Mitochondrial replacement techniques for treating infertility.

IF 3.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-02-21 DOI:10.1136/jme-2023-109660
Esther Braun
{"title":"Mitochondrial replacement techniques for treating infertility.","authors":"Esther Braun","doi":"10.1136/jme-2023-109660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs) usually aim to prevent the genetic transmission of maternally inherited mitochondrial diseases. Until now, only the UK and Australia have implemented specific legal regulations of MRTs. In both countries, clinical trials on these techniques are only permissible for cases with a high risk of severe mitochondrial disease in the offspring. However, these techniques can also be applied to treat infertility, especially for older women with impaired oocyte quality. In some countries without legal regulation of these techniques, MRTs are already offered for this purpose. Yet, this application of MRTs has received insufficient attention in the bioethical literature so far.In this paper, I examine whether there are ethical reasons to prohibit trials on MRTs in the context of infertility when they are permitted for preventing mitochondrial disease. Allowing MRTs in one context but not the other might be justified either because their application in the context of mitochondrial disease (1) is supported by a more convincing evidence base, (2) has a higher potential benefit or (3) has a lower risk. I compare both applications of MRTs with respect to these three factors. I conclude that there is no convincing reason to prohibit clinical trials on MRTs for infertility when they are permitted in the context of mitochondrial disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-109660","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mitochondrial replacement techniques (MRTs) usually aim to prevent the genetic transmission of maternally inherited mitochondrial diseases. Until now, only the UK and Australia have implemented specific legal regulations of MRTs. In both countries, clinical trials on these techniques are only permissible for cases with a high risk of severe mitochondrial disease in the offspring. However, these techniques can also be applied to treat infertility, especially for older women with impaired oocyte quality. In some countries without legal regulation of these techniques, MRTs are already offered for this purpose. Yet, this application of MRTs has received insufficient attention in the bioethical literature so far.In this paper, I examine whether there are ethical reasons to prohibit trials on MRTs in the context of infertility when they are permitted for preventing mitochondrial disease. Allowing MRTs in one context but not the other might be justified either because their application in the context of mitochondrial disease (1) is supported by a more convincing evidence base, (2) has a higher potential benefit or (3) has a lower risk. I compare both applications of MRTs with respect to these three factors. I conclude that there is no convincing reason to prohibit clinical trials on MRTs for infertility when they are permitted in the context of mitochondrial disease.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗不孕症的线粒体替代技术。
线粒体替代技术(MRT)通常旨在防止母体遗传的线粒体疾病的基因传播。到目前为止,只有英国和澳大利亚对线粒体替代技术实施了具体的法律规定。在这两个国家,只有在后代患严重线粒体疾病风险较高的情况下,才允许对这些技术进行临床试验。不过,这些技术也可用于治疗不孕症,尤其是卵母细胞质量受损的老年妇女。在一些对这些技术没有法律规定的国家,已经为此提供了 MRT。在本文中,我将探讨在允许使用 MRT 预防线粒体疾病的情况下,禁止在不孕症方面进行 MRT 试验是否符合伦理原则。允许在一种情况下使用 MRT 而不允许在另一种情况下使用 MRT 可能是合理的,因为 MRT 在线粒体疾病中的应用(1)有更有说服力的证据支持,(2)有更高的潜在益处或(3)有更低的风险。我就这三个因素对 MRT 的两种应用进行了比较。我的结论是,在允许对线粒体疾病进行 MRT 临床试验的情况下,没有令人信服的理由禁止对不孕症进行 MRT 临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
期刊最新文献
Strengthening harm-theoretic pro-life views. Wish to die trying to live: unwise or incapacitous? The case of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust versus 'ST'. AI, doping and ethics: On why increasing the effectiveness of detecting doping fraud in sport may be morally wrong. Medical authority and expectations of conformity: crystallising a key barrier to person-centred care during labour and childbirth. Mitochondrial replacement techniques for treating infertility.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1