ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2019
The technical risks of human gene editing.
Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical, Legal and Social Issues in Utilizing In Vitro Gametogenesis (IVG) and Stem Cell-Based Embryo Models (SCBEMs) for Human Reproduction in Singapore.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- From Bench to Bedside: Ethical and Clinical Best Practices for Genome Editing Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- CRISPR-Cas9-induced genetic mosaicism in three species of the microcrustaceanbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Synthetic nucleic acids in a post-agent biosecurity Era.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Double-strand break-free and transgene-free genome editing in the microalga Nannochloropsis oceanica using removable vectors containing the CRISPR base editing system.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The mosaicism of Cas-induced mutations and pleiotropic effects of scarlet gene in an emerging model system.Heredity · 2025Article
- Islamic Perspectives on Polygenic Testing and Selection of IVF Embryos (PGT-P) for Optimal Intelligence and Other Non-Disease-Related Socially Desirable Traits.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- Efficient CRISPR genome editing and integrative genomic analyses reveal the mosaicism of Cas-induced mutations and pleiotropic effects ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Advancements and future prospects of adeno-associated virus-mediated gene therapy for sensorineural hearing loss.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
- Revertant Mosaicism in Genodermatoses: Natural Gene Therapy Right before Your Eyes.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Application of CRISPR/Cas Genomic Editing Tools for HIV Therapy: Toward Precise Modifications and Multilevel Protection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Review
- Genome Editing among Bioethics and Regulatory Practices.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Cutting Through the "Gray Area": An Analysis of the IBC Regulatory Oversight of Applications of CRISPR Technology in Clinical Research.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2021Article
- Advances and challenges in adeno-associated viral inner-ear gene therapy for sensorineural hearing loss.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2021Review
- Responsible Translational Pathways for Germline Gene Editing?Current stem cell reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
A recent report from Dr He Jiankui concerning the birth of twin girls harbouring mutations engineered by CRISPR/Cas nucleases has been met with international condemnation. Beside the serious ethical concerns, there are known technical risks associated with CRISPR/Cas gene editing which further raise questions about how these events could have been allowed to occur. Numerous studies have reported unexpected genomic mutation and mosaicism following the use of CRISPR/Cas nucleases, and it is currently unclear how prevalent these disadvantageous events are and how robust and sensitive the strategies to detect these unwanted events may be. Although Dr Jiankui's study appears to have involved certain checks to ascertain these risks, the decision to implant the manipulated embryos, given these unknowns, must nonetheless be considered reckless. Here I review the technical concerns surrounding genome editing and consider the available data from Dr Jiankui in this context. Although the data remains unpublished, preventing a thorough assessment of what was performed, it seems clear that the rationale behind the undertaking was seriously flawed; the procedures involved substantial technical risks which, when added to the serious ethical concerns, fully justify the widespread criticism that the events have received.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.