Literature DB >> 23589552

Ethical, legal, and counseling challenges surrounding the return of genetic results in oncology.

Martijn P Lolkema1, Christa G Gadellaa-van Hooijdonk, Annelien L Bredenoord, Peter Kapitein, Nancy Roach, Edwin Cuppen, Nine V Knoers, Emile E Voest.   

Abstract

In the last decade, an overwhelming number of genetic aberrations have been discovered and linked to the development of treatment for cancer. With the rapid advancement of next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques, it is expected that large-scale DNA analyses will increasingly be used to select patients for treatment with specific anticancer agents. Personalizing cancer treatment has many advantages, but sequencing germline DNA as reference material for interpreting cancer genetics may have consequences that extend beyond providing cancer care for an individual patient. In sequencing germline DNA, mutations may be encountered that are associated with increased susceptibility not only to hereditary cancer syndromes but also to other diseases; in those cases, disclosing germline data could be clinically relevant and even lifesaving. In the context of personal autonomy, it is necessary to develop an ethical and legal framework for how to deal with identified hereditary disease susceptibilities and how to return the data to patients and their families. Because clear legislation is lacking, we need to establish guidelines on disclosure of genetic information and, in the process, we need to balance privacy issues with the potential advantages and drawbacks of sharing genetic data with patients and their relatives. Importantly, a strong partnership with patients is critical for understanding how to maximize the translation of genetic information for the benefit of patients with cancer. This review discusses the ethical, legal, and counseling issues surrounding disclosure of genetic information generated by NGS to patients with cancer and their relatives. We also provide a framework for returning these genetic results by proposing a design for a qualified disclosure policy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23589552     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.2789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  29 in total

1.  Returning a Research Participant's Genomic Results to Relatives: Analysis and Recommendations.

Authors:  Susan M Wolf; Rebecca Branum; Barbara A Koenig; Gloria M Petersen; Susan A Berry; Laura M Beskow; Mary B Daly; Conrad V Fernandez; Robert C Green; Bonnie S LeRoy; Noralane M Lindor; P Pearl O'Rourke; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Mark A Rothstein; Brian Van Ness; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

2.  Preferences for genetic testing for colorectal cancer within a population-based screening program: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Jorien Veldwijk; Mattijs S Lambooij; Frank G J Kallenberg; Henk J van Kranen; Annelien L Bredenoord; Evelien Dekker; Henriëtte A Smit; G Ardine de Wit
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  INTRODUCTION: Return of Research Results: What About the Family?

Authors:  Susan M Wolf
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

4.  Cancer Genetic Counselors' Current Practices and Attitudes Related to the Use of Tumor Profiling.

Authors:  LeAnne Noelle Goedde; Nathan W Stupiansky; Melissa Lah; Kimberly A Quaid; Stephanie Cohen
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Integrating genomics into clinical oncology: ethical and social challenges from proponents of personalized medicine.

Authors:  Michelle L McGowan; Richard A Settersten; Eric T Juengst; Jennifer R Fishman
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 6.  Familial pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Gloria M Petersen
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 7.  Genetic Testing and Tissue Banking for Personalized Oncology: Analytical and Institutional Factors.

Authors:  George Miles; James Rae; Suresh S Ramalingam; John Pfeifer
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 8.  Clinical cancer genomic profiling.

Authors:  Debyani Chakravarty; David B Solit
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  Broad Consent for Research on Biospecimens: The Views of Actual Donors at Four U.S. Medical Centers.

Authors:  Teddy D Warner; Carol J Weil; Christopher Andry; Howard B Degenholtz; Lisa Parker; Latarsha J Carithers; Michelle Feige; David Wendler; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 10.  Next-generation sequencing for research and diagnostics in kidney disease.

Authors:  Kirsten Y Renkema; Marijn F Stokman; Rachel H Giles; Nine V A M Knoers
Journal:  Nat Rev Nephrol       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 28.314

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.