BioSocieties

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 257–281 | Cite as

Spliced: Boundary-work and the establishment of human gene therapy

Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

Human gene therapy (HGT) aims to cure disease by inserting or editing the DNA of patients with genetic conditions. Since foundational genetic techniques came into use in the 1970s, the field has developed to the point that now three therapies have market approval, and over 1800 clinical trials have been initiated. In this article I present a brief history of HGT, showing how the ethical and practical viability of the field was achieved by key scientific and regulatory actors. These parties carefully articulated gene therapy’s scope, limiting it to therapeutic interventions on somatic cells, and cultivated alliances and divisions that bolstered the field’s legitimacy. At times these measures faltered, and then practitioners and sometimes patients would invoke an ethical imperative, posing gene therapy as the best solution to life and death problems. I suggest that we consider how boundary-work stretches out from science to enlist diverse publics, social formations and the natural world in the pursuit of legitimacy.

Keywords

human gene therapy history biotechnology genomics gene transfer boundary-work 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article benefited greatly from feedback offered by Jesper Lassen, Peter Sandøe, Samuel Taylor-Alexander and the Work in Progress group led by Silvia Camporesi at KCL’s Department of Social Science Health and Medicine. This project, as part of the Consortium for Designer Organisms, is funded by the University of Copenhagen’s Excellence Fund for Interdisciplinary Research.

References

  1. AdSAT Working Group (2002) Assessment of adenoviral vector safety and toxicity: Report of the national institutes of health Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (NIH Report). Human Gene Therapy 13(1): 3–13.Google Scholar
  2. Allan, D.S. and Dubé, I.D. (1996) Symposium highlights: Future prospects for gene therapy. Transfusion Science 17(1): 203–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amati, M.P. et al (2003) EMEA and gene therapy medicinal products development in the European Union. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 2003(1): 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, W.F. and Fletcher, J.C. (1980) Gene therapy in human beings: When is it ethical to begin? New England Journal of Medicine 303(22): 1293–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, W.F. (1982) Human Genetic Engineering: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology. (Testimonial) U.S. House of Representatives, 97th Congress, 2nd Session, no. 170, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  6. Anonymous (1988) Gene therapy in man: Recommendations of the European medical research councils. The Lancet 331(8597): 1271–1272.Google Scholar
  7. Anonymous (2002) The trials of gene therapy. Nature 420(6912): 107.Google Scholar
  8. Barber, S. and Border, P. (2015) Mitochondrial donation. (Standard Note SN/SC/6833) House of Commons Library.Google Scholar
  9. Batshaw, M.L., Wilson, J.M., Raper, S., Yudkoff, M. and Robinson, M.B. (1999) Recombinant adenovirus gene transfer in adults with partial Ornithine Transcarbamylase deficiency (OTCD). Human Gene Therapy 10(14): 2419–2437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berg, P. et al (1974) Potential biohazards of recombinant DNA molecules. Science 185(4148): 303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berg, P. and Singer, M.F. (1995) The recombinant DNA controversy: Twenty years later. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 92(20): 9011–9013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blaese, M.R. et al (1999) T-lymphocyte-directed gene therapy for ADA-SCID: Initial trial results after four years. Science 270(5235): 475–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bordignon, C. et al (1993) Clinical protocol: Transfer of the ADA gene into bone marrow cells and peripheral blood lymphocytes for the treatment of patients affected by ADA-deficient SCID. Human Gene Therapy 4(4): 513–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bordignon, C. et al (1995) Gene therapy in peripheral blood lymphocytes and bone marrow for ADA immunodeficient patients. Science 270(5235): 470–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bowker, G.C. and Star, S.L. (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bryant, L.M. et al (2013) Lessons learned from the clinical development and market authorization of Glybera. Human Gene Therapy Clinical Development 24(2): 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Büning, H. (2013) Gene therapy enters the pharma market: The short story of a long journey. EMBO Molecular Medicine 5(1): 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Butler, D. (1994) Call for risk/benefit study of gene therapy. Nature 372(6508): 716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, P., Maranto, G., Cantor, C.R., Glantz, L.H. and Miller, F.H. (1998) Gene therapy: Legal, financial and ethical issues. Boston University Journal of Science and Technology Law 4(3): 110.Google Scholar
  20. Cavazzana-Calvo, M. et al (2000) Gene therapy of human severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)-X1 disease. Science 288(5466): 669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cavazzana-Calvo, M.A., Thrasher, A. and Mavilio, F. (2004) The future of gene therapy: Balancing the risks and benefits of clinical trials. Nature 427(6977): 779–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Check, E. (2003) Harmful potential of viral vectors fuels doubt over gene therapy. Nature 423(6940): 573–574.Google Scholar
  23. Churchill, L.R., Collins, M.L., King, N.M.P., Pemberton, S.G. and Wailoo, K.A. (1998) Genetic research as ‘therapy’: Implications of ‘gene therapy’ for informed consent. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 26(1): 38–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Clothier Committee (1992) Report of the committee on the ethics of gene therapy. Human Gene Therapy 3(5): 519–523.Google Scholar
  25. Cohen-Haguenauer, O. (1992) Gene therapy in Europe. Transfusion Science 17(1): 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Comfort, N. (2013) The Science of Human Perfection: How Genes became the Heart of American Medicine. New Haven, CT, London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Committee on Government Reforms (2000) Human Subject Research Protections. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reforms. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  28. Couzin, J. and Kaiser, J. (2005) As Gelsinger case ends, gene therapy suffers another blow. Science 307(5712): 1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Culver, K.W. et al (1991) Correction of ADA deficiency in human T-lymphoctyes using retroviral-mediated gene transfer. Transplantation Proceedings. 23(1): 170–171.Google Scholar
  30. Curnutte, M. and Testa, G. (2010) Consuming genomes: Scientific and social innovation in direct-to-consumer genetic testing. New Genetics and Society 31(2): 159–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Deakin, C.T., Alexander, I.E. and Kerridge, I. (2009) Accepting risk in clinical research: Is the gene therapy field becoming too risk averse? Molecular Therapy 17(11): 1842–1848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Devlin, H. (2015) Britain’s House of Lords approves conception of three-parent babies. The Guardian, 24 February, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/24/uk-house-of-lords-approves-conception-of-three-person-babies.
  33. Dworkin, R.B. (1990) Science, society, and the expert town meeting: Some comments on Asilomar. Southern California Law Review 51(6): 1471–1482.Google Scholar
  34. Edelstein, M.L., Abedi, M.R. and Wixon, J. (2007) Gene therapy clinical trials worldwide to 2007 – An update. The Journal of Gene Medicine 9(10): 833–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ehrich, K., Williams, C., Scott, R., Sandall, J. and Farsides, B. (2006) Social welfare, genetic welfare? Boundary work in the IVF-PGD clinic. Social Science and Medicine 63(5): 1213–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. EMA (European Medicines Agency) (2012) Glybera, alipogene tiparvovec. EPAR summary for the public, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  37. Emery, D.W. (2004) Gene therapy for genetic disease: On the horizon. Clinical and Applied Immunology Reviews 4(6): 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Epstein, S. (1995) Impure Science: AIDS, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2001) Directive 2001/20/EC.Google Scholar
  40. Finkler, K. (2000) Experiencing the New Genetics: Family and Kinship on the Medical Frontier. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fischer, M.M.J. (2004) Emergent Forms of Life and the Anthropological Voice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Fletcher, J.C. (1990) Evolution of ethical debate about human gene therapy. Human Gene Therapy 1(1): 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Fortun, M. (2008) Promising Genomics: Iceland and deCODE Genetics in a World of Speculation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  44. Franklin, S. and Roberts, C. (2006) Born and Made: An Ethnography of Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis. Princeton, NJ; Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Frederikson, D.S. (1991) Asilomar and recombinant DNA: The end of the beginning. In: K.E. Hanna (ed.) Biomedical Politics. Washington DC: National Academies Press, pp. 258–298.Google Scholar
  46. Friedman, T. (1992) A brief history of human gene therapy. Nature Genetics 2(2): 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Frist, B. (2002) Protecting Human Subjects in Research: Are Current Safeguards Accurate? Hearing before the Subcommittee on Public Health of the Committee of Health, Education, Labour and Pensions United States Senate. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  48. Frith, L., Jacoby, A. and Gabbay, M. (2011) Ethical boundary work in the infertility clinic. Sociology of Health and Illness 33(4): 570–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gaspar, H.B. et al (2011) Long-term persistence of polyclonal T cell repertoire after gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. Science Translational Medicine 3(97): 97–99.Google Scholar
  50. Gibbon, S. (2002) Re-examining geneticization: Family trees in breast cancer genetics. Science as Culture 11(4): 429–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gieryn, T. (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in the professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gieryn, T. (1991) Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  53. Ginn, S.L., Alexander, I.E., Edelstein, M.L., Abedi, M.R. and Wixon, J. (2013) Gene therapy clinical trials worldwide to 2012 – An update. Journal of Gene Medicine 15(2): 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Genetic Alliance UK (2014) Avoiding mitochondrial disease. Response to the Nuffield Council of Bioethics, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  55. Gershon, D. (1990) Clinical trials next step. Nature 344(6261): 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Gore, A. (1982) Human Genetic Engineering: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology. Opening address, U.S. House of Representatives, 97th Congress, 2nd Session, no. 170, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  57. Gore, A. (1984) Human Gene Therapy: A Background Paper. Washington DC: U.S. Congree, Office of Technology Assessment.Google Scholar
  58. Grobhans, H. (2000) Gene therapy – When a simple concept meets a complex reality. Functional Integrative Genomics 1(2): 142–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hacein-Bay-Abina, S. et al (2008) Insertional oncogenesis in 4 patients after retrovirus-mediated gene therapy of SCID-X1. Journal of Clinical Investigation 118(9): 3132–3142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hacein-Bay-Abina, S., von Kalle, C. and Schmidt, M. (2003a) A serious adverse event after successful gene therapy for X-Linked severe combined immunodeficiency. New England Journal of Medicine 348(3): 255–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hacein-Bay-Abina, S. et al (2003b) LMO2-associated clonal T-cell proliferation in two patients after gene therapy for SCID-X1. Science 302(5644): 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Hedgecoe, A. (2001) Schitzophrenia and the narrative of enlightened geneticisation. Social Studies of Science 31(6): 875–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Horst, M. (2007) Public expectations of gene therapy: Scientific futures and their performative effects on scientific citizenship. Science, Technology and Human Values 32(2): 150–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (2014) Mitochondrial donation. Correspondence relating to evidence hearing, 22 October.Google Scholar
  65. Human Fertilisation and Embryo Authority (2014) Mitochondrial donation: An introductory briefing note, http://www.hfea.gov.uk/6896.html.
  66. Inhorn, M.C. and Birenbaum-Carmeli, D. (2008) Assisted reproductive technologies and culture change. Annual Review of Anthropology 37: 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Isasi, R.M., Nguyen, T.M. and Knoppers, B.M. (2006) National Regulatory Frameworks Regarding Human Genetic Modification Technologies. A report for the Genetics and Public Policy Centre, Montreal.Google Scholar
  68. Kaiser, J. (2005) Panel urges limits on X-SCID trials. Science 307(5715): 1544–1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kay, L.E. (2000) Who Wrote the Book of Life? A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Keller, E.F. (2000) The Century of the Gene. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. and Amos, A. (1998) Eugenics and the new genetics in Britain: Examining contemporary professionals accounts. Science, Technology and Human Values 23(2): 175–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Kerr, A. and Shakespeare, T. (2002) Genetic Politics: From Genetics to Genome. Cheltenham, UK: New Clarion Press.Google Scholar
  73. Kimmelman, J. (2009) Gene Transfer and the Ethics of First-in-Human Research: Lost in Translation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Kim, S., Peng, Z. and Kaneda, Y. (2007) Current status of gene therapy in Asia. Molecular Therapy 16(2): 237–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Klug, B., Celis, P., Carr, M. and Reinhardt, J. (2012) Regulatory structures for gene therapy medicinal products in the European Union. Methods in Enzymology 507: 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Koenig, B. (1988) The technological imperative in medical practice: The social creation of a ‘routine’ treatment. In: M. Lock and R. Gordon (eds.) Biomedicine Examined. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  78. Kohn, D.B. and Gänsbacher, D. (2003) Letter to the editors of Nature from the American Society of Gene Therapy and the European Society of Gene Therapy. Journal of Gene Medicine 5(7): 641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Landecker, H. (2007) Culturing Life: How Cells Became Technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Lehrman, S. (1995) … but seeks ‘practical’ gene therapy deals. Nature 378(6552): 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Liang, P. et al (2015) CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein and Cell 6(5): 363–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Lindee, S. (2005) Moments of Truth in Genetic Medicine. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Lippman, A. (1992) Led astray by genetic maps: The cartography of the human genome project and healthcare. Social Science and Medicine 39(12): 1469–1476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lu, D.R. et al (1993) Stage 1 clinical trial of gene therapy for haemophilia B. Science in China 36(11): 1342–1351.Google Scholar
  86. Lock, M. (2005) Eclipse of the gene and the return of divination. Current Anthropology 46(S48): S47–S70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lock, M. (2008) Biomedical technologies, cultural horizons and contested boundaries. In: E.J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Third Edition. Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  88. Lock, M. (2015) Comprehending the body in the era of the epigenome. Current Anthropology 56(2): 151–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Marshall, E. (1996) Gene therapy’s growing pains. Science 269(5227): 1050–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Martin, P. (1999) Genes as drugs: The social shaping of gene therapy and the reconstruction of genetic disease. Sociology of Health and Illness 21(5): 517–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Miller, H. (1995) Overregulation is an unnecessary hindrance to human gene therapy. Human Gene Therapy 6(11): 1361–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Miller, D.A. (1992) Human gene therapy comes of age. Nature 357(6368): 455–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Mitchell, R. and Waldby, C. (2010) National biobanks: Clinical labour, risk production, and the creation of biovalue. Science, Technology and Human Values 35(3): 330–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Nelkin, D. and Lindee, S. (1995) The DNA Mystique: The Gene as Cultural Icon. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  95. NIH (2013) NIH guidelines for research involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules, http://oba.od.nih.gov, accessed November 2013.
  96. Novas, C. and Rose, N. (2000) Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society 29(4): 485–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. O’Reilly, M. et al (2013) NIH oversight of human gene transfer research involving retroviral, lentiviral, and adeno-associated virus vectors and the role of the NIH Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee. Methods in Enzymology 507: 313–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Orkin, S. and Motulsky, A. (1995) Report and recommendations of the panel to assess the NIH investment in research on gene therapy. Bulletin of Medical Ethics 116: 10–11.Google Scholar
  99. President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1982) Splicing Life: A. Report on the Social and Ethical Issues of Genetic Engineering with Human Beings. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  100. Rabeharisoa, V. and Callon, M. (2002) The Involvement of Patients’ Associations in Research. UNESCO report, Oxford, UK and Malden, MA.Google Scholar
  101. Rabinow, P. (1996) Making PCR: A Story of Biotechnology. Chicago, IL; London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  102. Randall, C., Mandelbaum, B. and Kelly, T. (1980) Letter from three general secretaries. Letter to congress, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  103. Raper, S.E. et al (2003) Fatal systemic inflammatory response syndrome in a ornithine transcarbamylase deficient patient following adenoviral gene transfer. Molecular Genetics and Metabolism 80(1–2): 148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Rapp, R. (1999) Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: Women and Prenatal Diagnosis. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  105. Schmek, H.M. (1981) U.S. agency disciplines gene therapy researcher. The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/29/us/us-agency-disciplines-gene-splicing-researcher.html.
  106. Sheridan, C. (2011) Gene therapy finds its niche. Nature Biotechnology 29(2): 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Stockdale, A. (1999) Waiting for the cure: Mapping the social relations of human gene therapy research. Sociology of Health and Illness 21(5): 579–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Stolberg, S.G. (1999) The biotech death of Jesse Gelsinger. The New York Times Magazine, 28 November, http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/28/magazine/the-biotech-death-of-jesse-gelsinger.html?pagewanted=all.
  109. Taussig, K.-S. (2009) Ordinary Genomes: Science, Citizenship, and Genetic Identities?. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Thompson, C. (2005) Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  111. Uniqure (2012) uniQure’s Glybera® first gene therapy approved by European Commission. Press release. Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  112. Wade, N. (1981) Gene therapy caught in more entanglements. Science 212(4490): 24–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Wadman, M. (1995) Hyping results ‘could damage’ gene therapy. Nature 378(6558): 655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Wailoo, K. and Pemberton, S. (2006) The Troubled Dream of Genetic Medicine: Ethnicity and Innovation in Tay-Sachs, Cystic Fibrosis, and Sickle Cell Disease. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Wainwright, S.P., Williams, C., Michael, M., Farsides, B. and Cribb, A. (2006) Ethical boundary work in the embryonic stem cell laboratory. Sociology of Health and Illness 28(6): 732–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Wilson, J. (2005) Gendicine: The first commercial gene therapy product. Human Gene Therapy 16(9): 1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Wilson, J.M. (2009) Lessons learned from the gene therapy trial for ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency. Molecular Genetics and Metabolism 96(4): 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Wilson, J.M. (2013) Bulls, bubbles, and biotech. Human Gene Therapy 24(7): 715–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Wolff, J.A. and Lederberg, J. (1994) An early history of gene transfer and therapy. Human Gene Therapy 5(4): 469–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Yarborough, M. and Sharp, R.R. (2009) Public trust and research a decade later: What have we learned since Jesse Gelsinger’s death? Molecular Genetics and Metabolism 97(1): 4–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Ylä-Herttuala, S. (2012) Endgame: Glybera finally recommended for approval as the first gene therapy drug in the European Union. Molecular Therapy 20(10): 1831–1832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Zallen, D.T. (2000) U.S. gene therapy in crisis. Genetics and Society 16(6): 272–275.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food and Resource Economics, The University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations