In Utero: Gene Transfer Nirvana?


The February 2008 issue of Molecular Therapy has an editorial by Charles Coutelle defending in utero gene transfer (that is, the application of gene transfer to fetuses).  Coutelle makes several attractive arguments in its favor.  Among them: that many parents opt against abortion after receiving  a prenatal diagnosis, and that in utero gene transfer would provide these parents with a therapeutic option.

What troubles me about this position is this:  1- what makes in utero gene transfer attractive–favorable “vector-to-cell” ratio, and the “presence of expanding and developing stem cell populations,” is precisely what makes this procedure risky as well; 2- how often do parents opt against pre-implantation diagnosis, but then go on to seek prenatal pregnancy screening?  Specifically, does the frequency of the latter justify the risks of the former?


    title = {In Utero: Gene Transfer Nirvana?},
    journal = {STREAM research},
    author = {Jonathan Kimmelman},
    address = {Montreal, Canada},
    date = 2008,
    month = feb,
    day = 18,
    url = {}


Jonathan Kimmelman. "In Utero: Gene Transfer Nirvana?" Web blog post. STREAM research. 18 Feb 2008. Web. 09 May 2021. <>


Jonathan Kimmelman. (2008, Feb 18). In Utero: Gene Transfer Nirvana? [Web log post]. Retrieved from

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


All content © STREAM research
Twitter: @stream_research
3647 rue Peel
Montreal QC H3A 1X1