logo
Scientists use DNA from three people to protect babies from rare disease

Scientists use DNA from three people to protect babies from rare disease

Yahoo17-07-2025
LONDON - A pioneering IVF technique combining DNA from three people to protect a baby from a rare genetic disease has been used in Britain, leading to a healthy cohort of eight babies with no sign of serious disease, scientists said Wednesday.
Four girls and four boys, including one set of twins, were born healthy after scientists used the treatment to prevent mothers with mutations in their mitochondrial DNA from transmitting the condition to their children, scientists at Newcastle University in northern England said in a statement Wednesday.
Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post.
The authors say it represents the first study into an entire cohort of babies and paves the way for further research on their health outcomes, as well as improved medical techniques for that specific treatment - which is granted approval in the United Kingdom on a case-by-case basis.
Mitochondria are commonly known as the 'powerhouse of the cell' and produce energy required for major parts of the body to function. However, small mutations in mitochondrial DNA can affect tissues with high-energy demands such as the heart, muscle and brain, causing devastating disease and, in some cases, death.
Mitochondrial DNA is inherited from the mother, and although males can be affected, they do not transmit the disease, researchers said. About 1 in 5,000 babies are born worldwide each year with mutations that can cause the disease, researchers said.
Now, scientists have detailed how an IVF technique called pronuclear transfer has been used to combine the DNA of three people to reduce the risk of mitochondrial disease being passed down the generations, in accompanying studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday.
The technique uses 99.9 percent of the DNA from a man and woman, with another 0.1 percent from a second woman's donor egg. It works by transplanting the nuclear genome of an egg from the mother with the condition - which contains genes essential for individual characteristics like hair color and height - to an egg donated by an unaffected woman that has had its nuclear genome removed, researchers said.
The resulting embryo inherits nuclear DNA from its two parents, but the mitochondrial DNA comes from the donated egg, researchers said. The treatment was offered to certain women at very high risk of passing on serious mitochondrial disease, in accordance with U.K. regulations that assess each application for the procedure on a case-by-case basis.
The eight infants - who range in age from newborn to over 2 years old - were assessed to be healthy, meeting developmental milestones and reported levels of mitochondrial disease-causing mutations that were undetectable or at levels unlikely to cause disease, the Newcastle University statement said. Three of the babies had levels of disease-causing mitochondrial DNA mutations of up to 20 percent, which is still below the 80 percent threshold for clinical disease, it added.
Doug Turnbull, a neurologist at Newcastle University who co-wrote the study, said it was the first to document a 'cohort' of children who had received the treatment. He said it is the result of an extremely cautious approach by scientists and regulators that has been more than two decades in the making.
'People have used very similar techniques, but nobody's quite used this particular technique,' he told The Washington Post in a phone interview Thursday. 'It's just absolutely critical when you're doing a new technique to be cautious and to make sure … it's as safe and efficient as possible.'
The procedure has also raised concern from some, including religious groups, about its ethics and the fear that it could open the door to further genetic modification.
Peter Thompson, chief executive of the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, which regulates the process in Britain, said that only people with a 'very high risk' of passing on a serious mitochondrial disease are eligible for the treatment and that every application is assessed individually. As of July 1, 35 patients have been granted approval by U.K. authorities to proceed with the treatment since it was first licensed in 2017.
'These robust but flexible regulatory processes allow the technique to be used safely for the purposes that Parliament agreed in 2015,' Thompson said in a statement in response to Wednesday's news.
Scientists have cautiously welcomed the findings, while stressing the importance of long-term monitoring and raising the prospect of whether the procedure offers advantages over embryo screening for genetic disease. Others have raised the issue of cost in the long-term project that is supported by Britain's National Health Service and medical charity the Wellcome Trust, among other groups.
Mary Herbert, who is professor of reproductive biology at Newcastle University and lead author of the research paper, said 'the findings give grounds for optimism' but further research is needed to 'bridge the gap' between reducing risk of mitochondrial disease and preventing it.
Turnbull said the team is also looking to improve medical techniques and follow up with the children involved for as long as possible to track their health outcomes. He said researchers are offering health assessments for five years, but it 'would be lovely to be able to follow them up much longer.'
Joanna Poulton, a professor in mitochondrial genetics at the University of Oxford, who was not involved in the research, said 'time will tell' whether the treatment results in 'dramatic clinical advance.'
The births come amid a wider boom in genomic sequencing and IVF start-ups that have sparked a wider debate about the ethics and science behind embryo screening and genetic preselection.
In the United States, those undertaking IVF typically test for rare genetic disorders stemming from a single gene mutation, such as cystic fibrosis, or chromosomal abnormalities such as Down syndrome. The use of donor mitochondria, however, is not permitted under U.S. regulations. In Britain, the creation of babies using DNA from three people was first made legal in 2015, hailed for its ability to prevent serious disease being passed on.
Related Content
An asylum seeker abandons her claim and leaves Trump's America
He may have stopped Trump's would-be assassin. Now he's telling his story.
He seeded clouds over Texas. Then came the conspiracy theories.
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

AstraZeneca increasing focus on US market, as it is 'first to provide access to patients': CFO
AstraZeneca increasing focus on US market, as it is 'first to provide access to patients': CFO

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

AstraZeneca increasing focus on US market, as it is 'first to provide access to patients': CFO

AstraZeneca (AZN) is shifting its focus to the US, calling itself an "American company" on Tuesday as it ramps up manufacturing and proposes price cuts for the US market. CEO Pascal Soriot told reporters Tuesday that the company, which reported its best quarter to date on the same day, "We are a very American company. We are global, but we are certainly very much rooted and present in the US." Tuesday's comment comes as the UK-based and UK-listed company is reportedly considering moving its main stock market listing to New York. In addition, the company recently announced $50 billion in manufacturing commitments in the US — including a brand-new facility in Virginia — and stated its goal of having 50% of its revenue come from the US by 2030. AstraZeneca's top-selling drugs include cancer drug Tagrisso and diabetes drug Farxiga. CFO Aradhana Sarin told Yahoo Finance that the moves are independent of Trump's tariff threats of up to 200% on the pharmaceutical industry. "We have been thinking about our strategic manufacturing — this probably goes back 3 or 4 years," she said. "So, post-COVID, we made a strategic decision because we're such a global company that we needed to have segregated supply chains." "This new facility [in Virginia] that we announced was part of the plan anyway," she added. "But that's separate, it's nothing to do with tariffs. It's actually based on the demand that we see potentially for our new cardiovascular medicine." And there are other reasons why the market is more appealing — including how quickly products reach patients in the US versus other countries. "When new therapies come ... the US market is almost the first to provide access to patients. Physicians ... are really into looking at the data," Sarin said, explaining why the US market is more appealing to pharma than other markets. AstraZeneca is also focused on other strategies that appeal to the US government, including price cuts. It sent a proposal to the US government on price reductions for some of its drugs. The proposal is under review, Soriot said. Anjalee Khemlani is the senior health reporter at Yahoo Finance, covering all things pharma, insurance, provider services, digital health, PBMs, and health policy and politics. That includes GLP-1s, of course. Follow Anjalee as AnjKhem on social media platforms X, LinkedIn, and Bluesky @AnjKhem. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest health industry news and events impacting stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

We're More Likely Than Ever to See Ourselves as Sick. Why?
We're More Likely Than Ever to See Ourselves as Sick. Why?

New York Times

time3 hours ago

  • New York Times

We're More Likely Than Ever to See Ourselves as Sick. Why?

In 1983, nearly a decade before the Human Genome Project was even started and two decades before it was completed, scientists mapped the chromosomal abnormality responsible for Huntington's disease. The disease was then, as it is now, both incurable and intolerable: typically an inexorable descent into cognitive and neurological dysfunction, usually beginning in middle age and ending only after a long period of profound decline — often involuntary movements, followed by the inability to talk or communicate or, eventually, move. When a predictive test was first introduced in 1986, it was expected that perhaps as many as three-quarters of those at risk would choose to take it to discover what lay ahead for them — to be relieved or to begin planning, but in either case resolving uncertain anxiety into a more concrete sense of medical fate. Instead, the Irish neurologist Suzanne O'Sullivan writes in 'The Age of Diagnosis,' published this spring, roughly nine out of every 10 at-risk people offered the test around the world decline it — preferring to live with ignorance. Perhaps, she suggests, we'd all be better off if we followed their lead, embracing uncertainty and ambiguity rather than always rushing to diagnose every deviation from 'normal.' A collection of intimate case studies somewhat in the tradition of Oliver Sacks, 'The Age of Diagnosis' ranges widely, recounting the stories of patients reckoning not just with Huntington's but also with cancer and Lyme disease and long Covid. But it delivers its takeaway message boldly: that in our eagerness to help, we have grown too promiscuous in our impulse to pathologize. For certain conditions, O'Sullivan suggests, you can tally the cost in excessive, sometimes counterproductive care: Reports have indicated that perhaps one-third of breast cancer treatments are unnecessary, that certain prostate-cancer screening programs have saved relatively few lives, and that what is now called 'prediabetes' may resolve itself without any intervention in nearly 60 percent of cases. In the realm of mental health, some clinicians and researchers worry that diagnosis can be 'self-fulfilling,' through what is technically called 'iatrogenic' risk: that the very fact of identifying a disorder can make patients feel less well, less capable, more burdened and less independent than when they walked into the doctor's office wondering what the hell was going on. Some researchers, though, have emphasized the inverse phenomenon: that patients are relieved to have a name and feel empowered by a diagnosis, even if there isn't anything for them to do about it. And for me, 'The Age of Diagnosis' is too broad a polemic — given how many afflictions remain mysterious, how much suffering endures without a name, and how often we underdiagnose and undertreat even well-understood conditions. But the book very helpfully puts its finger on what is, I think, a key to understanding an awful lot of modern social panic. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Men Born in the Summer Are More Likely to Be Depressed, Study Finds
Men Born in the Summer Are More Likely to Be Depressed, Study Finds

Gizmodo

time4 hours ago

  • Gizmodo

Men Born in the Summer Are More Likely to Be Depressed, Study Finds

There really might be something to the idea of summertime sadness, at least for boys. A study finds that men born in the summer are more vulnerable to developing depression than men born at other times of the year. Researchers at the Kwantlen Polytechnic University in British Columbia, Canada, conducted the study, an international survey of adults. They found that men, but not women, were more likely to experience depression symptoms later in life if their birth occurred in the summer compared to other seasons. The findings suggest that mothers are exposed to important environmental risk factors that vary throughout the calendar year, the authors say, including levels of sunshine. Study author Mika Mokkonen was inspired to look into this topic by the kind of question you'd get making small talk at a party. 'The initial spark of the idea for this research arose when someone asked me if I believed in horoscopes. It got me wondering if there could potentially be a biological basis for them, in terms of how a person's birthday could be associated with physiological or mental features,' he told Gizmodo. Doctors have long known that seasonality can affect our current mental health—the clearest example being seasonal affective disorder, a type of depression that typically emerges during the winter months (summer SAD does exist, though). But there's only been limited research looking at a possible link between birth timing and mental health, according to Mokkonen. Mokkonen and his team conducted an online survey of 303 adults. Participants provided basic demographic information like age and answered two questionnaires commonly used to assess a person's level of anxiety and depression. After controlling for factors like age and income, the researchers found that summer-born men (specifically people whose biological sex was male) were noticeably more likely to report depression symptoms than men born anytime else. The team's findings were published Wednesday in the journal PLOS Mental Health. These sorts of studies can only show a correlation between any two things (seasonality at birth and depression in this case) and not decidedly prove that being born in the summer can shape men's mental health. The researchers also admit they only collected survey responses over a brief two-month period in early 2024, meaning they might not have been able to capture people's 'variations in depression and anxiety scores.' And while some of the participants did come from different countries, a substantial proportion were college students. It's fair to say this is far from a thorough or complete study. So clearly more research is needed to replicate and expand on this preliminary finding. There's also the unanswered and likely complex question of why being born in the summer could be specifically worse for men but not women. Seasonality has long played a role in affecting the survival of most species, Mokkonen noted. And while people today are generally more sheltered from the harshest elements of the outside world than our hunter-gatherer ancestors were, the changing aspects of the seasons might still be enough to subtly influence us as we're developing in the womb. 'I would say it is possibly related to the environmental conditions of the mother during pregnancy,' Mokkonen said. 'Consider conditions like temperature and sunlight—how do those conditions vary across the year?' The researchers plan to continue investigating how other maternal factors, including the mother's diet and circulating hormone levels, can affect the later health of their children. Mokkonen also points out that regardless of the season they were born in, a majority of the people in their study reported having at least some symptoms of anxiety (66%) and depression (84%). In other words, while the seasons may hold some sway over us, some things are unfortunately common across the board.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store