Safeguards for research using large scale DNA collections

When personal health data is no longer "personal"

Enacted in 2000, the Canadian Personal Health Information Protection and Electronics Documents Act is an important piece of legislation aimed at safeguarding an individual's right to control their personal health information. Since this time, the world of data and analytics has shifted in terms of our potential to collect, integrate, and analyze both structured and unstructured data. The implications for these data advancements are endless for our healthcare system; however, challenges influenced by our approach to collecting, accessing, and analyzing data as well as patient consent to share personal health information mean public entities lag behind commercial players in harnessing these potential benefits. While there are examples of data analytics application successes, Canadian healthcare continues to lag behind other countries and commercial sectors. We are at a pivot point for system improvements requiring a collective approach to collection, storage, linkage, and application of personal healthcare data. In the chasm of this rests how we address patient consent. All health leaders can play a central role in advancing our application of data for system improvements. Strategies to support health leaders in achieving this potential are outlined in this article.

Biobanks for genomics and genomics for biobanks

Biobanks include biological samples and attached databases. Human biobanks occur in research, technological development and medical activities. Population genomics is highly dependent on the availability of large biobanks. Ethical issues must be considered: protecting the rights of those people whose samples or data are in biobanks (information, autonomy, confidentiality, protection of private life), assuring the non-commercial use of human body elements and the optimal use of samples and data. They balance other issues, such as protecting the rights of researchers and companies, allowing long-term use of biobanks while detailed information on future uses is not available. At the level of populations, the traditional form of informed consent is challenged. Other dimensions relate to the rights of a group as such, in addition to individual rights. Conditions of return of results and/or benefit to a population need to be defined. With ‘large-scale biobanking’ a marked trend in genomics, new societal dimensions appear, regarding communication, debate, regulation, societal control and valorization of such large biobanks. Exploring how genomics can help health sector biobanks to become more rationally constituted and exploited is an interesting perspective. For example, evaluating how genomic approaches can help in optimizing haematopoietic stem cell donor registries using new markers and high-throughput techniques to increase immunogenetic variability in such registries is a challenge currently being addressed. Ethical issues in such contexts are important, as not only individual decisions or projects are concerned, but also national policies in the international arena and organization of democratic debate about science, medicine and society.

National population-based biobanks for genetic research

Clinical practice guidelines derived from genetic research using population-based biobanks could dramatically change the nature of personal and public health medicine. Centralized population-based biobanks have been established or proposed in at least nine countries to date, and many lessons have been learned from these landmark developments. Scientific and governmental leaders in the United States are currently contemplating pending federal legislation regarding the establishment of centralized and networked biobanks. Public health practitioners and clinical care providers may be called on to serve pronounced planning roles at the state level. Possible responsibilities include: formulating legislation, gathering public comment, reviewing research proposals, and developing procedures for informed consent, participant withdrawal, and confidentiality protection. State health agencies may also need to create and/or administer banking facilities. Proper planning may ensure that individual rights are protected while research benefits are maximized.

Valid consent for genomic epidemiology in developing countries

Drawing on experience gained from ongoing research in Mali, this paper describes practical ethical challenges relating to the achievement of valid consent in genomic epidemiology.

Pharmacogenetics and uncertainty: implications for policy makers

Uncertainty for policy makers is not new but the pressure to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty is perhaps greater than ever. The arrival of new scientific developments such as pharmacogenetics offers potentially great benefits (as well as significant risks). They have passionate supporters as well as doubters. The evidence is often extensive but unclear and policy makers may find themselves under pressure to make decisions before they feel that the evidence is compelling. The UK is particularly well placed to play a leading role in the development of pharmacogenetics and is equally well placed to derive the benefits to both health and wealth that could flow from this. However, the uncertainties threaten to overwhelm the capacity of policy makers to act effectively. The uncertainties are both about the context within which the science and delivery of pharmacogenetics is being developed and about the interests that could be served. This paper maps these uncertainties and concludes with some suggestions, drawing on deliberative democracy and futures thinking, as to how policy makers might manage the tensions and dilemmas they face by moving from an unstable, emergent policy arena to a more stable one.

Informed consent, participation in, and withdrawal from a population based cohort study involving genetic analysis

OBJECTIVE

Population based cohort studies involving genetic research have been initiated in several countries. However, research published to date provides little information on the willingness of the general population to participate in such studies. Furthermore, there is a need to discover the optimal methods for acquiring fully informed consent from the general population. We therefore examined the results of a population based genetic cohort study to identify the factors affecting the participation rate by members of the general public and also specifically to examine the impact of different consent procedures on the rate of participation by prospective candidates and their subsequent withdrawal rate from the study.

DESIGN

Descriptive analyses.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study evaluated two non-genetic subcohorts comprising 3166 people attending for a health checkup during 2002, and two genetic subcohorts comprising 2195 people who underwent a checkup during 2003.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Analysis endpoints were differences in participation rates between the non-genetic and genetic subcohorts, differences between providing non-extensive and extensive preliminary information, and changes in participation status between baseline and at 6 months.

RESULTS

Participation rates in the genetic subcohorts were 4.7-9.3% lower than those in the non-genetic subcohorts. The odds ratios (OR) of participation in genetic research were between 0.60 and 0.77, and the OR for withdrawal from the research was over 7.70; providing preliminary extensive information about genetic research reduced the withdrawal risks (OR 0.15 for all dependent variables) but worsened participation rates (OR 0.63-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

The general population responded sceptically towards genetic research. It is crucial that genetic researchers utilise an informative and educational consent process worthy of public trust.

Strategies for consulting with the community: the cases of four large-scale genetic databases

Large-scale genetic databases are being developed in several countries around the world. However, these databases depend on public participation and acquiescence. In the past, information campaigns have been waged and little attention has been paid to dialogue. Nowadays, it is important to include the public in the development of scientific research and to encourage a free, open and useful dialogue among those involved. This paper is a review of community consultation strategies as part of four proposed large-scale genetic databases in Iceland, Estonia, United Kingdom and Quebec. The Iceland Health Sector Database and Estonian Genome Project have followed a "communication approach" in order to address public concerns, whereas, UK Biobank and Quebec CARTaGENE have chosen a "partnership approach" to involve the public in decision-making processes. Following a comparison of community consultation strategies, the main concerns of the public are examined as well as the challenges of involving communities. Importantly, reported across all groups is the concern for confidentiality, respect of the individual, transparency, and the donor's right to access to their own result. However, even if researchers demonstrate a willingness to respect values such as fair representation, transparency and accountability, there is still a risk that the public will mistrust researchers and simply will not participate in sufficient numbers. Complications may arise when individual and community interests conflicts. The implementation of a partnership approach is definitely involving and costly; however, if used properly, this method can improve both participation and so database development.

“Iceland Inc.”?: On the ethics of commercial population genomics

A detailed analysis of the Icelandic commercial population-wide genomics database project of deCODE Genetics was performed for the purpose of providing ethics insights into public/private efforts to develop genetic databases. This analysis examines the moral differences between the general case of governmental collection of medical data for public health purposes and the centralized collection planned in Iceland. Both the process of developing the database and its design vary in significant ways from typical government data collection and analysis activities. Because of these differences, the database may serve the interests of deCODE more than it serves the interests of the public, undermining the claim that presumed consent for this data collection and its proprietary use is ethical. We believe that there is an evolving consensus that informed consent of participants must be secured for population-based genetics databases and research. The Iceland model provides an informative counterexample that holds key ethics lessons for similar ventures.

Coding and consent: moral challenges of the database project in Iceland

A major moral problem in relation to the deCODE genetics database project in Iceland is that the heavy emphasis placed on technical security of healthcare information has precluded discussion about the issue of consent for participation in the database. On the other hand, critics who have emphasised the issue of consent have most often demanded that informed consent for participation in research be obtained. While I think that individual consent is of major significance, I argue that this demand for informed consent is neither suitable nor desirable in this case. I distinguish between three aspects of the database and show that different types of consent are appropriate for each. In particular, I describe the idea of a written authorisation based on general information about the database as an alternative to informed consent and presumed consent in database research.

An empirical survey on biobanking of human genetic material and data in six EU countries

Biobanks correspond to different situations: research and technological development, medical diagnosis or therapeutic activities. Their status is not clearly defined. We aimed to investigate human biobanking in Europe, particularly in relation to organisational, economic and ethical issues in various national contexts. Data from a survey in six EU countries (France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the UK) were collected as part of a European Research Project examining human and non-human biobanking (EUROGENBANK, coordinated by Professor JC Galloux). A total of 147 institutions concerned with biobanking of human samples and data were investigated by questionnaires and interviews. Most institutions surveyed belong to the public or private non-profit-making sectors, which have a key role in biobanking. This activity is increasing in all countries because few samples are discarded and genetic research is proliferating. Collections vary in size, many being small and only a few very large. Their purpose is often research, or research and healthcare, mostly in the context of disease studies. A specific budget is very rarely allocated to biobanking and costs are not often evaluated. Samples are usually provided free of charge and gifts and exchanges are the common rule. Good practice guidelines are generally followed and quality controls are performed but quality procedures are not always clearly explained. Associated data are usually computerised (identified or identifiable samples). Biobankers generally favour centralisation of data rather than of samples. Legal and ethical harmonisation within Europe is considered likely to facilitate international collaboration. We propose a series of recommendations and suggestions arising from the EUROGENBANK project.

The Australian joint inquiry into the Protection of Human Genetic Information

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) and the Australian Health Ethics Committee are currently engaged in an inquiry into the Protection of Human Genetic Information. In particular, the Attorney-General and the Minister for Health and Ageing have asked us to focus, in relation to human genetic information and tissue samples, on how best to ensure world's best practice in relation to: privacy protection; protection against unlawful discrimination; and the maintenance of high ethical standards in medical research and clinical practice. While initial concerns and controversies have related mainly to aspects of medical research (e.g. consent; re-use of samples) and access to private insurance coverage, relevant issues arise in a wide variety of contexts, including: employment; medical practice; tissue banks and genetic databases; health administration; superannuation; access to government services (e.g. schools, nursing homes); law enforcement; and use by government authorities (e.g. for immigration purposes) or other bodies (e.g. by sports associations). Under the Australian federal system, it is also the case that laws and practices may vary across states and territories. For example, neonatal genetic testing is standard, but storage and retention policies for the resulting 'Guthrie cards' differ markedly. Similarly, some states have developed highly linked health information systems (e.g. incorporating hospitals, doctors' offices and public records), while others discourage such linkages owing to concerns about privacy. The challenge for Australia is to develop policies, standards and practices that promote the intelligent use of genetic information, while providing a level of security with which the community feels comfortable. The inquiry is presently reviewing the adequacy of existing laws and regulatory mechanisms, but recognizes that it will be even more important to develop a broad mix of strategies, such as community and professional education, and the development of official standards and industry codes that reflect emerging international best practice in the area.

A proposed architecture and method of operation for improving the protection of privacy and confidentiality in disease registers

BACKGROUND

Disease registers aim to collect information about all instances of a disease or condition in a defined population of individuals. Traditionally methods of operating disease registers have required that notifications of cases be identified by unique identifiers such as social security number or national identification number, or by ensembles of non-unique identifying data items, such as name, sex and date of birth. However, growing concern over the privacy and confidentiality aspects of disease registers may hinder their future operation. Technical solutions to these legitimate concerns are needed.

DISCUSSION

An alternative method of operation is proposed which involves splitting the personal identifiers from the medical details at the source of notification, and separately encrypting each part using asymmetrical (public key) cryptographic methods. The identifying information is sent to a single Population Register, and the medical details to the relevant disease register. The Population Register uses probabilistic record linkage to assign a unique personal identification (UPI) number to each person notified to it, although not necessarily everyone in the entire population. This UPI is shared only with a single trusted third party whose sole function is to translate between this UPI and separate series of personal identification numbers which are specific to each disease register.

SUMMARY

The system proposed would significantly improve the protection of privacy and confidentiality, while still allowing the efficient linkage of records between disease registers, under the control and supervision of the trusted third party and independent ethics committees. The proposed architecture could accommodate genetic databases and tissue banks as well as a wide range of other health and social data collections. It is important that proposals such as this are subject to widespread scrutiny by information security experts, researchers and interested members of the general public, alike.

Privacy and confidentiality of genetic information: what rules for the new science?

This review covers the ethical, legal, and policy issues associated with the generation and dissemination of genetic information. First, conceptual issues, such as the definition of terms and the description of two modes of analysis, are addressed. Research findings on public attitudes toward privacy and genetics and other factors relevant to policy making are also reviewed. Second, the example of genetic research is used to highlight the importance of attention to the intrinsic harms associated with violations of genetic privacy. Subtopics include national databases and biobanks, gene brokers, and pharmacogenomics. Third, the example of insurer access to genetic information is used to highlight the importance of attention to discrimination and other instrumental harms associated with failures of regulation. Fourth, a summary of the preceding sections leads into an outline of a program for realizing the benefits of the new science in a manner that affirms rather than erodes privacy and other important values.

Human biological materials in research: ethical issues and the role of stewardship in minimizing research risks

Recent scientific and technologic advances generated from the human genome project have increased the ability of researchers to study human biological materials. This has enhanced the ease with which highly personal information such as genetic makeup can be revealed about individuals, families, and communities. In addition, a change in the societal value of human biological tissue from waste to commercial resource has occurred. A new model of stewardship is developed that can be used as a guide for protecting human research participants who are involved in studies that include collecting and handling human biological samples. Nursing implications to ensure protection of human research participants are discussed.

Yin-yang genetics, or the HSD deCODE controversy

Iceland has attracted world-wide attention because of a controversy surrounding the Icelandic Health Sector Database Act of 1998 and the genomics company deCODE Genetics. The controversy concerns limits to state power, bioethics and regulation of research, and civil liberties. Understanding it necessitates paying attention to the yin-yang-like character of deCODE; it is international or Icelandic, what is the relation between the HSD and deCODE, will the HSD engulf the Icelandic nation as a whole?

The Icelandic genome debate

Three of the central issues in contemporary debates about the commodification of the human body are those of property, ownership, and access. This article uses the case of the central medical database on Icelanders to discuss contesting claims about the ownership of the human genome, with respect to the rapid development of biotechnology, human genome projects and DNA collections. We emphasize the contrast between commercial and communitarian perspectives and to illustrate our argument we explore debates about the Icelandic database. These debates have been intense, focusing on a range of issues, including ethics, academic freedom, public health and, last but not least, the control and ownership of medical records, genetic information and genealogical data. This article should be seen primarily as an anthropological commentary on ongoing developments.

Solidarity and equity: new ethical frameworks for genetic databases

Genetic database initiatives have given rise to considerable debate about their potential harms and benefits. The question arises as to whether existing ethical frameworks are sufficient to mediate between the competing interests at stake. One approach is to strengthen mechanisms for obtaining informed consent and for protecting confidentiality. However, there is increasing interest in other ethical frameworks, involving solidarity--participation in research for the common good--and the sharing of the benefits of research.