Surgeon Bill Peranteau ’97, this November afternoon starts with a success story. His first patient is an energetic preschooler wearing light-up Spider-Man shoes. When the little boy’s mother was pregnant, a routine ultrasound showed that he had a hole in the diaphragm, the muscle that separates the abdominal and lung cavities, which would permit abdominal organs to crowd out the lungs and threaten their development. When the child was still a newborn, Peranteau operated to close the hole. Now the family is back at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) for an annual follow-up visit, and the little boy is thriving; he has recently discovered the joys of jumping on the bed.
Over the next couple of hours, Peranteau, an attending surgeon in CHOP’s division of general, thoracic, and fetal surgery, sees other children whose small bodies he’s repaired, sometimes when they were just days old. Under certain circumstances, when a structural defect could cause extensive or deadly damage before birth, he also performs surgery on fetuses — a previously unimaginable scenario pioneered at CHOP over the past few decades. But other kids remain beyond his reach — among them, those with genetic defects causing potentially fatal or severe health problems that begin and worsen during pregnancy. That’s where Peranteau’s current research interests come in. He and his colleagues are working to tackle those problems prenatally using CRISPR, the gene-editing technology that over the past several years has accumulated a growing list of possible applications, from creating hardier crops to eliminating disease-spreading mosquitoes to altering human DNA in pursuit of better health.
There’s a lot of experimental ground to be covered before that vision is a reality, and Peranteau, with his feet planted both in clinical practice and research, is in the thick of it. With these new technologies, “you have to have someone who’s the champion of the cause,” says Simon Waddington, professor of gene therapy at University College London. Peranteau “understands the science, and he sees the patients,” he says. N. Scott Adzick, the surgeon-in-chief at CHOP, calls him a “rare triple threat”: a stellar surgeon, researcher, and teacher. “He’s going to lead the field.”
Peranteau went to Princeton thinking he was interested in science; while there, that sharpened into a desire to become a physician. After doing lab work in immunology for his senior thesis in molecular biology, he decided to add research to the mix. He headed to the University of Pennsylvania, where he planned to get both M.D. and Ph.D. degrees.
During medical school, Peranteau opted to do surgery as the first of his clinical rotations, solely to get it out of the way. The stereotype of the brusque, arrogant surgeon didn’t appeal, and Peranteau originally thought he’d do his due diligence and move on to another specialty. But in the OR, he says he found a team-like atmosphere that recalled his years as a diver at Princeton. And he loved working with his hands and seeing the immediate impact of his work. He decided to pursue surgery and clinical research, scrapping his plans for a doctorate and instead doing two stints of focused research at CHOP’s Center for Fetal Research during his medical training. That experience, he says, gave him a model for his career aspirations: “doing very impactful research while at the same time doing major surgeries.” He was drawn to pediatric surgery in particular for the research questions it poses about abnormal development and for the chance to work with children and their families. It was at CHOP that he was exposed to fetal surgery, a still-developing field that was thought to be impossible just decades ago.
WHEN THE IDEA OF OPERATING on a fetus was first proposed, it sounded “crazy” to many people, Adzick, a pioneer of the field, recalled in the 2015 PBS documentary series Twice Born. That’s in part because it exposes the mother to the risks of surgery even though she’s not the one who physically benefits. Early results didn’t show a benefit to the fetus, either. But as surgical techniques and criteria improved, so did outcomes. It’s now an option for a dozen or so conditions that pose deadly or devastating consequences to the fetus.
Those conditions include carefully selected cases of the most common and serious form of spina bifida, a condition in which the fetus’s developing spinal column fails to form normally, leaving a hole in the back that exposes the spinal cord and nerves to damage from amniotic fluid and puts the baby at risk of serious motor and cognitive problems. To address the condition through fetal surgery, doctors operate on the mother to reveal the uterus. They use ultrasound to position incisions so as not to harm the baby or interfere with the placenta, then use uterine stapling to open the walls of the uterus just enough to expose the developing fetus’s tiny back and bottom. The surgeons sew up the hole in the back tightly enough to form a watertight seal, so that damaging amniotic fluid can’t get into the spinal cavity and cerebrospinal fluid can’t get out. The uterus is sewn up; the mother spends the rest of her pregnancy living close to CHOP; and the baby is delivered later by cesarean section. It’s delicate work, yet if all goes well, the surgery can be done in as little as an hour, thanks to a tightly organized team of surgeons, nurses, and other clinicians accustomed to working together, says Peranteau.
To be sure, prenatal spina bifida surgery — which unlike other fetal surgeries is done to improve quality of life rather than to save it — is not a guaranteed fix. Some damage has often occurred by the time surgery happens, and there are risks to both the mother and fetus, including premature birth. It doesn’t work for everyone. But a landmark trial led by Adzick and published in 2011 in The New England Journal of Medicine showed that the prenatal surgery led to a reduced need for shunting (inserting a tube into the skull to drain fluid) and improved motor outcomes at 30 months compared to surgery after birth. CHOP is one of the major centers for fetal surgery, and Peranteau and his colleagues counsel about 1,500 pregnant women a year, about 150 or 200 of whom end up having some kind of fetal surgical procedure, including removing tumors and placing shunts. Many of the others have a specialized delivery at CHOP and then surgery early in the baby’s life.
As he took part in this new field of surgery, Peranteau became interested in an even more cutting-edge line of research: gene therapy, which involves replacing defective, disease-causing genes with healthy ones ferried into cells by a viral vector. It was a hot research area in the 1990s, but in 1999, an 18-year-old volunteer in a University of Pennsylvania trial of a treatment for a genetic disorder died due to an overwhelming inflammatory response against the modified cold virus that was used to transport the healthy gene into his body. Progress ground to a halt for years as researchers worked to make procedures safer. Slowly, the field came back, and these days gene therapy is again fertile ground for research, with hundreds of clinical trials accepting or planning to accept patients. “The delay, and the [current] excitement, are both appropriate,” says Peranteau. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already approved a handful of products, including a gene therapy for an inherited form of retinal blindness that was first developed by researchers at CHOP and the University of Pennsylvania and then by Spark Therapeutics, a biotech company spun off from CHOP. During his two research fellowships at CHOP, Peranteau studied using gene therapy in utero.
When he got his own lab several years later, a new, related technology caught his eye: CRISPR, which is short for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats.” Unlike traditional gene therapy, which introduces new copies of healthy genes that don’t always integrate into the cell’s DNA, CRISPR seeks to change or edit the DNA, meaning changes would persist for the lifetime of the edited cell and be passed on to cells that arise from it. It also has the potential to be more precise. CRISPR was derived from the immune response of bacteria, and the original iteration has been joined by increasingly precise versions.