Promising results reported in genetic therapy clinical trials and recent US Food and Drug Administration approvals have attracted media attention. This critical content analysis examines themes and narrative framings present in feature articles published in US news media sources following patients involved in first-in-human clinical trials of genetic therapies. Articles were collected through focused searches across US news websites and LexisNexis databases in the period from 01 January 2017 to 06 April 2022. Forty-three articles met inclusion criteria (n = 13 from database searches, n = 30 from external searches). Articles were diverse across genetic conditions, news sources, and media types. Three dominant themes emerged: (1) Impacts of Living with Genetic Condition, (2) Consequences of Receiving Gene Therapy Treatment, and (3) Risks of Gene Therapy. Narrative frames included hope and caution. Results are discussed in relation to how the value of patient narratives and content may be situated alongside the interests of different actors.
ArnoldC (2021) Record number of gene-therapy trials, despite setbacks. Nature Medicine27(8): 1312–1315.
2.
Baffoe-BonnieMSFloydKJLivinskiAAGradyC (2023) A scoping review exploring cure definitions and language for inherited hemoglobinopathies. Genetics in Medicine Open2: 100838.
3.
BannerO (2017) Communicative Biocapitalism: The Voice of the Patient in Digital Health and the Health Humanities. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
4.
BenjaminySBubelaT (2014) Ocular gene transfer in the spotlight: Implications of newspaper content for clinical communications. BMC Medical Ethics15(1): 58.
5.
BrownNMichaelM (2003) A sociology of expectations: Retrospecting prospects and prospecting retrospects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management15(1): 3–18.
6.
CarvalhoA (2008) Media(ted) discourse and society. Journalism Studies9(2): 161–177.
7.
CaulfieldT (2004) Biotechnology and the popular press: Hype and the selling of science. Trends in Biotechnology22(7): 337–339.
8.
CheckE (2002) A tragic setback. Nature420(6912): 116–118.
9.
ConroyG (2022) How viruses are driving the gene-therapy renaissance. Nature612: S24-S26.
10.
CornettaKBonaminoMMahlanguJMingozziFRangarajanSRaoJ (2022) Gene therapy access: Global challenges, opportunities, and views from Brazil, South Africa, and India. Molecular Therapy30(6): 2122–2129.
11.
CouzinJKaiserJ (2005) As Gelsinger case ends. Gene Therapy Suffers Another Blow307(5712): 1028–1028.
12.
CrearyMS (2021) Bounded justice and the limits of health equity. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics49(2): 241–256.
13.
DeMartinoPHaagMBHershARCaugheyABRothJA (2021) A budget impact analysis of gene therapy for sickle cell disease: The medicaid perspective. JAMA Pediatrics175(6): 617–623.
14.
FrankAW (1998) Just listening: Narrative and deep illness. Families, Systems, & Health16: 197–212.
15.
FrankAW (2019) Not whether but how: Considerations on the ethics of telling patients’ stories. Hastings Center Report49(6): 13–16.
16.
GellerG (2019) The tyranny of hope. Hastings Center Report49(4): 3.
17.
HsiehHFShannonSE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research15(9): 1277–1288.
18.
IntemannK (2022) Understanding the problem of “hype”: Exaggeration, values, and trust in science. Canadian Journal of Philosophy52(3): 279–294.
19.
JasanoffSKimS-H (2013) Sociotechnical imaginaries and national energy policies. Science as Culture22(2): 189–196.
20.
JohnsonKMJiaoBRamseySDBenderMADevineBBasuA (2023) Lifetime medical costs attributable to sickle cell disease among nonelderly individuals with commercial insurance. Blood Advances7(3): 365–374.
21.
KamenovaKCaulfieldT (2015) Stem cell hype: Media portrayal of therapy translation. Science Translational Medicine7(278): 278ps4.
22.
KatoGJPielFBReidCDGastonMHOhene-FrempongKKrishnamurtiL, et al (2018) Sickle cell disease. Nature Reviews Disease Primers4: 18010.
LedfordH (2022) Gene therapy’s comeback: How scientists are trying to make it safer. Nature606(7914): 443–444.
26.
LuptonD (2017) ‘Download to delicious’: Promissory themes and sociotechnical imaginaries in coverage of 3D printed food in online news sources. Futures93: 44–53.
27.
MacnamaraJ (2005) Media content analysis: Its uses. Benefits and Best Practice Methodology6(1): 1–34.
28.
ManiI (2021) CRISPR-Cas9 for treating hereditary diseases. Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science181: 165–183.
29.
MarchioneM (2017) In a Milestone Year, Gene Therapy Finds a Place in Medicine. New York, NY: Associated Press.
30.
MasterZResnikDB (2013) Hype and public trust in science. Science and Engineering Ethics19(2): 321–335.
31.
MenaryR (2008) Embodied narratives. Journal of Consciousness Studies15(6): 63–84.
32.
NelkinDLindeeMS (2010) The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
NisbetMCLewensteinBV (2002) Biotechnology and the American media. Science Communication23(4): 359–391.
35.
O’KeefeMPerraultSHalpernJIkemotoLYarboroughM; UC North Bioethics Collaboratory for Life & Health Sciences (2015) “Editing” genes: A case study about how language matters in bioethics. The American Journal of Bioethics15(12): 3–10.
36.
OliverMBDillardJPBaeKTamulDJ (2012) The effect of narrative news format on empathy for stigmatized groups. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly89(2): 205–224.
37.
PersaudADesineSBlizinskyKBonhamVL (2019) A CRISPR focus on attitudes and beliefs toward somatic genome editing from stakeholders within the sickle cell disease community. Genetics in Medicine21(8): 1726–1734.
38.
PetersenA (2001) Biofantasies: Genetics and medicine in the print news media. Social Science & Medicine52(8): 1255–1268.
39.
RacineEGareauIDoucetHLaudyDJobinGSchraedley-DesmondP (2006) Hyped biomedical science or uncritical reporting? Press coverage of genomics (1992-2001) in Québec. Social Science & Medicine62(5): 1278–1290.
40.
RennieSSiednerMTuckerJDMoodleyK (2015) The ethics of talking about “HIV cure.”BMC Medical Ethics16: 18.
41.
RiccaboniMVerginerL (2022) The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific research in the life sciences. PLoS ONE17(2): e0263001.
42.
ShivramHCressBFKnottGJDoudnaJA (2021) Controlling and enhancing CRISPR systems. Nature Chemical Biology17(1): 10–19.
43.
ShortKG (2016) Critical content analysis as a research methodology. In: JohnsonHMathisJShortKG (eds) Critical Content Analysis of Children’s and Young Adult Literature: Reframing Perspective. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 1–15.
44.
SinhaCBBakshiNRossDLoewensteinGKrishnamurtiL (2021) Primary caregiver decision-making in hematopoietic cell transplantation and gene therapy for sickle cell disease. Pediatric Blood & Cancer68(1): e28749.
45.
SmithWRValrieCSislerI (2022) Structural racism and impact on sickle cell disease: Sickle cell lives matter. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America36(6): 1063–1076.
46.
StapletonPTorres YabarA (2023) Playing god? Media coverage of CRISPR in the United States. Public Understanding of Science32(4): 504–521.
47.
StewartCOYoungAJ (2022) “Something with a frightening reputation”: 60 minutes’ accommodation of HIV in gene therapy for sickle cell disease. Rhetoric of Health & Medicine5(1): 66–92.
Van DoorenWNoordegraafM (2020) Staging science: Authoritativeness and fragility of models and measurement in the COVID-19 crisis. Public Administration Review80(4): 610–615.
51.
WangJYDoudnaJA (2023) CRISPR technology: A decade of genome editing is only the beginning. Science379: eadd8643.
52.
WebsterFRiceKSudA (2020) A critical content analysis of media reporting on opioids: The social construction of an epidemic. Social Science & Medicine244: 112642.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
