Genotype-driven recruitment: a strategy whose time has come?

BMC Medical Genomics

Jennifer R Harris¹  Bartha Maria Knoppers²  Anne Marie Tassé²  Kaitlin J Soye²  Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne¹ 

[1]Division of Epidemiology, Department of Genes and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, P.O. Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo NO-0403, Norway

[2]Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, 740 Doctor Penfield Avenue, suite 5203, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1A4, Canada

关键词: Biobanks;    Genetic testing;    Feedback of results;    Genotype-Driven Recruitment;   

Others  :  1092390
DOI  :  10.1186/1755-8794-6-19

 received in 2013-01-30, accepted in 2013-05-17,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Genotype-Driven Recruitment (GDR) is a research design that recruits research participants based on genotype rather than based on the presence or absence of a particular condition or clinical outcome. Analyses of the ethical issues of GDR studies, and the recommendations derived from these analyses, are based on GDR research designs that make use of genetic information already collected in previous studies. However, as genotyping becomes more affordable, it is expected that genotypic information will become a common part of the information stored in biobanks and held in health care records. Furthermore, individuals will increasingly gain knowledge of their own genotypes through Direct-to-Consumer services. One can therefore foresee that individuals will be invited to participate not only in follow-up GDR studies but also in original GDR studies because genetic information about them is available. These individuals may or may have not participated in research before and may or may not be aware that their genetic information is available for research.

Discussion

From a conceptual point of view, we investigate whether the current ethics-related recommendations for the conduct of GDR suffice for a broader array of circumstances under which genetic information can be available. Our analysis reveals that the existing recommendations do not suffice for a broader use of GDR.

Summary

Our findings refocus attention on ethical issues which are neither new nor specific to GDR but which place greater demand on coordinated solutions. These challenges and approaches for addressing them are discussed.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Budin-Ljøsne et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Beskow LM, Linney KN, Radtke RA, Heinzen EL, Goldstein DB: Ethical challenges in genotype-driven research recruitment. Genome Res 2010, 20:705-709.
• [2]McGuire SE, McGuire AL: Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater: enabling a bottom-up approach in genome-wide association studies. Genome Res 2008, 18:1683-1685.
• [3]Beskow LM, Namey EE, Cadigan RJ, Brazg T, Crouch J, Henderson GE, Michie M, Nelson DK, Tabor HK, Wilfond BS: Research participants’ perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011, 6:3-20.
• [4]Beskow LM, Botkin JR, Daly M, Juengst ET, Lehmann LS, Merz JF, Pentz R, Press NA, Ross LF, Sugarman J: Ethical issues in identifying and recruiting participants for familial genetic research. Am J Med Genet A 2004, 130A:424-431.
• [5]Beskow LM, Burke W: Offering individual genetic research results: context matters. Sci Transl Med 2010, 2:38cm20.
• [6]Beskow LM, Namey EE, Miller PR, Nelson DK, Cooper A: IRB chairs’ perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment. IRB 2012, 34:1-10.
• [7]Beskow LM, Fullerton SM, Namey EE, Nelson DK, Davis AM, Wilfond BS: Recommendations for ethical approaches to genotype-driven research recruitment. Hum Genet 2012, 131:1423-1431.
• [8]Budin-Ljøsne I: A review of ethical frameworks for the disclosure of individual research results in population-based genetic and genomic research. Research Ethics 2012, 8:25-42.
• [9]Cadigan RJ, Michie M, Henderson G, Davis AM, Beskow LM: The meaning of genetic research results: reflections from individuals with and without a known genetic disorder. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011, 6:30-40.
• [10]Caulfield T, McGuire AL, Cho M, Buchanan JA, Burgess MM, Danilczyk U, Diaz CM, Fryer-Edwards K, Green SK, Hodosh MA: Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement. PLoS Biol 2008, 6:e73.
• [11]Henderson GE, Juengst ET, King NM, Kuczynski K, Michie M: What research ethics should learn from genomics and society research: lessons from the ELSI Congress of 2011. J Law Med Ethics 2012, 40:1008-1024.
• [12]McGuire AL, Beskow LM: Informed consent in genomics and genetic research. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2010, 11:361-381.
• [13]McGuire AL, Lupski JR: Personal genome research : what should the participant be told? Trends Genet 2010, 26:199-201.
• [14]Michie M, Cadigan RJ, Henderson G, Beskow LM: Am I a control? Genotype-driven research recruitment and self-understandings of study participants. Genet Med 2012, 14:983-989.
• [15]Namey EE, Beskow LM: Epilepsy patient-participants and genetic research results as “answers”. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011, 6:21-29.
• [16]Oliver JM, McGuire AL: Exploring the ELSI universe: critical issues in the evolution of human genomic research. Genome Med 2011, 3:38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Tabor HK, Brazg T, Crouch J, Namey EE, Fullerton SM, Beskow LM, Wilfond BS: Parent perspectives on pediatric genetic research and implications for genotype-driven research recruitment. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011, 6:41-52.
• [18]Wolf SM, Crock BN, Van NB, Lawrenz F, Kahn JP, Beskow LM, Cho MK, Christman MF, Green RC, Hall R: Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genet Med 2012, 14:361-384.
• [19]National Research Council: Toward Precision Medicine: Building a Knowledge Network for Biomedical Research and a New Taxonomy of Disease. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
• [20]FarGen project. [http://cphx.org/2012/08/bogi-eliasen-sequencing-the-entire-nation-of-the-faroe-islands/ webcite]
• [21]Jakobsen RK: Sequencing the genome of an entire population. [http://sciencenordic.com/sequencing-genome-entire-population webcite]
• [22]Doward J: Plans for NHS database of patients’ DNA angers privacy campaigners. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/09/dna-database-nhs-gene-genomics webcite]
• [23]Human Genomics Strategy Group: Building on our inheritance - Genomic technology in health care. [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/134568/dh_132382.pdf.pdf webcite]
• [24]Health Law Institute University of Alberta: Analysis of Privacy Policies and Practices of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Companies: Private Sector Databanks and Privacy Protection Norms. [http://www.heals.ualberta.ca/People/ExternalResearchFellows/NolaMRies/~/media/heals/ResearchDocuments/OPCC_Report_March_28_2010.pdf webcite]
• [25]Vorhaus D, Moore L: What happens if a DTC genomics company goes belly up?. [http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2009/09/18/what-happens-if-a-dtc-genomics-company-goes-belly-up/ webcite]
• [26]23anMe Research Portal Call for Academic Collaborators[https://www.23andme.com/researchportal/ webcite]
• [27]Obasogie OK: Googling Your Genes?. [http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=3536 webcite]
• [28]Shanks P: New Business Plans for the Direct-to-Consumer Gene Testing Industry?. [http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=6552 webcite]
• [29]Dressler LG, Juengst ET: Thresholds and boundaries in the disclosure of individual genetic research results. Am J Bioeth 2006, 6:18-20.
• [30]Fernandez CV, Weijer C: Obligations in offering to disclose genetic research results. Am J Bioeth 2006, 6:44-46.
• [31]Shalowitz DI, Miller FG: Disclosing individual results of clinical research: implications of respect for participants. JAMA 2005, 294:737-740.
• [32]Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR, Puggal M, Beskow LM, Biesecker LG, Bookman E, Burke W, Burchard EG, Church G: Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a national heart, lung, and blood institute working group. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 2010, 3:574-580.
• [33]Knoppers BM, Laberge C: Return of “accurate” and “actionable” results: yes! Am J Bioeth 2009, 9:107-109.
• [34]Knoppers BM, Deschenes M, Zawati MH, Tasse AM: Population studies: return of research results and incidental findings Policy Statement. Eur J Hum Genet 2013, 21:245-247.
• [35]Green RC, Roberts JS, Cupples LA, Relkin NR, Whitehouse PJ, Brown T, Eckert SL, Butson M, Sadovnick AD, Quaid KA: Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer’s disease. N Engl J Med 2009, 361:245-254.
• [36]Christensen KD, Roberts JS, Shalowitz DI, Everett JN, Kim SY, Raskin L, Gruber SB: Disclosing individual CDKN2A research results to melanoma survivors: interest, impact, and demands on researchers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011, 20:522-529.
• [37]Borry P, van Hellemondt RE, Sprumont D, Jales CF, Rial-Sebbag E, Spranger TM, Curren L, Kaye J, Nys H, Howard H: Legislation on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in seven European countries. Eur J Hum Genet 2012, 20:715-721.
• [38]Vorhaus D: What five FDA letters mean for the future of DTC genetic testing?. [http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2010/06/11/what-five-fda-letters-mean-for-the-future-of-dtc-genetic-testing/ webcite]
• [39]Arnason V, Hjorleifsson S: Geneticization and bioethics: advancing debate and research. Med Health Care Philos 2007, 10:417-431.
• [40]Evans JP, Burke W: Genetic exceptionalism. Too much of a good thing? Genet Med 2008, 10:500-501.