When papers from two independent research groups reported in June that CRISPR genome editing is more likely to succeed in cells that have lost their cancer kill switch, it raised fears that edited cells used to treat patients might initiate tumors. That inference is still the subject of intense debate — including over whether Nature Medicine should even have published the studies — but one thing is beyond question: The papers sent other scientists scurrying to their labs to check their results.

What they found is a mix of good news and bad news. In other words, the debate rages on.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • Online intelligence briefings
  • Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy