Better governance starts with better words: why responsible human tissue research demands a change of language

The rise of precision medicine has led to an unprecedented focus on human biological material in biomedical research. In addition, rapid advances in stem cell technology, regenerative medicine and synthetic biology are leading to more complex human tissue structures and new applications with tremendous potential for medicine. While promising, these developments also raise several ethical and practical challenges which have been the subject of extensive academic debate. These debates have led to increasing calls for longitudinal governance arrangements between tissue providers and biobanks that go beyond the initial moment of obtaining consent, such as closer involvement of tissue providers in what happens to their tissue, and more active participatory approaches to the governance of biobanks. However, in spite of these calls, such measures are being adopted slowly in practice, and there remains a strong tendency to focus on the consent procedure as the tool for addressing the ethical challenges of contemporary biobanking. In this paper, we argue that one of the barriers to this transition is the dominant language pervading the field of human tissue research, in which the provision of tissue is phrased as a 'donation' or 'gift', and tissue providers are referred to as 'donors'. Because of the performative qualities of language, the effect of using 'donation' and 'donor' shapes a professional culture in which biobank participants are perceived as passive providers of tissue free from further considerations or entitlements. This hampers the kind of participatory approaches to governance that are deemed necessary to adequately address the ethical challenges currently faced in human tissue research. Rather than reinforcing this idea through language, we need to pave the way for the kind of participatory approaches to governance that are being extensively argued for by starting with the appropriate terminology.

Knowledge graphs of ethical concerns of cerebral organoids

OBJECTIVES

The rapid development of cerebral organoid technology and the gradual maturity of cerebral organoids highlight the necessity of foresighted research on relevant ethical concerns. We employed knowledge graphs and conducted statistical analysis with CiteSpace for a comprehensive analysis of the status quo of the research on the ethical concerns of cerebral organoids from a bibliometric perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a statistical analysis of published papers on cerebral organoid ethics, keyword co-occurrence graph, literature co-citation and knowledge clustering graph to examine the status of the ethics research, internal relationship between technological development and ethical research, and ethical concerns of the academia. Finally, we used a keyword time zone graph and related statistics to analyze and predict the trends and popular topics of future cerebral organoids ethics research.

RESULTS

We demonstrated that although the ethical concerns of cerebral organoids have long been discussed, it was not until 2017 that the ethical issues began to receive more attention, when cerebral organoids were gradually mimicking the human brain more closely and increasingly being combined with chimera research. The recent key ethical concerns are primarily divided into three categories: concerns that are common in life sciences, specific to cerebral organoids, and present in cross-fields. These increasing ethical concerns are inherently related to the continual development of technology. The analysis pointed out that future research should focus on the ethical concerns of consciousness that are unique to cerebral organoids, ethical concerns of cross-fields, and construction and improvement of legislative and regulatory systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Although research on cerebral organoids can benefit the biomedicine field, the relevant ethical concerns are significant and have received increasing attention, which are inherently related to the continual development of technology. Future studies in ethics regarding cerebral organoid research should focus on the ethical concerns of consciousness, and cross-fields, as well as the improvement of regulatory systems.

Breeding brains? Patients' and laymen's perspectives on cerebral organoids

Aim: To explore the perspectives of patients and laymen with regard to the development, use and storage of cerebral organoids, in order to contribute to the ethical debate about this technology. Materials & methods: In depth semi-structured interviews with 28 patients and laymen were conducted. A qualitative thematic analysis was undertaken using a constant comparative method. Results: Three interrelated themes emerged from the empirical material: moral value; willingness to donate; and elements of good governance. Conclusion: Patients and laymen are most concerned about cerebral organoids potentially developing consciousness and potential misuse. They support the use of cerebral organoids under the conditions that donors are adequately informed and that there will be good governance. Perspectives of patients and laymen are helpful to enable responsible development and use of cerebral organoids in practice.

Responsible use of organoids in precision medicine: the need for active participant involvement

Organoids are three-dimensional multicellular structures grown in vitro from stem cells and which recapitulate some organ function. They are derivatives of living tissue that can be stored in biobanks for a multitude of research purposes. Biobank research on organoids derived from patients is highly promising for precision medicine, which aims to target treatment to individual patients. The dominant approach for protecting the interests of biobank participants emphasizes broad consent in combination with privacy protection and ex ante (predictive) ethics review. In this paradigm, participants are positioned as passive donors; however, organoid biobanking for precision medicine purposes raises challenges that we believe cannot be adequately addressed without more ongoing involvement of patient-participants. In this Spotlight, we argue why a shift from passive donation towards more active involvement is particularly crucial for biobank research on organoids aimed at precision medicine, and suggest some approaches appropriate to this context.

Has the biobank bubble burst? Withstanding the challenges for sustainable biobanking in the digital era

Biobanks have been heralded as essential tools for translating biomedical research into practice, driving precision medicine to improve pathways for global healthcare treatment and services. Many nations have established specific governance systems to facilitate research and to address the complex ethical, legal and social challenges that they present, but this has not lead to uniformity across the world. Despite significant progress in responding to the ethical, legal and social implications of biobanking, operational, sustainability and funding challenges continue to emerge. No coherent strategy has yet been identified for addressing them. This has brought into question the overall viability and usefulness of biobanks in light of the significant resources required to keep them running. This review sets out the challenges that the biobanking community has had to overcome since their inception in the early 2000s. The first section provides a brief outline of the diversity in biobank and regulatory architecture in seven countries: Australia, Germany, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA. The article then discusses four waves of responses to biobanking challenges. This article had its genesis in a discussion on biobanks during the Centre for Health, Law and Emerging Technologies (HeLEX) conference in Oxford UK, co-sponsored by the Centre for Law and Genetics (University of Tasmania). This article aims to provide a review of the issues associated with biobank practices and governance, with a view to informing the future course of both large-scale and smaller scale biobanks.

Organoid biobanking: identifying the ethics: Organoids revive old and raise new ethical challenges for basic research and therapeutic use

Organoid technology is at the margin of basic research, precision medicine, and regenerative medicine where various research and clinical ethical issues converge. Resolving these interrelated ethical challenges requires an integrated approach rather than assessing each issue individually.

Biobanking and Privacy Laws in Australia

Australian biobanks are largely autonomous and funded by local health care institutions, although some biobanks also receive funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). There is no formal biobank legislation, but the NHMRC has developed biobanking guidelines. The regulation of biobanks is mainly through privacy laws and human research ethics committees. Australia is moving toward the use of broad consent for biobanking. International data sharing is permitted.