ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2025
"Snip, snip, cure"? Philosophical, legal and biomedical perspectives on novel somatic genomic therapies.
Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of innovative techniques, such as the CRISPR/Cas system, has opened up a new range of possibilities for modifying the genome, with the potential to address previously unmet therapeutic needs of patients with genetic diseases. These new possibilities have not only raised ethical concerns but also challenged existing classifications of genome modification techniques. While the legal status of some of these new therapies remains uncertain, there is an ongoing debate within philosophy of biology about the information-related metaphors adopted by scientists to describe and classify the genome and its therapeutic modification. Given the continuing advance of new genomic therapies, we show, employing an interdisciplinary approach, that a comprehensive framework for the classification of these technologies is needed to resolve legal and philosophical issues. The first section provides an analysis of the current state of novel genome-modifying techniques in medical genetics. In the second section, we assess the regulatory status of these techniques within the European regulatory framework for advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs). Drawing on these results, we argue in the third section from a philosophical perspective that metaphors, such as 'editing' the genome, which are based on a conception of the genome as linear information, cannot adequately capture the breadth of advanced genomic technologies. To accurately categorise these techniques in a manner that meets their diverse applications, we propose introducing the umbrella term 'somatic genomic therapies' (SGTs). Urging an integrative approach to defining and classifying new technologies in medical genetics, we advocate for the development of an integrative concept of SGTs.
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.