logo
Gene editing helped a desperately ill baby thrive. Scientists say it could someday treat millions

Gene editing helped a desperately ill baby thrive. Scientists say it could someday treat millions

CTV News15-05-2025

KJ Muldoon is seen after a follow-up dose of an experimental gene editing treatment in Philadelphia in April 2025. (Chloe Dawson/Children's Hospital of Philadelphia via AP)
A baby born with a rare and dangerous genetic disease is growing and thriving after getting an experimental gene editing treatment made just for him.
Researchers described the case in a new study, saying he's among the first to be successfully treated with a custom therapy that seeks to fix a tiny but critical error in his genetic code that kills half of affected infants. Though it may be a while before similar personalized treatments are available for others, doctors hope the technology can someday help the millions left behind even as genetic medicine has advanced because their conditions are so rare.
'This is the first step towards the use of gene editing therapies to treat a wide variety of rare genetic disorders for which there are currently no definitive medical treatments,' said Dr. Kiran Musunuru, a University of Pennsylvania gene editing expert who co-authored the study published Thursday in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The baby, KJ Muldoon of Clifton Heights, Pennsylvania, is one of 350 million people worldwide with rare diseases, most of which are genetic. He was diagnosed shortly after birth with severe CPS1 deficiency, estimated by some experts to affect around one in a million babies. Those infants lack an enzyme needed to help remove ammonia from the body, so it can build up in their blood and become toxic. A liver transplant is an option for some.
Knowing KJ's odds, parents Kyle and Nicole Muldoon, both 34, worried they could lose him.
'We were, like, you know, weighing all the options, asking all the questions for either the liver transplant, which is invasive, or something that's never been done before,' Nicole said.
'We prayed, we talked to people, we gathered information, and we eventually decided that this was the way we were going to go,' her husband added.
Within six months, the team at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine, along with their partners, created a therapy designed to correct KJ's faulty gene. They used CRISPR, the gene editing tool that won its inventors the Nobel Prize in 2020. Instead of cutting the DNA strand like the first CRISPR approaches, doctors employed a technique that flips the mutated DNA 'letter' — also known as a base — to the correct type. Known as 'base editing,' it reduces the risk of unintended genetic changes.
It's 'very exciting' that the team created the therapy so quickly, said gene therapy researcher Senthil Bhoopalan at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, who wasn't involved in the study. 'This really sets the pace and the benchmark for such approaches.'
In February, KJ got his first IV infusion with the gene editing therapy, delivered through tiny fatty droplets called lipid nanoparticles that are taken up by liver cells.
While the room was abuzz with excitement that day, 'he slept through the entire thing,' recalled study author Dr. Rebecca Ahrens-Nicklas, a gene therapy expert at CHOP.
After follow-up doses in March and April, KJ has been able to eat more normally and has recovered well from illnesses like colds, which can strain the body and exacerbate symptoms of CPS1. The 9 1/2-month old also takes less medication.
Considering his poor prognosis earlier, 'any time we see even the smallest milestone that he's meeting – like a little wave or rolling over – that's a big moment for us,' his mother said.
Still, researchers caution that it's only been a few months. They'll need to watch him for years.
'We're still very much in the early stages of understanding what this medication may have done for KJ,' Ahrens-Nicklas said. 'But every day, he's showing us signs that he's growing and thriving.'
Researchers hope what they learn from KJ will help other rare disease patients.
Gene therapies, which can be extremely expensive to develop, generally target more common disorders in part for simple financial reasons: more patients mean potentially more sales, which can help pay the development costs and generate more profit. The first CRISPR therapy approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for example, treats sickle cell disease, a painful blood disorder affecting millions worldwide.
Musunuru said his team's work — funded in part by the National Institutes of Health — showed that creating a custom treatment doesn't have to be prohibitively expensive. The cost was 'not far off' from the US$800,000-plus for an average liver transplant and related care, he said.
'As we get better and better at making these therapies and shorten the time frame even more, economies of scale will kick in and I would expect the costs to come down,' Musunuru said.
Scientists also won't have to redo all the initial work every time they create a customized therapy, Bhoopalan said, so this research 'sets the stage' for treating other rare conditions.
Carlos Moraes, a neurology professor at the University of Miami who wasn't involved with the study, said research like this opens the door to more advances.
'Once someone comes with a breakthrough like this, it will take no time' for other teams to apply the lessons and move forward, he said. 'There are barriers, but I predict that they are going to be crossed in the next five to 10 years. Then the whole field will move as a block because we're pretty much ready.'
———-
Laura Ungar, The Associated Press
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split
He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split

CBC

time6 hours ago

  • CBC

He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split

Billions of dollars lost in government contracts. A slew of regulatory headaches. These are just some of the ramifications Elon Musk could face over his fallout with U.S. President Donald Trump. The two men may have personally split, at least for now. But if Trump is seeking to retaliate against the tech billionaire, severing the relationship between Musk's many companies and the U.S. government could prove difficult, analysts say. "I would say the president has more cards than Musk does, but it doesn't mean that [Musk] doesn't have any," said Peter Hays, a lecturer of space policy and international affairs at George Washington University's Space Policy Institute. Both sides have "all kinds of leverage on each other," added Dan Grazier, senior fellow and program director at the D.C.-based Stimson Center, a think-tank focused on international security. The public fallout came after Musk repeatedly criticized Trump's spending bill. Trump eventually lashed back, posting on Truth Social that the easiest way to save "Billions and Billion of Dollars" would be to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." However, those threats might not be so simple to implement. SpaceX, satellite contracts SpaceX has $15 billion US worth of contracts from NASA for the company's Falcon 9 rockets and its development of the multipurpose Starship rocket system, tapped to land NASA astronauts on the moon this decade. The company has also been awarded billions of dollars to launch most of the Pentagon's national security satellites into space while it builds a massive spy satellite constellation. That's why, if Trump cancels those contracts, SpaceX would have to seriously rethink its business model, Grazier says. Musk "needs the government to keep his company operating as they are," he said. But the U.S. government is also reliant on SpaceX, he says. For example, it's the only U.S. company capable right now of transporting crews to and from the International Space Station, using its four-person Dragon capsules. "Trump needs Elon Musk in pretty much the exact same way that Elon Musk needs President Trump, as far as SpaceX goes," Grazier said. "It's not like the United States has a credible alternative to SpaceX right now as far as space launch goes," he said. "And the United States needs reliable space launch capabilities." WATCH | F eud explodes into public view: Threats, insults as Trump-Musk feud explodes into public view 1 day ago Duration 2:27 Tearing up SpaceX contracts would have a huge domino effect across a lot of the government's critical functions in space, according to Clayton Swope, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And those functions are "most closely centred around the Pentagon and NASA," he told Bloomberg News. But if Trump holds off on cancelling SpaceX contracts, and is looking for another way to poke at Musk, he could put the squeeze on Musk's companies through the government's regulatory agencies, some experts say. "Those can all be leverage points for the administration," said Cary Coglianese, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn program on regulation. Last year, Musk was waging at least 11 separate regulatory or legal battles with the Biden administration or independent federal agencies related to his business empire, according to NBC News. This might have been why, in part, Musk eventually endorsed Trump, who had pledged during the presidential campaign to slash regulations. How Trump's tax bill ignited his feud with Musk | Hanomansing Tonight 1 day ago Duration 7:21 Yet Trump could now pressure those same agencies to make Musk's life difficult. Just some of the regulators Musk's business empire must deal with include the Federal Communications Commission for his satellite internet service Starlink, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for Tesla, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for SpaceX. The FAA, under pressure from Trump, or to curry his favour, could say it's not going to approve any SpaceX launch permits, says Roger Nober, director of the Regulatory Studies Center, also at George Washington University. For Tesla, for example, Trump could pressure regulators to deny necessary approvals of its autonomous driving program, or could renew investigations into the safety of its full self-driving software, some analysts told ABC News. "If full self-driving were to be invalidated, that would be a huge hit to Tesla stock and to Musk," Gordon Johnson, CEO and founder of the data firm GLJ Research, told ABC. Although the courts shouldn't tolerate such actions if they are shown to be vindictive, the president wouldn't necessarily need a "litigation-proof strategy to really mess up" Musk's life, Coglianese said. It could still be "very painful and problematic" for Musk, while courts sorted out the issues, he said. "And if Musk's operations get delayed or disrupted, that can mean real money." Nober says he believes that any lasting regulatory change against Musk's companies would be difficult to implement, given his very public spat with Trump and that the president said he's going to punish his one-time friend. "If they then initiate regulatory action that's intended punish any of Musk's business… it's going to be vulnerable to challenge on the theory that it was arbitrary," he said. However, there may be other minor administrative regulatory roadblocks that government agencies could impose on Musk that would be difficult to challenge in court, Nober says. "They can make life difficult" for Musk, he said. On Thursday, amid their war of words, shares of Tesla plunged more than 14 per cent, leaving $150 billion US of the electric automaker's value erased by the end of trading day. The plunge was probably because Tesla, like a lot of Musk's companies, have a lot of little things they deal with, with a lot of regulatory bodies, Nober says. "Just making those more difficult, or slowing them down, or reviewing them, or taking longer to turn things around, has a cumulative impact," he said.

CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means
CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means

CBC

time6 hours ago

  • CBC

CO2 levels just broke another record. Here's what that means

Social Sharing When man first walked on the moon, the carbon dioxide concentration in Earth's atmosphere was 325 parts per million (ppm). By 9/11, it was 369 ppm, and when COVID-19 shut down normal life in 2020, it had shot up to 414 parts ppm. This week, our planet hit the highest levels ever directly recorded: 430 parts per million. For 67 years, the observatory on Hawaii's Mauna Loa volcano has been taking these measurements daily — tracking the invisible gas that is building up in our atmosphere and changing life on Earth. The record is known as the Keeling Curve. Charles David Keeling began those recordings, some of the first in the world to measure CO2 concentration over time. His son, Ralph Keeling, born one year before the observatory opened, has witnessed the rapid increase firsthand over his lifetime. "I was a teenager when I first started to appreciate what my father was doing and how it might be significant," Keeling told CBC News. Back then it was around 330 ppm. Keeling, a geochemistry professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, took over the research once his father passed away in 2005. "This problem is not going away, and we're moving further and further into uncharted territory, and almost certainly, very dangerous territory." Why CO2 matters The build up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere isn't visible to the naked eye, but its concentration matters because of the greenhouse effect. Like the glass walls that trap heat from the sun in an actual greenhouse, gases in our atmosphere such as CO2 and methane also trap heat from the sun. At the start of the Industrial Revolution, ice core samples show CO2 levels were around 280 parts per million but as they rose, warming has increased by about 1.3 C over the pre-industrial average. That's led to rising temperatures and leading to more frequent and extreme weather, like heat waves, floods, wildfires and droughts. While many have heard about the goals of limiting warming to 1.5 C or 2 C above pre-industrial levels, there have also been efforts to return CO2 levels to below 350 parts per million, as a key part of limiting the damage from climate change. The record highs have continued though. Just in the last year, CO2 readings from May have increased more than three parts per million — that many more molecules of CO2 trapping heat and contributing to warming. "We know why it's rising faster than ever, it's because we're burning more fossil fuels each year," said Keeling. Direct link to fossil fuels Damon Matthews, a climate scientist and professor at Concordia University in Quebec, also says he's concerned and isn't surprised that there are new records every year. "If we want to actually stabilize CO2 levels in the atmosphere, we would need to cut global emissions by more than 50 per cent, and we're nowhere near doing that," he said, adding that there are other gases at play but CO2 is the dominant influence. "Every May, we're going to see a new record of atmospheric CO2, until we actually make a lot more progress on climate mitigation than we have today." The annual cycle, peaking in late spring in the northern hemisphere, is tied to plant photosynthesis — CO2 concentrations drop in the summer as plants absorb the gas and release oxygen. In 2021, the International Energy Agency said that if the world wants to limit global warming and reach net-zero by 2050, there could be no new coal, oil or gas projects. Matthews is part of Canada's net-zero advisory body and says he's seen some progress in decreasing CO2 emissions the last few years, but not enough. He says Europe's emissions have been going down for decades, and that last year CO2 emissions in China didn't increase. However, he says Canada still lags behind other countries, and the U.S. is trending the other way. "There's lots of policy options, certainly focusing on expanding the oil and gas industry in Canada right now is not going to get us where we need to go in terms of climate," he said. "We just need to stop arguing about whether it's a priority and start doing the things that we know will help to solve the problem."

B.C. launches $5-million ad campaign to recruit American doctors, nurses
B.C. launches $5-million ad campaign to recruit American doctors, nurses

Globe and Mail

time14 hours ago

  • Globe and Mail

B.C. launches $5-million ad campaign to recruit American doctors, nurses

British Columbia has launched a six-week, $5-million campaign of targeted advertisements to recruit doctors and nurses in the United States, citing 'chaos' under the Trump administration to lure them north. The Ministry of Health said the campaign launched on Monday was being shown on thousands of advertising screens in Washington, Oregon and California, at locations within a 16-kilometre radius of health care facilities, as well as on podcasts and Netflix shows. B.C. Health Minister Josie Osborne said at a news conference it was a step B.C. needed to 'take right now' to attract physicians, nurses and other health care workers, and the province would do everything in its power to ease their transition. 'This will help supercharge our overall recruitment campaign to attract U.S. health care workers to B.C.,' she said. Opinion: How to win a trade war Fentanyl czar focused on combatting opioid trade, despite tariff distraction In one of the ads, a disgruntled-looking woman in hospital scrubs listens to 'more news from Washington' before the scene cuts to outdoor views of British Columbia, and listeners are urged to 'follow your heart' to the province. Osborne said the campaign was expected to reach about 250,000 health care workers. She said B.C. was 'taking advantage of the uncertainty and chaos' in the United States after the election of President Donald Trump by reaching out to health workers who shared the values of the province's health care system. One ad says recruits can 'practice evidence-based care' in B.C., while another promises 'universal health care that puts people first.' Looming over these efforts is the question of whether B.C.'s public single-payer system offers sufficient financial incentives. Osborne said it was difficult to directly compare physician salaries in B.C. with those in the United States. 'But I can say that with some of the recent changes we've made, and how we pay family doctors, we know that we have competitive salaries,' she said. 'We also know that we offer very competitive salaries for nursing. We offer some of the highest nursing wages in Canada. We also know, though, that doctors are not just motivated by dollars and cents.' Osborne said nearly 1,600 health care providers had already expressed an interest in moving to B.C. even before the ads launched. These included 700 doctors and 500 nurses, but she could not say how many had made it to B.C. 'We're going to do everything we can to attract as many physicians and nurses as possible,' she said without giving a specific target number. 'Ultimately, the success is measured by what people experience in their communities,' she added. She said B.C. would eventually expand international recruitment to other jurisdictions, likening the process to hitting a target. 'We've got the U.S. right in the centre, the bull's eye, and then right outside in the next rings, are countries like the United Kingdom,' she said. 'That's where we'll be focusing our efforts next.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store