|
||||
|
||||
Managing Incidental Findings and Research Results in Genomic Research Involving Biobanks and Archived Data SetsSusan M. WolfUniversity of Minnesota Law School Brittney N. CrockUniversity of Minnesota - Twin Cities Brian Van NessUniversity of Minnesota - Twin Cities Frances P. Lawrenz, PhDUniversity of Minnesota - Twin Cities Jeffrey P. KahnJohns Hopkins University Laura M. BeskowDuke University - Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy Mildred K. ChoStanford University - Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics (SCBE) Michael F. ChristmanCoriell Institute for Medical Research Robert C. GreenHarvard Medical School Ralph Hall, JDUniversity of Minnesota, Twin Cities - School of Law Judy IllesUniversity of British Columbia Moira Keane, M.A.University of Minnesota - Twin Cities Barbara KoenigUniversity of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Bartha Maria KnoppersMcGill University Isaac S. KohaneHarvard Children's Hospital Bonnie LeRoyUniversity of Minnesota - Twin Cities Karen J. MaschkeThe Hastings Center Pilar OssorioUniversity of Wisconsin - Madison William McGeveranUniversity of Minnesota Law School Lisa ParkerUniversity of Pittsburgh Gloria M. PetersenMayo Clinic College of Medicine Henry S. RichardsonGeorgetown University - Department of Philosophy Joan A. ScottNational Coalition for Health Professional Education in Genetics Sharon TerryGenetic Alliance Benjamin WilfondUniversity of Washington Wendy A. WolfHarvard Children's Hospital January 25, 2012 Genetics in Medicine, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 361-384, 2012 Abstract: Biobanks and archived data sets collecting samples and data have become crucial engines of genetic and genomic research. Unresolved, however, is what responsibilities biobanks should shoulder to manage incidental findings and individual research results of potential health, reproductive, or personal importance to individual contributors (using “biobank” here to refer both to collections of samples and collections of data). This article reports recommendations from a 2-year project funded by the National Institutes of Health. We analyze the responsibilities involved in managing the return of incidental findings and individual research results in a biobank research system (primary research or collection sites, the biobank itself, and secondary research sites). We suggest that biobanks shoulder significant responsibility for seeing that the biobank research system addresses the return question explicitly. When reidentification of individual contributors is possible, the biobank should work to enable the biobank research system to discharge four core responsibilities to (1) clarify the criteria for evaluating findings and the roster of returnable findings, (2) analyze a particular finding in relation to this, (3) reidentify the individual contributor, and (4) recontact the contributor to offer the finding. We suggest that findings that are analytically valid, reveal an established and substantial risk of a serious health condition, and are clinically actionable should generally be offered to consenting contributors. This article specifies 10 concrete recommendations, addressing new biobanks as well as those already in existence.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 24 Keywords: biobanks, bioethics, genetics, genomics, incidental findings, research ethics, return of results Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: March 26, 2012 ; Last revised: April 27, 2012Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.437 seconds