Doudna's article is a typical scientific review written by someone intimately involved in the research. She doesn't try to teach 'important lessons', or outline the history of CRISPR, nor does she draw on unquoted 'personal interviews and other materials'. Everything is referenced, you can go and read each paper she cites. You can also compare her review to countless others written by her colleagues and patent opponents. Scientific reviews are invariably invited by the journal, with authors chosen based on their research interests and scientific output.

Lander's article is a completely different beast. I highly doubt Cell cold called Eric Lander and asked him to write a campfire history of CRISPR.

It is clear the Cell has a liberal COI policy in any case. I can't find COI mentioned anywhere, even to say that there aren't any.