Cargando…

Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility

The clinical uses of cytoplasmic transfer and pronuclear transfer for infertility treatment have raised concerns, leading to restrictive regulatory responses in both the USA and China. In 2015, the UK legalized nuclear transfer from oocytes and zygotes to prevent the onset of serious mitochondrial d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishii, Tetsuya, Hibino, Yuri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6076383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30094357
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.01.002
_version_ 1783344703565987840
author Ishii, Tetsuya
Hibino, Yuri
author_facet Ishii, Tetsuya
Hibino, Yuri
author_sort Ishii, Tetsuya
collection PubMed
description The clinical uses of cytoplasmic transfer and pronuclear transfer for infertility treatment have raised concerns, leading to restrictive regulatory responses in both the USA and China. In 2015, the UK legalized nuclear transfer from oocytes and zygotes to prevent the onset of serious mitochondrial disease in the children of affected mothers. A research team in the USA then performed egg nuclear transfer, with subsequent embryo transfer in Mexico, to prevent mitochondrial disease. A live birth resulted, but the cross-border activity attracted attention from regulatory authorities. In order to respond appropriately to the likelihood of the wider use of such mitochondrial manipulation techniques (MMT), the present study first surveyed countries where MMT have been clinically implemented or where such experimental procedures are advertised on the internet. Sixteen countries were selected for an analysis of the legal position regarding germline genetic modification and egg donation. It was found that regulation of the clinical use of MMT could be broken down into three categories: (i) largely prohibited (USA and China), (ii) not regulated (Northern Cyprus and Ukraine), and (iii) insufficiently regulated (the remaining 12 countries, including Mexico). The reasons for no or insufficient regulation included no intention to oversee experimental procedures, no consideration of the manipulation in eggs, unclear technical terms and ambiguous medical purposes. To protect future children, this study underscores the pressing need for regulatory frameworks with policies that cover MMT. Wider implications regarding the responsible implementation of procedures in experimental reproductive medicine are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6076383
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60763832018-08-09 Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility Ishii, Tetsuya Hibino, Yuri Reprod Biomed Soc Online Ethics, Law and Religion The clinical uses of cytoplasmic transfer and pronuclear transfer for infertility treatment have raised concerns, leading to restrictive regulatory responses in both the USA and China. In 2015, the UK legalized nuclear transfer from oocytes and zygotes to prevent the onset of serious mitochondrial disease in the children of affected mothers. A research team in the USA then performed egg nuclear transfer, with subsequent embryo transfer in Mexico, to prevent mitochondrial disease. A live birth resulted, but the cross-border activity attracted attention from regulatory authorities. In order to respond appropriately to the likelihood of the wider use of such mitochondrial manipulation techniques (MMT), the present study first surveyed countries where MMT have been clinically implemented or where such experimental procedures are advertised on the internet. Sixteen countries were selected for an analysis of the legal position regarding germline genetic modification and egg donation. It was found that regulation of the clinical use of MMT could be broken down into three categories: (i) largely prohibited (USA and China), (ii) not regulated (Northern Cyprus and Ukraine), and (iii) insufficiently regulated (the remaining 12 countries, including Mexico). The reasons for no or insufficient regulation included no intention to oversee experimental procedures, no consideration of the manipulation in eggs, unclear technical terms and ambiguous medical purposes. To protect future children, this study underscores the pressing need for regulatory frameworks with policies that cover MMT. Wider implications regarding the responsible implementation of procedures in experimental reproductive medicine are discussed. Elsevier 2018-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6076383/ /pubmed/30094357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.01.002 Text en © 2018 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Ethics, Law and Religion
Ishii, Tetsuya
Hibino, Yuri
Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title_full Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title_fullStr Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title_full_unstemmed Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title_short Mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: Regulation and responsibility
title_sort mitochondrial manipulation in fertility clinics: regulation and responsibility
topic Ethics, Law and Religion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6076383/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30094357
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.01.002
work_keys_str_mv AT ishiitetsuya mitochondrialmanipulationinfertilityclinicsregulationandresponsibility
AT hibinoyuri mitochondrialmanipulationinfertilityclinicsregulationandresponsibility