{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]],"date-time":"2026-10-06T18:50:13Z","timestamp":1791312613013,"version":"4.3.1"},"reference-count":32,"publisher":"Public Library of Science (PLoS)","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]],"date-time":"2026-10-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1791244800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Eloi Holding Inc.","award":["18770567"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["18770567"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["www.plosone.org"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["PLoS One"],"abstract":"\n Background<\/jats:title>\n Advances in CRISPR-based gene editing and stem cell-derived embryo models have created substantial biomedical opportunity alongside significant ethical and distributive concerns. Personalized genomic and regenerative therapies approved in the United States as of this writing carry list prices spanning approximately $2.2 million (Casgevy) to $4.25 million (Lenmeldy), with several other approved products priced between these figures (e.g., Lyfgenia, $3.1 million; Hemgenix, $3.5 million). This raises the question of how affordability, accessibility, ethical compliance, and distributional inequality can be jointly represented in a single, mathematically coherent index to support policy analysis.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Methods<\/jats:title>\n We audited a previously proposed composite index, the Genomic Equity Accessibility Framework (GEAF = ((A x E) \u2013 (C x I))\/(P\u2009+\u2009R) x 100), and identified dimensional incompatibility between its terms, an unbounded and not-independently-interpretable output range, and scenario inputs inconsistent with the cost estimates cited elsewhere in the same manuscript. We reconstructed GEAF as a normalized, bounded (0\u2013100) weighted composite of six dimensionless components \u2013 accessibility, ethical compliance, affordability, equity (inverse inequality), policy strength, and research efficiency \u2013 derived using multi-attribute utility theory. We tested the reconstructed formula against algebraic edge cases, applied it to seven re-specified illustrative scenarios whose cost inputs are anchored to cited list-price literature, and conducted one-way, two-way, and Monte Carlo (10,000-iteration) probabilistic sensitivity analyses.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Results<\/jats:title>\n The reconstructed index (GEAF\u2019) is bounded on [0,100], monotonic in every component, and behaves consistently at algebraic extremes. Across the seven illustrative scenarios, GEAF\u2019 ranged from 27.9 (no equity intervention, list-price cost) to 86.5 (fully optimized tiered-pricing and policy scenario). One-way sensitivity analysis identified cost (C) and the inequality factor (I) as the two largest single-parameter drivers of the index under baseline conditions, followed by ethical compliance (E). Monte Carlo simulation (10,000 iterations per regime) propagating stated, non-empirical parameter-uncertainty assumptions produced a baseline-scenario mean of 32.6 (90% interval, 5th-95th percentile, approximately 22.9\u201342.9) and an equity-intervention-scenario mean of 72.4 (90% interval approximately 62.9\u201381.1), with no overlap between the two simulated distributions.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n GEAF\u2019 provides a transparent, reproducible, and dimensionally coherent way to combine affordability, accessibility, ethical compliance, and distributional equity into a single comparative index for genomic and regenerative therapy policy scenarios. It is presented as a candidate conceptual and methodological framework, not as an empirically validated predictive or clinical tool; quantitative claims about real-world cost reductions have been removed unless directly supported by cited evidence. Prospective empirical calibration against real accessibility, pricing, and policy-outcome data is identified as a necessary next step before GEAF\u2019 is used in health technology assessment or resource-allocation decisions.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0359782","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]],"date-time":"2026-10-06T17:50:36Z","timestamp":1791309036000},"page":"e0359782","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.corrections_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["The Genomic Equity Accessibility Framework (GEAF): A dimensionally consistent framework for modeling affordability and equity in genomic and regenerative therapies"],"prefix":"10.1371","volume":"21","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0003-9868-5430","authenticated-orcid":true,"given":"Peter Oloche","family":"David","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Strayer University","place":["Washington, District of Columbia, United States of America"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"340","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]]},"reference":[{"key":"pone.0359782.ref001","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"202","DOI":"10.1038\/s41434-023-00429-7","article-title":"Looking ahead: ethical and social challenges of somatic gene therapy for sickle cell disease in Africa","volume":"31","author":"NS Munung","year":"2024","journal-title":"Gene Ther"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref002","author":"Vertex Pharmaceuticals, CRISPR Therapeutics","year":"2023"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref003","unstructured":"Orchard Therapeutics. Lenmeldy (atidarsagene autotemcel): US wholesale acquisition cost announcement of $4.25 million. 2024."},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref004","author":"o bluebird b i","year":"2023"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref005","unstructured":"CSL Behring. Hemgenix (etranacogene dezaparvovec): US wholesale acquisition cost announcement. 2022."},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0359782.ref006","article-title":"Projected spending on gene therapies in the United States: 2024-2030","volume":"6","author":"RM Conti","year":"2025","journal-title":"JAMA Health Forum"},{"issue":"6","key":"pone.0359782.ref007","first-page":"1678","article-title":"Real-world evidence of gene therapy access and outcomes in Europe and the United States","volume":"31","author":"LP Garrison","year":"2023","journal-title":"Mol Ther"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref008","author":"Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation, Targeted Update","year":"2025"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref009"},{"issue":"6230","key":"pone.0359782.ref010","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"36","DOI":"10.1126\/science.aab1028","article-title":"Biotechnology. A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification","volume":"348","author":"D Baltimore","year":"2015","journal-title":"Science"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"413","DOI":"10.1111\/1467-8519.00251","article-title":"Procreative beneficence: why we should select the best children","volume":"15","author":"J Savulescu","year":"2001","journal-title":"Bioethics"},{"issue":"3","key":"pone.0359782.ref012","first-page":"1","article-title":"Do CRISPR germline editing and artificial gametogenesis need a regulatory framework?","volume":"1","author":"C Brokowski","year":"2018","journal-title":"CRISPR J"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref013","article-title":"Chinese scientists genetically modify human embryos","author":"D Cyranoski","year":"2015","journal-title":"Nature"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref014","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.7551\/mitpress\/13492.001.0001","volume-title":"CRISPR People: The Science and Ethics of Editing Humans","author":"HT Greely","year":"2021"},{"issue":"17","key":"pone.0359782.ref015","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3548","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cell.2023.07.028","article-title":"An ethical framework for human embryology with embryo models","volume":"186","author":"NC Rivron","year":"2023","journal-title":"Cell"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref016","author":"International Society for Stem Cell Research","year":"2021"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref017","author":"Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care","year":"2025"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0359782.ref018","first-page":"1","article-title":"Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: A review of the literature and future directions","volume":"19","author":"P Thokala","year":"2016","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref019","first-page":"195","article-title":"Mathematical modeling in health equity: applications to social determinants of health","volume":"42","author":"NR Waters","year":"2021","journal-title":"Annual Review of Public Health"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref020","author":"World Health Organization","year":"2022"},{"issue":"10","key":"pone.0359782.ref021","first-page":"1204","article-title":"Inequality in the distribution of health care expenditure: evidence from the English NHS","volume":"28","author":"M Asaria","year":"2019","journal-title":"Health Econ"},{"issue":"5","key":"pone.0359782.ref022","first-page":"463","article-title":"Access to innovative medicines in Europe: a review of tiered pricing and managed entry agreements","volume":"38","author":"P Kanavos","year":"2020","journal-title":"PharmacoEconomics"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref023","author":"World Health Organization","year":"2025"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref024","author":"Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services","year":"2024"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0359782.ref025","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2957","DOI":"10.1038\/s41467-018-05188-3","article-title":"A framework for enhancing ethical genomic research with Indigenous communities","volume":"9","author":"KG Claw","year":"2018","journal-title":"Nat Commun"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref026","author":"H3Africa Consortium","year":"2024"},{"issue":"6","key":"pone.0359782.ref027","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"377","DOI":"10.1038\/s41576-020-0228-x","article-title":"Rights, interests and expectations: Indigenous perspectives on unrestricted access to genomic data","volume":"21","author":"M Hudson","year":"2020","journal-title":"Nat Rev Genet"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref028","author":"World Health Organization","year":"2024"},{"key":"pone.0359782.ref029","volume-title":"Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis","author":"R Cookson","year":"2017"},{"issue":"6","key":"pone.0359782.ref030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"779","DOI":"10.7326\/M22-3272","article-title":"Distributional Cost-Effectiveness of Equity-Enhancing Gene Therapy in Sickle Cell Disease in the United States","volume":"176","author":"G Goshua","year":"2023","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"issue":"10","key":"pone.0359782.ref031","first-page":"1157","article-title":"Challenges faced in transforming economic evaluation of orphan drugs: the case of gene therapies","volume":"22","author":"M Drummond","year":"2019","journal-title":"Value Health"},{"issue":"5","key":"pone.0359782.ref032","first-page":"1","article-title":"Health technology assessment for gene therapies: Are our methods fit for purpose?","volume":"26","author":"A Towse","year":"2023","journal-title":"Value Health"}],"container-title":["PLOS One"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/dx.plos.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0359782","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]],"date-time":"2026-10-06T17:50:50Z","timestamp":1791309050000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/dx.plos.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0359782"}},"subtitle":[],"editor":[{"given":"Kangkang","family":"Ji","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Huazhong Agriculture University","place":["CHINA"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"editor"}]}],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]]},"references-count":32,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0359782","relation":{},"ISSN":["1932-6203"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1932-6203","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,6]]}}}