Attitudes of clinical geneticists and certified genetic counselors to genome editing and its clinical applications: A nation-wide questionnaire survey in Japan

Human genome editing in clinical applications: Japanese lay and expert attitudes

Background: The world's first gene-edited babies, reported by the Chinese scientist He Jiankui, prompted an outcry of criticism and concerns worldwide over the use of genome editing for reproductive purposes. Many countries and academic associations opposed to heritable genome editing (HGE) called for public discussion involving various stakeholders. To hold a discussion of this nature and form a consensus concerning HGE, we must understand under what conditions stakeholders consider HGE acceptable and the reasons for which they deem it unacceptable. Methods: Laypeople and researchers were surveyed in May 2019. They were asked about the degree of their acceptance toward somatic genome editing (SGE) and HGE; those who answered "acceptable depending on the purpose" were queried further regarding their acceptance in the contexts of specific clinical purposes. Results: Responses were obtained from 4,424 laypeople and 98 researchers. The percentage of respondents choosing each option in attitudes to HGE was, from largest to smallest: "acceptable depending on purpose" (laypeople 49.3%; researchers 56.1%), "not acceptable for any purpose" (laypeople 45.8%; researchers 40.8%), and "acceptable for any purpose" (laypeople 5.0%; researchers 3.1%). In an additional question for those who answered "acceptable depending on the purpose," laypeople found the following purposes acceptable: infertility treatment (54.5%), treatment of life-threatening diseases (52.2%), and treatment of debilitating diseases (51.4%). Meanwhile, the degree of acceptance for enhancement purposes was 10.7, 7.9, 6.2, and 5.5% for physical, cognitive, health, and personality enhancements, respectively. In contrast, acceptance among the researchers was 94.5% and 92.7% for the treatment of life-threatening and debilitating diseases, respectively, compared with 69.1% for infertility treatment. Researchers' acceptance for enhancement purposes was similar to that of the lay participants, with 12.7, 9.1, 10.9, and 5.5% for physical, cognitive, health, and personality enhancement, respectively. Conclusion: In the past, debates regarding the acceptability of human genome editing in clinical applications tend to focus on HGE in many countries. Society will now need to debate the acceptability of both types of human genome editing, HGE and SGE.

Fundamental knowledge taught in compulsory education for effective genetic counseling: a qualitative study of descriptions in textbooks

In genetic counseling, information must be provided in ways that the client and general public can understand to ensure that decisions are made autonomously. To realize this, we must assess the extent of knowledge held by the general public regarding genetics. To identify the client's original knowledge before genetic counseling, we explored the fundamental knowledge related to genetic counseling that is taught in Japanese compulsory education. A qualitative study was conducted. We selected 50 textbooks for compulsory education (Japanese, social studies, science, health and physical education, technology and home economics, morality, and life) that had been used in more than half of the districts in Japan. The text data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, and quantitative data were analyzed for methodological triangulation. Codes, subcategories, and categories were generated from the contexts that met the following criteria: the contents included in the official textbook for clinical geneticists, contents derived from such descriptions that were related to genetic counseling, and contents clearly related to genetics. Among the 50 textbooks, 33 textbooks contained fundamental knowledge regarding genetic counseling. A qualitative content analysis identified four major categories: (1) basics of genetics, (2) understanding and control of diseases, (3) efforts and barriers to the realization of a harmonious society, and (4) technology and humans. We found that fundamental knowledge related to genetic counseling is directly or indirectly taught in compulsory education. Our results are an important resource for understanding the client's knowledge baseline and will be helpful for effective genetic counseling.

Gene Therapy Knowledge and Attitude Among Healthcare Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Study

This study aimed to assess healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and concerns toward gene therapy in Saudi Arabia. We conducted an online cross-sectional survey via convenience sampling during the period from December 2018 to March 2019. A total of 419 (358 pharmacists and 61 physicians) responded to our questionnaire. Three hundred and nine (73.7%) were male, and the mean (±SD) age of 32.0 ± 7.7 years. The mean knowledge scores of all participants, pharmacists, and physicians were 3.8 ± 1.9, 3.8 ± 1.9, and 3.7 ± 1.9, respectively (P = 0.73). Higher knowledge score was associated with younger age (Coefficient: -0.03; P = 0.02), male (Coefficient: 0.57; P = 0.01), master's degree (Coefficient: 0.93; P = 0.003) and Ph.D. holders (Coefficient: 1.10; P = 0.01), and participants graduated from Canada (Coefficient: 2.10; P = 0.01).Moreover, about half of the respondents (55%) were concerned about gene therapy, and genetics training at college was considered the best gene therapy education method by 69.4%. Attitude score was not significantly associated with the profession (P = 0.88) but positively correlated with the knowledge score (rho= 0.4; P < 0.001). In conclusion, pharmacists and physicians showed limited knowledge with a positive attitude toward gene therapy. Therefore, educational programs on gene therapy need to be considered, focusing primarily on the safety, and social acceptance of such new therapeutic management.

Increased awareness and decreased acceptance of genome-editing technology: The impact of the Chinese twin babies

Genome-editing technology has become increasingly known in recent years, and the 2018 news of genome-edited twins in China had a particularly significant impact on public awareness. In the present study we investigate the effect of Japanese media coverage on public opinions of this technology. To identify the effects we employ a questionnaire survey method on a pre-registered sample from online research company Macromill. Our repeated survey from 2016 through 2019 reveal a generally supportive attitude toward the medical application of genome-editing methods. To see this we employed a multinomial logit analysis examining the determinants of negative and positive impressions of the technology. Results show that although editing for medical purposes remained mostly acceptable, its use in fertilizing human eggs was increasingly rejected, especially in 2019, the most recent sample year. The suggestion is that while genome-editing applications in general medical fields are publicly accepted, its use in human functionality enhancement is heavily increasingly resisted. News of the twin babies in China did raise public awareness of the methods but also damaged their reputation. It therefore is important for genome researchers to hold such concerns in mind, keeping the public informed of changing technology fundamentals. As a related question we inquire into the public acceptability of genome editing for animal and plant breeding, such as in agriculture and fisheries, as well. We find the Japanese public views the medical and breeding applications of this technology to be unconnected with each other, despite that awareness of both has risen significantly in recent years.

Genetics experience impacts attitudes towards germline gene editing: a survey of over 1500 members of the public

CRISPR-Cas9 has revolutionised genome engineering and has the potential to radically change our approach to genetic disease. However, the potential for genetic modification of embryos has raised significant and complex ethical and social concerns. The scientific community have called for ongoing stakeholder consultation about Germline Gene Editing (GGE), in particular lay publics, to help guide policy, education, research and regulatory priorities. In response, we conducted a survey to gauge public support for GGE and describe the demographic, experiential and contextual factors that influence individual attitudes. Respondent support was measured across nine hypothetical medical and enhancement GGE applications. We received responses from 1537 participants across 67 countries. Respondents were generally supportive of GGE, particularly for medical applications. While the most opposition observed was among religious respondents, those with work experience in genetics or genomics also reported greater resistance to GGE. Personal or family-related experience with genetics or genomics, identifying as female and tertiary education were also associated with less support for GGE. Further research needs to explore a diverse range of community and group attitudes towards GGE; the reasons underlying demographic and experiential differences; and to determine where the public and genetics professionals draw the line on ethical implementation respectively.