Literature DB >> 19223929

Biological sample collections from minors for genetic research: a systematic review of guidelines and position papers.

Kristien Hens1, Herman Nys, Jean-Jacques Cassiman, Kris Dierickx.   

Abstract

Stored tissue samples are an important resource for epidemiological genetic research. Genetic research on biological material from minors can yield valuable information on the development and genesis of early-onset genetic disorders and the early interaction of environmental and genetic factors. The use of such tissue raises some specific ethical and governance questions, which are not completely covered by the discussion on biological materials from adults. We have retrieved 29 guidelines and position papers pertaining to the storage and use of biological tissue samples for genetic research, originating from 27 different organizations. Five documents have an international scope, three have an European scope and 21 have a national scope. We discovered that 11 of these documents did not contain a section on biological materials from minors. The content of the remaining 18 documents was categorized according to four themes: consent, principles of non-therapeutic research on vulnerable populations, ethics committee approval and difference between anonymous and identifiable samples. We found out that these themes are not consistently mentioned by each document, but that documents discussing the same themes were mostly in agreement with their recommendations. However, a systematic reflection on the ethical and policy issues arising from the participation of minors in biobank research is missing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19223929      PMCID: PMC2986563          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2009.9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  28 in total

Review 1.  Solidarity and equity: new ethical frameworks for genetic databases.

Authors:  R Chadwick; K Berg
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  Should children decide whether they are enrolled in nonbeneficial research?

Authors:  David Wendler; Seema Shah
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 11.229

3.  Children's consent to research participation: social context and personal experience invalidate fixed cutoff rules.

Authors:  Richard Ashcroft; Trudy Goodenough; Emma Williamson; Julie Kent
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 4.  Data storage and DNA banking for biomedical research: informed consent, confidentiality, quality issues, ownership, return of benefits. A professional perspective.

Authors:  Béatrice Godard; Jörg Schmidtke; Jean-Jacques Cassiman; Ségolène Aymé
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Data storage and DNA banking for biomedical research: technical, social and ethical issues.

Authors: 
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  HUGO Ethics Committee Statement on DNA sampling: control and access.

Authors:  B M Knoppers; M Hirtle; S Lormeau; C M Laberge; M Laflamme
Journal:  Genetic Resour       Date:  1998

7.  International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects.

Authors: 
Journal:  Bull Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10

8.  Human genetic banking: altruism, benefit and consent.

Authors:  Garrath Williams; Doris Schroeder
Journal:  New Genet Soc       Date:  2004-04

9.  Body of research--ownership and use of human tissue.

Authors:  R Alta Charo
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-10-12       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Integration of DNA sample collection into a multi-site birth defects case-control study.

Authors:  Sonja A Rasmussen; Edward J Lammer; Gary M Shaw; Richard H Finnell; Robert E McGehee; Margaret Gallagher; Paul A Romitti; Jeffrey C Murray
Journal:  Teratology       Date:  2002-10
View more
  17 in total

1.  Regulating biobanking with children's tissue: a legal analysis and the experts' view.

Authors:  Elcke J Kranendonk; M Corrette Ploem; Raoul C M Hennekam
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Are the kids really all right? Direct-to-consumer genetic testing in children: are company policies clashing with professional norms?

Authors:  Heidi Carmen Howard; Denise Avard; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Practical guidance on informed consent for pediatric participants in a biorepository.

Authors:  Kyle B Brothers; John A Lynch; Sharon A Aufox; John J Connolly; Bruce D Gelb; Ingrid A Holm; Saskia C Sanderson; Jennifer B McCormick; Janet L Williams; Wendy A Wolf; Armand H M Antommaria; Ellen W Clayton
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 4.  Reconsidering the Need for Reconsent at 18.

Authors:  Benjamin E Berkman; Dana Howard; David Wendler
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 7.124

5.  Children, biobanks and the scope of parental consent.

Authors:  Kristien Hens; Jean-Jacques Cassiman; Herman Nys; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  Parent perspectives on pediatric genetic research and implications for genotype-driven research recruitment.

Authors:  Holly K Tabor; Tracy Brazg; Julia Crouch; Emily E Namey; Stephanie M Fullerton; Laura M Beskow; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.742

7.  Why parents consent to their children's participation in genetic research: A study of parental decision making.

Authors:  Sunita Kumari; Triptish Bhatia; Nagendra N Mishra; Nupur Kumari; Sreelatha S Narayanan; Deepak Malik; Smita N Deshpande
Journal:  Indian J Med Ethics       Date:  2019 Oct-Dec

8.  Clarifying assent in pediatric research.

Authors:  Noor A A Giesbertz; Annelien L Bredenoord; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Attitudes of African-American parents about biobank participation and return of results for themselves and their children.

Authors:  Colin M E Halverson; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 2.903

10.  Potential Value of Qiagen and PrepIT•MAX Kits in Extraction of Mycobacterial DNA From Presumptive Tuberculosis Archived Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissues.

Authors:  Yunus Ayub; Jackson T Mollel; Erasto V Mbugi
Journal:  East Afr Health Res J       Date:  2018-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.