Public attitudes in the clinical application of genome editing on human embryos in Japan: a cross-sectional survey across multiple stakeholders
- PMID: 35534678
- DOI: 10.1038/s10038-022-01042-z
Public attitudes in the clinical application of genome editing on human embryos in Japan: a cross-sectional survey across multiple stakeholders
Abstract
Recent advances in genome editing technology are accompanied by increasing public expectations on its potential clinical application, but there are still scientific, ethical, and social considerations that require resolution. In Japan, discussions pertaining to the clinical use of genome editing in human embryos are underway. However, understanding of the public's sentiment and attitude towards this technology is limited which is important to help guide the debate for prioritizing policies and regulatory necessities. Thus, we conducted a cross-sectional study and administered an online questionnaire across three stakeholder groups: the general public, patients and their families, and health care providers. We received responses from a total of 3,511 individuals, and the attitudes were summarized and compared among the stakeholders. Based on the distribution of responses, health care providers tended to be cautious and reluctant about the clinical use of genome editing, while patients and families appeared supportive and positive. The majority of the participants were against the use of genome editing for enhancement purposes. Participants expressed the view that clinical use may be acceptable when genome editing is the fundamental treatment, the risks are negligible, and the safety of the technology is demonstrated in human embryos. Our findings suggest differences in attitudes toward the clinical use of genome editing across stakeholder groups. Taking into account the diversity of the public's awareness and incorporating the opinion of the population is important. Further information dissemination and educational efforts are needed to support the formation of the public's opinion.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japan Society of Human Genetics.
Similar articles
-
Survey on the perception of germline genome editing among the general public in Japan.J Hum Genet. 2018 Jun;63(6):745-748. doi: 10.1038/s10038-018-0430-2. Epub 2018 Mar 15. J Hum Genet. 2018. PMID: 29545588 Free PMC article.
-
A Need for Better Understanding Is the Major Determinant for Public Perceptions of Human Gene Editing.Hum Gene Ther. 2019 Jan;30(1):36-43. doi: 10.1089/hum.2018.033. Epub 2018 Oct 3. Hum Gene Ther. 2019. PMID: 29926763
-
Public attitudes in Japan toward participation in whole genome sequencing studies.Hum Genomics. 2018 Apr 13;12(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s40246-018-0153-7. Hum Genomics. 2018. PMID: 29653595 Free PMC article.
-
The clinical application of gene editing: ethical and social issues.Per Med. 2019 Jul;16(4):337-350. doi: 10.2217/pme-2018-0155. Epub 2019 Jul 23. Per Med. 2019. PMID: 31331245 Review.
-
Reexamining the Ethics of Human Germline Editing in the Wake of Scandal.Mayo Clin Proc. 2020 Feb;95(2):330-338. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.11.018. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020. PMID: 32029087 Review.
Cited by
-
U.S. public opinion about the safety of gene editing in the agriculture and medical fields and the amount of evidence needed to improve opinions.Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024 Feb 16;12:1340398. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1340398. eCollection 2024. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024. PMID: 38433825 Free PMC article.
-
Scientists' Views on Scientific Self-Governance for Human Genome Editing Research.Hum Gene Ther. 2022 Nov;33(21-22):1157-1163. doi: 10.1089/hum.2022.087. Epub 2022 Aug 22. Hum Gene Ther. 2022. PMID: 35850532 Free PMC article.
-
Acceptance of genetic editing and of whole genome sequencing of human embryos by patients with infertility before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.Reprod Biomed Online. 2023 Jul;47(1):157-163. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.03.013. Epub 2023 Mar 24. Reprod Biomed Online. 2023. PMID: 37127437 Free PMC article.
-
Growing knowledge impact of gene-editing technology on public acceptance: a longitudinal analysis in Japan.GM Crops Food. 2024 Dec 31;15(1):411-428. doi: 10.1080/21645698.2024.2435709. Epub 2024 Dec 6. GM Crops Food. 2024. PMID: 39641364 Free PMC article.
-
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 Anal. 2025 Jun 12. doi: 10.1007/s10728-025-00521-6. Online ahead of print. Health Care Anal. 2025. PMID: 40504438
References
-
- Doudna JA. The promise and challenge of therapeutic genome editing. Nature 2020;578:229–36. - DOI
-
- Shim G, Kim D, Park GT, Jin H, Suh SK, Oh YK. Therapeutic gene editing: delivery and regulatory perspectives. Acta Pharm Sin. 2017;38:738–53. - DOI
-
- Kelly EO, Yvonne B, Vence LB, Lily HA, Heidi CH, Rosario I, et al. The clinical application of gene editing: ethical and social issues. Pers Med. 2019;16:337–50.
-
- Coller BS. Ethics of human genome editing. Annu Rev Med. 2019;70:289–305. - DOI
-
- Armsby AJ, Bombard Y, Garrison NA, Halpern-Felsher BL, Ormond KE. Attitudes of members of genetics professional societies toward human gene editing. CRISPR J 2019;2:331–9. - DOI