Literature DB >> 16680905

Returning genetic research results to individuals: points-to-consider.

Gaile Renegar1, Christopher J Webster, Steffen Stuerzebecher, Lea Harty, Susan E Ide, Beth Balkite, Taryn A Rogalski-Salter, Nadine Cohen, Brian B Spear, Diane M Barnes, Celia Brazell.   

Abstract

This paper is intended to stimulate debate amongst stakeholders in the international research community on the topic of returning individual genetic research results to study participants. Pharmacogenetics and disease genetics studies are becoming increasingly prevalent, leading to a growing body of information on genetic associations for drug responsiveness and disease susceptibility with the potential to improve health care. Much of these data are presently characterized as exploratory (non-validated or hypothesis-generating). There is, however, a trend for research participants to be permitted access to their personal data if they so choose. Researchers, sponsors, patient advocacy groups, ethics committees and regulatory authorities are consequently confronting the issue of whether, and how, study participants might receive their individual results. Noted international ethico-legal guidelines and public policy positions in Europe and the United States are reviewed for background. The authors offer 'Points-to-Consider' regarding returning results in the context of drug development trials based on their knowledge and experience. Theses considerations include: the clinical relevance of data, laboratory qualifications, informed consent procedures, confidentiality of medical information and the competency of persons providing results to participants. The discussion is framed as a benefit-to-risk assessment to balance the potential positive versus negative consequences to participants, while maintaining the integrity and feasibility of conducting genetic research studies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16680905     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00473.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioethics        ISSN: 0269-9702            Impact factor:   1.898


  32 in total

1.  Issues surrounding biospecimen collection and use in clinical trials.

Authors:  Allison R Baer; Mary Lou Smith; Deborah Collyar; Jeffrey Peppercorn
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 2.  Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Timothy Caulfield; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Ethical, legal, and social considerations in conducting the Human Microbiome Project.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; James Colgrove; Simon N Whitney; Christina M Diaz; Daniel Bustillos; James Versalovic
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 9.043

4.  Disclosure of individualized research results: a precautionary approach.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results.

Authors:  J O'Daniel; S B Haga
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 2.000

6.  One thing leads to another: the cascade of obligations when researchers report genetic research results to study participants.

Authors:  Fiona Alice Miller; Robin Zoe Hayeems; Li Li; Jessica Peace Bytautas
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Environmental Health Research Involving Human Subjects: Ethical Issues.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Environ Health Insights       Date:  2008-07-14

8.  Biobanking, consent, and commercialization in international genetics research: the Type 1 Diabetes Genetics Consortium.

Authors:  Mark A Hall; Nancy M P King; Letitia H Perdue; Joan E Hilner; Beena Akolkar; Carla J Greenbaum; Catherine McKeon
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  Re-consenting human subjects: ethical, legal and practical issues.

Authors:  D B Resnik
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 10.  The clinical investigator-subject relationship: a contextual approach.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Philos Ethics Humanit Med       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 2.464

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.