Literature DB >> 32167617

"My Research Is Their Business, but I'm Not Their Business": Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Commercialization of Precision Oncology Data.

Kayte Spector-Bagdady1,2, Chris D Krenz2, Collin Brummel3, J Chad Brenner3,4, Carol R Bradford3,4, Andrew G Shuman2,3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genetic sequencing and precision oncology have supported clinical breakthroughs but depend upon access to vast arrays of research specimens and data. One way for academic medical centers to fund such infrastructure and research is "commercialization" of access to specimens and data to industry. Here we explore patient and clinician perspectives regarding cancer specimen and data commercialization with the goal of improving such processes in the future.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative analysis was embedded within a prospective precision oncology sequencing study of adults with head and neck cancer. Via semistructured dyadic interviews with patients with cancer and their doctors, we assessed understanding and concerns regarding potential commercialization, opinions regarding investment of profits, and perspectives regarding the return of information directly to participants from industry.
RESULTS: Several patient- and clinician-participants did not understand that the consent form already permitted commercialization of patient genetic data and expressed concerns regarding who would profit from the data, how profits would be used, and privacy and access. Patients were generally more comfortable with commercialization than clinicians. Many patients and clinicians were comfortable with investing profits back into research, but clinicians were more interested in investment in head and neck cancer research specifically. Patients generally supported potential return-of-results from a private entity, but their clinicians were more skeptical.
CONCLUSION: Our results illustrate the limitations of mandatory disclosures in the informed consent process. The voices of both patients and their doctors are critical to mitigate violations of privacy and a degradation of trust as stakeholders negotiate the terms of academic and commercial engagement. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Further education is needed regarding how and why specimens and data in precision oncology research may be commercialized for both patients and providers alike. This process will require increased transparency, comprehension, and engagement of involved stakeholders. © AlphaMed Press 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Commercialization; Data use; Ethics; Industry; Research

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32167617      PMCID: PMC7356718          DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0863

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncologist        ISSN: 1083-7159            Impact factor:   5.837


  18 in total

1.  Debunking the Delusion That Precision Oncology Is an Illusion.

Authors:  Vivek Subbiah; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-05-26

2.  Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Final rule.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  2017-01-19

3.  Attitudes Toward Risk and Informed Consent for Research on Medical Practices: A Cross-sectional Survey.

Authors:  Mildred K Cho; David Magnus; Melissa Constantine; Sandra Soo-Jin Lee; Maureen Kelley; Stephanie Alessi; Diane Korngiebel; Cyan James; Ellen Kuwana; Thomas H Gallagher; Douglas Diekema; Alexander M Capron; Steven Joffe; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Revisiting Expectations in an Era of Precision Oncology.

Authors:  Emily J Marchiano; Andrew C Birkeland; Paul L Swiecicki; Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Andrew G Shuman
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-11-20

5.  Patient Preferences for Use of Archived Biospecimens from Oncology Trials When Adequacy of Informed Consent Is Unclear.

Authors:  Jeffrey Peppercorn; Eric Campbell; Steve Isakoff; Nora K Horick; Julia Rabin; Katharine Quain; Lecia V Sequist; Aditya Bardia; Deborah Collyar; Fay Hlubocky; Debra Mathews
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-09-06

6.  Encouraging Participation And Transparency In Biobank Research.

Authors:  Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Raymond G De Vries; Michele G Gornick; Andrew G Shuman; Sharon Kardia; Jodyn Platt
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 6.301

7.  Are Patients With Cancer Less Willing to Share Their Health Information? Privacy, Sensitivity, and Social Purpose.

Authors:  David Grande; David A Asch; Fei Wan; Angela R Bradbury; Reshma Jagsi; Nandita Mitra
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  Patient perspectives on compensation for biospecimen donation.

Authors:  Samuel C Allen; Minisha Lohani; Kristopher A Hendershot; Travis R Deal; Taylor White; Margie D Dixon; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2018-04-26

9.  Neglected ethical issues in biobank management: Results from a U.S. study.

Authors:  R Jean Cadigan; Dragana Lassiter; Kaaren Haldeman; Ian Conlon; Erik Reavely; Gail E Henderson
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2013-12-01

10.  Improving biobank consent comprehension: a national randomized survey to assess the effect of a simplified form and review/retest intervention.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Li Lin; Carrie B Dombeck; Emily Gao; Kevin P Weinfurt
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  6 in total

1.  Implications of Research Biopsies in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Sarah M Dermody; Andrew G Shuman
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2021-08-31

2.  Bioethical implications of current state practices of molecular diagnostics in neuropathology.

Authors:  Wesley Wang; Dana Howard; Pierre Giglio; Diana Thomas; José Javier Otero
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 13.029

3.  Translational Science, DNA Commercialization, and Informed Consent: The Need for Specific Terminology, Insights from a Review of H3Africa Projects.

Authors:  Patricia Marshall; Charmaine D M Royal; Ruth Chadwick
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 2.132

4.  Patient and Provider Perspectives on Enrollment in Precision Oncology Research: Qualitative Ethical Analysis.

Authors:  Andrew G Shuman; Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Madison Kent; Chris D Krenz; Collin Brummel; Paul L Swiecicki; J Chad Brenner
Journal:  JMIR Cancer       Date:  2022-05-03

Review 5.  Sociotechnical safeguards for genomic data privacy.

Authors:  Zhiyu Wan; James W Hazel; Ellen Wright Clayton; Yevgeniy Vorobeychik; Murat Kantarcioglu; Bradley A Malin
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 59.581

6.  The Essentials of Multiomics.

Authors:  John L Marshall; Beth N Peshkin; Takayuki Yoshino; Jakob Vowinckel; Håvard E Danielsen; Gerry Melino; Ioannis Tsamardinos; Christian Haudenschild; David J Kerr; Carlos Sampaio; Sun Young Rha; Kevin T FitzGerald; Eric C Holland; David Gallagher; Jesus Garcia-Foncillas; Hartmut Juhl
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2022-04-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.