic child.
He said, ?Dad. Tony was this young no?? I told him not to speak of any politicians
[info]famulla wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 10:27 pm (UTC)
My son was excited by the photo. He said, ?Dad. Tony was this young no?? I told him not to speak of any politicians even if the looked like the Zebra with the striped suits.
Ed. Where do we get money? When the schools have no teachers, hospitals nurses sick and still ask for pay, Boris is on the bike. BUR YOU MUST ADMIT THE SIMILARITY????
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla

but long term??????
[info]pietroirlandes wrote:
Monday, 31 August 2009 at 03:50 pm (UTC)
what if the defects, horrible as their results are, serve a purpose to the human race/gene pool as a whole??? are these scientists just racing each other for prizes and to hell with moral issues/long term repercussions?????

Most popular