| 1. |
- De Wert, G., et al.
(författare)
-
Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing : Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Human Genetics. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 1018-4813 .- 1476-5438. ; 26:4, s. 450-470
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, including editing of the germline. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. This document provides the background to the Recommendations. Germline gene editing is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if germline gene editing would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique could help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? This Background document summarizes the scientific developments and expectations regarding germline gene editing, legal regulations at the European level, and ethics for three different settings (basic research, preclinical research and clinical applications). In ethical terms, we argue that the deontological objections (e.g., gene editing goes against nature) do not seem convincing while consequentialist objections (e.g., safety for the children thus conceived and following generations) require research, not all of which is allowed in the current legal situation in European countries. Development of this Background document and Recommendations reflects the responsibility to help society understand and debate the full range of possible implications of the new technologies, and to contribute to regulations that are adapted to the dynamics of the field while taking account of ethical considerations and societal concerns.
|
|
| 2. |
- Komatsu, Kimberly J., et al.
(författare)
-
Global change effects on plant communities are magnified by time and the number of global change factors imposed
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - : National Academy of Sciences. - 0027-8424 .- 1091-6490. ; 116:36, s. 17867-17873
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Accurate prediction of community responses to global change drivers (GCDs) is critical given the effects of biodiversity on ecosystem services. There is consensus that human activities are driving species extinctions at the global scale, but debate remains over whether GCDs are systematically altering local communities worldwide. Across 105 experiments that included over 400 experimental manipulations, we found evidence for a lagged response of herbaceous plant communities to GCDs caused by shifts in the identities and relative abundances of species, often without a corresponding difference in species richness. These results provide evidence that community responses are pervasive across a wide variety of GCDs on long-term temporal scales and that these responses increase in strength when multiple GCDs are simultaneously imposed.Global change drivers (GCDs) are expected to alter community structure and consequently, the services that ecosystems provide. Yet, few experimental investigations have examined effects of GCDs on plant community structure across multiple ecosystem types, and those that do exist present conflicting patterns. In an unprecedented global synthesis of over 100 experiments that manipulated factors linked to GCDs, we show that herbaceous plant community responses depend on experimental manipulation length and number of factors manipulated. We found that plant communities are fairly resistant to experimentally manipulated GCDs in the short term (<10 y). In contrast, long-term (≥10 y) experiments show increasing community divergence of treatments from control conditions. Surprisingly, these community responses occurred with similar frequency across the GCD types manipulated in our database. However, community responses were more common when 3 or more GCDs were simultaneously manipulated, suggesting the emergence of additive or synergistic effects of multiple drivers, particularly over long time periods. In half of the cases, GCD manipulations caused a difference in community composition without a corresponding species richness difference, indicating that species reordering or replacement is an important mechanism of community responses to GCDs and should be given greater consideration when examining consequences of GCDs for the biodiversity–ecosystem function relationship. Human activities are currently driving unparalleled global changes worldwide. Our analyses provide the most comprehensive evidence to date that these human activities may have widespread impacts on plant community composition globally, which will increase in frequency over time and be greater in areas where communities face multiple GCDs simultaneously.
|
|
| 3. |
- Niederberger, C., et al.
(författare)
-
Forty years of IVF
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Fertility and Sterility. - : Elsevier BV. - 0015-0282. ; 110:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This monograph, written by the pioneers of IVF and reproductive medicine, celebrates the history, achievements, and medical advancements made over the last 40 years in this rapidly growing field.
|
|
| 4. |
- Wortel, Meike T., et al.
(författare)
-
Towards evolutionary predictions : current promises and challenges
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Evolutionary Applications. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1752-4571. ; 16:1, s. 3-21
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Evolution has traditionally been a historical and descriptive science, and predicting future evolutionary processes has long been considered impossible. However, evolutionary predictions are increasingly being developed and used in medicine, agriculture, biotechnology and conservation biology. Evolutionary predictions may be used for different purposes, such as to prepare for the future, to try and change the course of evolution or to determine how well we understand evolutionary processes. Similarly, the exact aspect of the evolved population that we want to predict may also differ. For example, we could try to predict which genotype will dominate, the fitness of the population or the extinction probability of a population. In addition, there are many uses of evolutionary predictions that may not always be recognized as such. The main goal of this review is to increase awareness of methods and data in different research fields by showing the breadth of situations in which evolutionary predictions are made. We describe how diverse evolutionary predictions share a common structure described by the predictive scope, time scale and precision. Then, by using examples ranging from SARS-CoV2 and influenza to CRISPR-based gene drives and sustainable product formation in biotechnology, we discuss the methods for predicting evolution, the factors that affect predictability and how predictions can be used to prevent evolution in undesirable directions or to promote beneficial evolution (i.e. evolutionary control). We hope that this review will stimulate collaboration between fields by establishing a common language for evolutionary predictions.
|
|
| 5. |
- de Wert, Guido, et al.
(författare)
-
Human germline gene editing : Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Human Genetics. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 1018-4813 .- 1476-5438. ; 26:4, s. 445-449
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, first of all for somatic gene editing but in theory also for germline gene editing (GLGE). GLGE is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if GLGE would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique can help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. After consulting its membership and experts, this final version of the Recommendations was endorsed by the Executive Committee and the Board of the respective Societies in May 2017. Taking account of ethical arguments, we argue that both basic and pre-clinical research regarding GLGE can be justified, with conditions. Furthermore, while clinical GLGE would be totally premature, it might become a responsible intervention in the future, but only after adequate pre-clinical research. Safety of the child and future generations is a major concern. Future discussions must also address priorities among reproductive and potential non-reproductive alternatives, such as PGD and somatic editing, if that would be safe and successful. The prohibition of human germline modification, however, needs renewed discussion among relevant stakeholders, including the general public and legislators.
|
|
| 6. |
- de Wert, Guido, et al.
(författare)
-
Human germline gene editing. Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE
- 2018
-
Ingår i: HUMAN REPRODUCTION OPEN. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2399-3529. ; 2018:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, first of all for somatic gene editing but in theory also for germline gene editing (GLGE). GLGE is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if GLGE would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique can help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. After consulting its membership and experts, this final version of the Recommendations was endorsed by the Executive Committee and the Board of the respective Societies in May 2017. Taking account of ethical arguments, we argue that both basic and pre-clinical research regarding human GLGE can be justified, with conditions. Furthermore, while clinical GLGE would be totally premature, it might become a responsible intervention in the future, but only after adequate pre-clinical research. Safety of the child and future generations is a major concern. Future discussions must also address priorities among reproductive and potential non-reproductive alternatives, such as PGD and somatic editing, if that would be safe and successful. The prohibition of human germline modification, however, needs renewed discussion among relevant stakeholders, including the general public and legislators.
|
|
| 7. |
- de Wert, Guido, et al.
(författare)
-
Responsible innovation in human germline gene editing. Background document to the recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE
- 2018
-
Ingår i: HUMAN REPRODUCTION OPEN. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2399-3529. ; 2018:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Technological developments in gene editing raise high expectations for clinical applications, including editing of the germline. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) together developed a Background document and Recommendations to inform and stimulate ongoing societal debates. This document provides the background to the Recommendations. Germline gene editing is currently not allowed in many countries. This makes clinical applications in these countries impossible now, even if germline gene editing would become safe and effective. What were the arguments behind this legislation, and are they still convincing? If a technique could help to avoid serious genetic disorders, in a safe and effective way, would this be a reason to reconsider earlier standpoints? This Background document summarizes the scientific developments and expectations regarding germline gene editing, legal regulations at the European level, and ethics for three different settings (basic research, pre-clinical research and clinical applications). In ethical terms, we argue that the deontological objections (e.g. gene editing goes against nature) do not seem convincing while consequentialist objections (e.g. safety for the children thus conceived and following generations) require research, not all of which is allowed in the current legal situation in European countries. Development of this Background document and Recommendations reflects the responsibility to help society understand and debate the full range of possible implications of the new technologies, and to contribute to regulations that are adapted to the dynamics of the field while taking account of ethical considerations and societal concerns.
|
|
| 8. |
- Goossens, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Fertility preservation in boys: recent developments and new insights †
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human reproduction open. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2399-3529. ; 2020:3, s. hoaa016-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUNDInfertility is an important side effect of treatments used for cancer and other non-malignant conditions in males. This may be due to the loss of spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) and/or altered functionality of testicular somatic cells (e.g. Sertoli cells, Leydig cells). Whereas sperm cryopreservation is the first-line procedure to preserve fertility in post-pubertal males, this option does not exist for prepubertal boys. For patients unable to produce sperm and at high risk of losing their fertility, testicular tissue freezing is now proposed as an alternative experimental option to safeguard their fertility.OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALEWith this review, we aim to provide an update on clinical practices and experimental methods, as well as to describe patient management inclusion strategies used to preserve and restore the fertility of prepubertal boys at high risk of fertility loss.SEARCH METHODSBased on the expertise of the participating centres and a literature search of the progress in clinical practices, patient management strategies and experimental methods used to preserve and restore the fertility of prepubertal boys at high risk of fertility loss were identified. In addition, a survey was conducted amongst European and North American centres/networks that have published papers on their testicular tissue banking activity.OUTCOMESSince the first publication on murine SSC transplantation in 1994, remarkable progress has been made towards clinical application: cryopreservation protocols for testicular tissue have been developed in animal models and are now offered to patients in clinics as a still experimental procedure. Transplantation methods have been adapted for human testis, and the efficiency and safety of the technique are being evaluated in mouse and primate models. However, important practical, medical and ethical issues must be resolved before fertility restoration can be applied in the clinic.Since the previous survey conducted in 2012, the implementation of testicular tissue cryopreservation as a means to preserve the fertility of prepubertal boys has increased. Data have been collected from 24 co-ordinating centres worldwide, which are actively offering testis tissue cryobanking to safeguard the future fertility of boys. More than 1033 young patients (age range 3 months to 18 years) have already undergone testicular tissue retrieval and storage for fertility preservation.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONThe review does not include the data of all reproductive centres worldwide. Other centres might be offering testicular tissue cryopreservation. Therefore, the numbers might be not representative for the entire field in reproductive medicine and biology worldwide. The key ethical issue regarding fertility preservation in prepubertal boys remains the experimental nature of the intervention.WIDER IMPLICATIONSThe revised procedures can be implemented by the multi-disciplinary teams offering and/or developing treatment strategies to preserve the fertility of prepubertal boys who have a high risk of fertility loss.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)The work was funded by ESHRE. None of the authors has a conflict of interest.
|
|
| 9. |
- Pennings, M., et al.
(författare)
-
KIF1A variants are a frequent cause of autosomal dominant hereditary spastic paraplegia
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Human Genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1018-4813 .- 1476-5438. ; 28, s. 40-49
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Variants in the KIF1A gene can cause autosomal recessive spastic paraplegia 30, autosomal recessive hereditary sensory neuropathy, or autosomal (de novo) dominant mental retardation type 9. More recently, variants in KIF1A have also been described in a few cases with autosomal dominant spastic paraplegia. Here, we describe 20 KIF1A variants in 24 patients from a clinical exome sequencing cohort of 347 individuals with a mostly ‘pure’ spastic paraplegia. In these patients, spastic paraplegia was slowly progressive and mostly pure, but with a highly variable disease onset (0–57 years). Segregation analyses showed a de novo occurrence in seven cases, and a dominant inheritance pattern in 11 families. The motor domain of KIF1A is a hotspot for disease causing variants in autosomal dominant spastic paraplegia, similar to mental retardation type 9 and recessive spastic paraplegia type 30. However, unlike these allelic disorders, dominant spastic paraplegia was also caused by loss-of-function variants outside this domain in six families. Finally, three missense variants were outside the motor domain and need further characterization. In conclusion, KIF1A variants are a frequent cause of autosomal dominant spastic paraplegia in our cohort (6–7%). The identification of KIF1A loss-of-function variants suggests haploinsufficiency as a possible mechanism in autosomal dominant spastic paraplegia. © 2019, The Author(s).
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
