Groundbreaking study demonstrates promise and controversy of gene editing in embryos

It’s potentially a huge step for medicine -- but also a controversial one.

It’s potentially a huge step for medicine -- but also a controversial one. While these embryos, which a team led by researchers at the Oregon Health and Science University edited using a novel gene-editing procedure known as CRISPR-Cas9, were destroyed rather than implanted into a womb, some say this type of genetic manipulation opens the door to other possibilities in human engineering.

Below are answers to some of the common questions about this research.

What did this experiment show?

Using a technique known as CRISPR-Cas9, the scientists were able to target the faulty genes as the cells in the embryo divided -- swapping them out for a properly functioning form of the gene. What was novel about this study is that researchers were able to nudge the embryo to use its own native machinery to perform the repair with a high degree of efficiency using a correct form of the gene already present in the cell. In this particular experiment, the researchers used CRISPR-Cas9 on 58 embryos containing the mutation. After the procedure, they found that the mutation was corrected in 42 embryos -- a success rate of 72 percent.

Why is this important?

If a feat similar to that seen in this experiment could be achieved in an afflicted embryo that was allowed to develop into a person, it would prevent the condition in this individual -- and it would also prevent their future sons and daughters from inheriting this condition as well.

Is such gene editing likely to become reality?

So what lies ahead for human embryo editing research?

Right now, it is unclear. Importantly, even though this experiment was considered to be successful, it is not known how this method would perform in other cases -- for example, a case in which both copies of the gene were mutated rather than just one, which was the case in this experiment. Also, since the scientists destroyed these embryos at a very early stage of development, it is not possible to tell for sure how viable these embryos would actually have been in the long run, or whether there would have been any unforeseen complications with their development.

But along with these scientific questions are also big ethical questions -- ones that will only be answered as scientists, ethicists and the public reflect further on this groundbreaking step.

Will Garneau, M.D., is an internal medicine resident at the Johns Hopkins Hospital.