Summary
An INSERM Ethics Committee correspondence argues that embryo genome editing and genomic embryo selection should be considered together as both develop. The authors distinguish recent embryo research from a clinical indication for heritable editing.
A correspondence published in Nature Medicine on 23 September 2026 argues that embryo genome editing and embryo selection through genetic testing need to be considered together. Writing on behalf of the INSERM Ethics Committee, Hervé Chneiweiss, François Hirsch and Catherine Bourgain frame this as a governance issue arising from advances in embryo research and the expansion of reproductive genomic testing.
Why editing and selection are converging
The authors point to recent research using base editing in early human embryos. They describe one report applying adenine base editing at two targets without the major chromosomal abnormalities seen in some earlier experiments. Another used base editing to produce a functional knockout of a developmental regulator during early human embryogenesis. The correspondence presents these as important research advances, while stressing that they do not establish a clinical indication for heritable genome editing.
Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) examines embryos before implantation. The correspondence says it was developed to detect chromosomal abnormalities and pathogenic variants associated with serious single-gene disorders. It also describes commercial services offering whole-genome embryo profiling and polygenic rankings for common diseases, and in some cases non-clinical traits. Polygenic approaches use many genetic variants to estimate susceptibility to conditions influenced by multiple factors.
The authors’ case for joint governance is that these practices are developing alongside one another: selection can influence which embryo is chosen, while editing could alter an embryo’s genome. Because heritable changes may be passed to descendants, the distinction between research progress and clinical use is consequential. The correspondence argues that oversight should take account of both the growing capabilities of editing and the expanding use of genomic information in embryo selection.