Mark A Frye1, Allen Doederlein2, Barbara Koenig3, Susan L McElroy4,5, Malik Nassan1, Lisa R Seymour1, Joanna M Biernacka1,6, Allen S Daniels2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance, Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Institute for Health and Aging, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. 4. Lindner Center of HOPE, Mason, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, University of Cincinnati, College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 6. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to engage a national advocacy group and local stakeholders for guidance in developing a bipolar disorder biobank through a web-based survey and a community advisory board. METHODS: The Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance and the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank conducted a national web-based survey inquiring about interest in participating in a biobank (i.e., giving DNA and clinical information). A community advisory board was convened to guide establishment of the biobank and identify key deliverables from the research project and for the community. RESULTS: Among 385 survey respondents, funding source (87%), professional opinion (76%), mental health consumer opinion (79%), and return of research results (91%) were believed to be important for considering study participation. Significantly more patients were willing to participate in a biobank managed by a university or clinic (78.2%) than one managed by government (63.4%) or industry (58.2%; both p < 0.001). The nine-member community advisory board expressed interest in research to help predict the likelihood of bipolar disorder developing in a child of an affected parent and which medications to avoid. The advisory board endorsed the use of a comprehension questionnaire to evaluate participants' understanding of the study (e.g., longevity of DNA specimens, right to remove samples, accessing medical records) as a means to strengthen the informed consent process. CONCLUSIONS: These national survey and community advisory data support the merit of establishing a biobank to enable studies of disease risk, provided that health records and research results are adequately protected. The goals of earlier diagnosis and individualized treatment of bipolar disorder were endorsed.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to engage a national advocacy group and local stakeholders for guidance in developing a bipolar disorder biobank through a web-based survey and a community advisory board. METHODS: The Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance and the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank conducted a national web-based survey inquiring about interest in participating in a biobank (i.e., giving DNA and clinical information). A community advisory board was convened to guide establishment of the biobank and identify key deliverables from the research project and for the community. RESULTS: Among 385 survey respondents, funding source (87%), professional opinion (76%), mental health consumer opinion (79%), and return of research results (91%) were believed to be important for considering study participation. Significantly more patients were willing to participate in a biobank managed by a university or clinic (78.2%) than one managed by government (63.4%) or industry (58.2%; both p < 0.001). The nine-member community advisory board expressed interest in research to help predict the likelihood of bipolar disorder developing in a child of an affected parent and which medications to avoid. The advisory board endorsed the use of a comprehension questionnaire to evaluate participants' understanding of the study (e.g., longevity of DNA specimens, right to remove samples, accessing medical records) as a means to strengthen the informed consent process. CONCLUSIONS: These national survey and community advisory data support the merit of establishing a biobank to enable studies of disease risk, provided that health records and research results are adequately protected. The goals of earlier diagnosis and individualized treatment of bipolar disorder were endorsed.
Authors: Ronald C Kessler; Patricia Berglund; Olga Demler; Robert Jin; Kathleen R Merikangas; Ellen E Walters Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2005-06
Authors: Gabriele S Leverich; Robert M Post; Paul E Keck; Lori L Altshuler; Mark A Frye; Ralph W Kupka; Willem A Nolen; Trisha Suppes; Susan L McElroy; Heinz Grunze; Kirk Denicoff; Maria K M Moravec; David Luckenbaugh Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Stephanie A Kraft; Mildred K Cho; Katherine Gillespie; Meghan Halley; Nina Varsava; Kelly E Ormond; Harold S Luft; Benjamin S Wilfond; Sandra Soo-Jin Lee Journal: Am J Bioeth Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 11.229
Authors: Mark A Frye; Susan L McElroy; Manuel Fuentes; Bruce Sutor; Kathryn M Schak; Christine W Galardy; Brian A Palmer; Miguel L Prieto; Simon Kung; Christopher L Sola; Euijung Ryu; Marin Veldic; Jennifer Geske; Alfredo Cuellar-Barboza; Lisa R Seymour; Nicole Mori; Scott Crowe; Teresa A Rummans; Joanna M Biernacka Journal: Int J Bipolar Disord Date: 2015-06-24
Authors: M L Prieto; E Ryu; G D Jenkins; A Batzler; M M Nassan; A B Cuellar-Barboza; J Pathak; S L McElroy; M A Frye; J M Biernacka Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 6.222