Chapter 1: A Nobel Awakening

The moment the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced her 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry on October 7, Jennifer Doudna was deep in slumber at her California home. A reporter from Nature awakened her with the news just before 3 a.m.

“What’s going on? Who won?” Doudna replied in disbelief.

Doudna, who is affiliated with the University of California, Berkeley, shares the prestigious award with Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Institute in Germany, for their pioneering work on CRISPR gene-editing technology. Their collaboration began in 2011, culminating in a landmark paper published a year later that changed the landscape of genetic engineering.

CRISPR, an acronym for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats, functions as a bacterial immune system. When viruses invade bacteria, these microorganisms capture fragments of the viral genome and integrate them into their own DNA. This process allows bacteria to recognize and defend against future viral attacks by producing a guiding RNA molecule that cleaves the viral genetic material.

Recognizing the potential, Doudna and Charpentier harnessed this natural mechanism, introducing the concept of “DNA scissors” in their 2012 publication, thus giving rise to the CRISPR technology we know today.

Regarded as one of the 21st century's pivotal breakthroughs, CRISPR is celebrated for its speed, cost-effectiveness, and precision compared to previous gene-editing methods. Its applications range from combating serious genetic disorders to enhancing crop resilience against diseases and climate challenges, and even targeting disease-spreading organisms like mosquitoes and mice. Researchers are actively developing even more refined versions of CRISPR.

However, the power of gene editing also brings ethical concerns. In 2018, the actions of Chinese scientist He Jiankui, who created the first gene-edited babies using CRISPR, ignited global condemnation and fears of a future filled with "designer babies."

Following the Nobel announcement, I spoke with Doudna about the future of CRISPR, the advancements in gene editing, and her ongoing scientific endeavors.

This conversation has been edited for clarity and readability.

Future Human: Congratulations on this incredible honor! How did it feel to learn you won the Nobel Prize?

Jennifer Doudna: I was completely taken aback! It’s hard to describe the shock of waking up to such news. I told the reporter, “I can’t discuss this now; I need to verify if it’s true.”

As we witness the onset of clinical trials utilizing CRISPR, which diseases do you believe hold the most promise for treatment?

Certainly, conditions stemming from single-gene mutations are prime candidates. Sickle cell disease is a shining example; we’ve already seen promising preliminary results from trials. I believe we’ll also explore other blood disorders, genetic eye diseases, and potentially, in the long run, conditions like cystic fibrosis and muscular dystrophy.

What do you foresee as the most significant challenge in bringing these treatments to patients?

Delivery is likely the main hurdle. Blood disorders have been early targets for CRISPR because the necessary genome edits can be performed on cells extracted from a patient and reintroduced later. In contrast, conditions like cystic fibrosis or muscular dystrophy require in-body editing, which presents a more complex challenge.

Your company, Mammoth Biosciences, is developing a rapid CRISPR-based test for COVID-19. How do you envision the role of CRISPR diagnostics in the future?

Numerous initiatives are in progress to create CRISPR diagnostics across various companies and academic institutions. We anticipate everything from high-throughput lab tests requiring robotic equipment to point-of-care tests usable in doctors' offices or emergency rooms. Ultimately, we aspire to develop a home test akin to a pregnancy test for COVID-19. The appeal of CRISPR technology lies in its potential for quicker, more direct virus detection, independent of the supply chain used for traditional PCR tests.

What is the current status of your company’s COVID-19 test?

Mammoth Biosciences plans to introduce its test to select partner labs for beta testing in November. Based on the outcomes, we’ll expand to additional labs, aiming to compare results with the PCR test.

You’ve recently launched another CRISPR enterprise, Scribe Therapeutics. What are its primary objectives?

CRISPR's versatility allows for various applications. Early efforts have concentrated on blood disorders like sickle cell disease because these tissues are more amenable to gene-editing molecule introduction. With Scribe Therapeutics, our focus shifts to neurodegenerative diseases, where the technology must be robust and safe enough to effectively reach brain cells and neural tissues. Our goal is to refine editing tools and identify optimal delivery methods for the brain.

What do you anticipate will be the next major advancement in CRISPR technology?

That’s a challenging inquiry, given the rapid developments in the field. One intriguing prospect is the use of CRISPR for gene regulation rather than permanent genome modifications. This newer application has immense potential for controlling protein production without altering DNA permanently.

In light of the CRISPR babies controversy, do you think germline editing should be strictly prohibited?

I don’t believe it should be entirely off-limits. I was encouraged by the recent report from the National Academies and the U.K. Royal Society advocating for a cautious approach to germline technology development. They propose research to understand its effects on embryos, emphasizing that any clinical applications must be limited to serious genetic conditions with few alternatives.

The report you mentioned also advocates for “extensive societal dialogue” before any permission is granted for heritable genome editing. How can we foster public understanding of CRISPR?

Public engagement is essential. The media plays a vital role in educating the public on such topics. Interactive formats like videos and documentaries can be particularly effective, though ensuring scientific accuracy is a must.

How can we ensure that the public's voice is taken into account concerning CRISPR usage?

That’s a crucial question. While it’s vital to involve the public in discussions about technology usage, achieving that requires a certain level of understanding that many might not possess. Thus, creating diverse formats for discussion is key. We’ve seen this with CRISPR, where technical meetings address ethical issues, and more accessible events explore broader implications without delving too deep into the science. Including non-specialists in these conversations has proven beneficial.

Beyond medicine, where else do you see CRISPR making a significant impact?

Agriculture is another field ripe for transformation. We are already witnessing CRISPR's application in developing plants with beneficial genetic modifications, such as improved yields, drought resistance, and enhanced nutritional content. This area shows great promise for future advancements.

Considering the potential for CRISPR misuse, how should it be regulated?

Fortunately, a solid regulatory framework exists in the U.S. and in most regions with significant research activities, tracing back to the 1970s Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA. However, particular applications, like human embryo editing, warrant heightened scrutiny.

Which CRISPR scientists do you particularly admire?

There are many deserving of recognition in this expansive field. Luciano Marraffini from Rockefeller University is notable for his foundational work on CRISPR biology. Jill Banfield at Berkeley continues to discover new CRISPR systems in non-cultured bacteria. In plant research, Pamela Ronald at UC Davis is utilizing CRISPR to address challenges in rice cultivation amid climate change. On the biomedical front, I am excited about Charles Gersbach’s work at Duke University.

What lies ahead for you in your research?

CRISPR will keep us occupied for the foreseeable future. There are many fundamental questions to explore regarding these pathways. Jill Banfield remains a close collaborator, providing us with exciting new CRISPR pathways to investigate. We are also keen on exploring genome editing within natural microbial communities, which presents fascinating opportunities for microbial manipulation.

Chapter 2: CRISPR Breakthroughs and Future Directions

This video discusses the groundbreaking work of Nobel laureates Doudna and Charpentier in the field of CRISPR gene editing.

In this video, Jennifer Doudna shares her initial reactions to winning the Nobel Prize in 2020, reflecting on her journey in science.