Precarious hope: Ethical considerations for offering experimental fetal therapies outside of research after initial studies in humans

Author:

Hendriks Saskia1,Althaus Janyne2,Atkinson Meredith A.3,Baschat Ahmet A.4,Berkman Benjamin E.15,Grady Christine1,Wasserman David1,Wendler David1,Miller Jena L.4

Affiliation:

1. Department of Bioethics NIH Clinical Center Bethesda Maryland USA

2. Department of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences University of Maryland Baltimore Maryland USA

3. Department of Pediatrics Division of Nephrology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore Maryland USA

4. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Center for Fetal Therapy Johns Hopkins University Baltimore Maryland USA

5. National Human Genome Research Institute Bethesda Maryland USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveRisks and benefits of experimental fetal therapies can remain uncertain after initial clinical studies, especially long‐term effects. Nevertheless, pregnant individuals may request them, hoping to benefit their future child. Guidance about offering experimental fetal therapies outside research (as “innovative therapy”) is limited, despite their ethical complexity. We propose points for clinicians and reviewers to consider when deciding whether and how to offer experimental fetal therapies as innovative therapies after initial clinical studies.MethodWe used conceptual analysis and a current case to develop points for consideration, grounded in broader debates on innovative therapy and the unique challenges associated with experimental fetal therapies.ResultsClinicians should evaluate whether offering experimental fetal therapies as innovative therapy is appropriate for a pregnant individual and their fetus. The anticipated risk‐benefit ratio for the fetus should be favorable. For the pregnant individual, risks may outweigh benefits, within reasonable limits. Medical resources should be sufficient to ensure appropriate care. Clinicians should support pregnant individuals in making informed choices. Clinicians offering innovative therapies with more than minimal risk should collect and report data on outcomes. Independent review should take place.ConclusionConsidering these points may advance the interests of fetuses, future children, and their families.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Genetics (clinical),Obstetrics and Gynecology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3