Patient perspectives on group benefits and harms in genetic research

Consideration and Disclosure of Group Risks in Genomics and Other Data-Centric Research: Does the Common Rule Need Revision?

Harms and risks to groups and third-parties can be significant in the context of research, particularly in data-centric studies involving genomic, artificial intelligence, and/or machine learning technologies. This article explores whether and how United States federal regulations should be adapted to better align with current ethical thinking and protect group interests. Three aspects of the Common Rule deserve attention and reconsideration with respect to group interests: institutional review board (IRB) assessment of the risks/benefits of research; disclosure requirements in the informed consent process; and criteria for waivers of informed consent. In accordance with respect for persons and communities, investigators and IRBs should systematically consider potential group harm when designing and reviewing protocols, respectively. Research participants should be informed about any potential group harm in the consent process. We call for additional public discussion, empirical research, and normative analysis on these issues to determine the right regulatory and policy path forward.

Attitudes of the Public Toward Consent for Biobank Research in Japan

Background: Parallel to the rapid advancement of biological and information technologies, the role and forms of biobank research have been constantly changing. The ethical, legal, and social implications of consent in biobank research are in a state of flux. This study aimed to clarify current Japanese public preferences regarding the consent model and explore how public attitudes are determined. Methods: We conducted an online, population-based quantitative survey among Japanese residents aged between 20 and 69 years. Statistical analyses consisted of univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results: Of the 1580 respondents, 60.9% preferred autonomy-based consent (specific or dynamic consent) and 23.9% preferred broad-type consent (opt-out or broad consent). Marital status, gender, and privacy concerns were significantly associated with the preference for a consent model. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated the public's current preference for autonomy-based consent, including dynamic consent. However, our findings also revealed that approximately half of the respondents considered broad consent as somewhat preferable.

Learning from Black/African American Participants: Applying the Integrated Behavioral Model to Assess Recruitment Strategies for a Glaucoma Genetic Study

The underrepresentation of African American (AA) participants in medical research perpetuates racial health disparities in the United States. Open-ended phone interviews were conducted with 50 AA adults from Philadelphia who had previously participated in a genetic study of glaucoma that included complimentary ophthalmic screenings. Recruitment for the genetic study was done in partnership with a Black-owned radio station. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts, guided by the integrated behavior model (IBM), identified self-reported motivations for participating in this care-focused and community-promoted research program. Findings revealed that decisions to enroll were influenced by strong instrumental attitudes regarding learning more about personal health and contributing to future care options for others. Notable normative influences that factored into participants' decisions to enroll in the study included hearing about the study from a respected community media outlet, friends, and family. About one-third of respondents discussed past and current racial discrimination in medical research as an important sociocultural frame within which they thought about participation, suggesting that experiential attitudes play a continuing role in AA's decisions to enroll in medical research studies. Medical researchers seeking to recruit AA participants should collaborate with community partners, combine enrollment opportunities with access to health services, and emphasize the potential for new research to mitigate racial inequalities.

The difficulties of broad data sharing in genomic medicine: Empirical evidence from diverse participants in prenatal and pediatric clinical genomics research

PURPOSE

This study aimed to understand broad data sharing decisions among predominantly underserved families participating in genomic research.

METHODS

Drawing on clinic observations, semistructured interviews, and survey data from prenatal and pediatric families enrolled in a genomic medicine study focused on historically underserved and underrepresented populations, this paper expands empirical evidence regarding genomic data sharing communication and decision-making.

RESULTS

One-third of parents declined to share family data, and pediatric participants were significantly more likely to decline than prenatal participants. The pediatric population was significantly more socioeconomically disadvantaged and more likely to require interpreters. Opt-in was tied to altruism and participants' perception that data sharing was inherent to research participation. Opt-out was associated with privacy concerns and influenced by clinical staff's presentation of data handling procedures. The ability of participants to make informed choices during enrollment about data sharing was weakened by suboptimal circumstances, which was revealed by poor understanding of data sharing in follow-up interviews as well as discrepancies between expressed participant desires and official recorded choices.

CONCLUSION

These empirical data suggest that the context within which informed consent process is conducted in clinical genomics may be inadequate for respecting participants' values and preferences and does not support informed decision-making processes.

High Acceptability of Donating Hair and Other Biological Samples for Research Among People Living with HIV in an Outpatient Clinic in Lagos, Nigeria

Willingness to donate hair samples is a rate-limiting step for assaying antiretroviral (ARV) concentrations in hair, an emerging technique for HIV prevention and treatment monitoring. We surveyed ethnically diverse Nigerians to determine their willingness to donate hair for biomedical research. A cross-sectional survey of people living with HIV on ARV therapy (ART) was conducted at the HIV clinic of Nigerian Institute of Medical Research, using systematic sampling. The researcher-administered questionnaire was designed to capture sociodemographic data, length of time on ART, and willingness to donate hair. Univariate analysis was performed on sociodemographic characteristics, and independent-samples t-test and chi-square tests were used for bivariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with willingness to donate hair samples, with a significance level of 0.05. Of the 398 participants enrolled in the study, 258 (64.8%) were female, the average age was 40 years (±9.8), and the average time spent on ART was 7.3 years (±4.2). More than half (64.8%) of the respondents were willing to donate hair samples for biomedical research and they were 1.5 times more likely to donate hair than blood. For one-third of the participants, the anticipated benefit from the eventual research findings was the primary motivation to donate hair samples. Fear of use of hair for rituals was the most common stated reason for unwillingness to donate hair samples (21.2%). In an ethnically diverse, urban-based Nigerian study population, nearly two-thirds of the participants were willing to donate hair samples for biomedical research. These findings support the feasibility of hair sampling for future HIV clinical research conducted within Nigeria.

Obligations of the "Gift": Reciprocity and Responsibility in Precision Medicine

Precision medicine relies on data and biospecimens from participants who willingly offer their personal information on the promise that this act will ultimately result in knowledge that will improve human health. Drawing on anthropological framings of the "gift," this paper contextualizes participation in precision medicine as inextricable from social relationships and their ongoing ethical obligations. Going beyond altruism, reframing biospecimen and data collection in terms of socially regulated gift-giving recovers questions of responsibility and care. As opposed to conceiving participation in terms of donations that elide clinical labor critical to precision medicine, the gift metaphor underscores ethical commitments to reciprocity and responsibility. This demands confronting inequities in precision medicine, such as systemic bias and lack of affordability and access. A focus on justice in precision medicine that recognizes the sociality of the gift is a critical frontier for bioethics.

Engaging publics in biobanking and genetic research governance - a literature review towards informing practice in India

Background: There is growing interest in advancing biobanking and genetic research in many countries, including India. Concurrently, more importance is being placed on participatory approaches involving the public and other stakeholders in addressing ethical issues and policymaking as part of a broader governance approach. We analyse the tools, purposes, outcomes and limitations of engaging people towards biobanking and genetic research governance that have been undertaken worldwide, and explore their relevance to India. Methods: Papers to be reviewed were identified through a targeted literature search carried out using ProQuest and PubMed. Retrieved papers were analysed with the Rpackage for Qualitative Data Analysis using inductive coding and thematic analysis, guided by the Framework Method. Results: Empirical studies on public and community engagement in the context of biobanking and or genetic research show a predominance towards the end of the last decade, spanning 2007 to 2019. Numerous strategies-including public meetings, community durbars, focus group discussions, interviews, deliberations, citizen-expert panels and community advisory boards-have been used to facilitate communication, consultation and collaboration with people, at the level of general and specific publics. Engagement allowed researchers to understand how people's values, opinions and experiences related to the research process; and enabled participants to become partners within the conduct of research. Conclusions: Constructs such as 'co-production', 'engagement of knowledges', 'rules of engagement' and 'stewardship' emerge as significant mechanisms that can address the ethical challenges and the governance of biobanking and genetic research in India. Given the inherent diversity of the Indian population and its varying cultural values and beliefs, there is a need to invest time and research funds for engagement as a continuum of participatory activity, involving communication, consultation and collaboration in relation to biobanking and genetic research. Further research into these findings is required to explore their effective employment within India.

Engaging publics in biobanking and genetic research governance - a literature review towards informing practice in India

Background: There is growing interest in advancing biobanking and genetic research in many countries, including India. Concurrently, more importance is being placed on participatory approaches involving the public and other stakeholders in addressing ethical issues and policymaking as part of a broader governance approach. We analyse the tools, purposes, outcomes and limitations of engaging people towards biobanking and genetic research governance that have been undertaken worldwide, and explore their relevance to India. Methods: Papers to be reviewed were identified through a targeted literature search carried out using ProQuest and PubMed. Retrieved papers were analysed with the R package for Qualitative Data Analysis using inductive coding and thematic analysis, guided by the Framework Method. Results: Empirical studies on public and community engagement in the context of biobanking and or genetic research show a predominance towards the end of the last decade, spanning 2007 to 2019. Numerous strategies—including public meetings, community durbars, focus group discussions, interviews, deliberations, citizen-expert panels and community advisory boards—have been used to facilitate communication, consultation and collaboration with people, at the level of general and specific publics. Engagement allowed researchers to understand how people’s values, opinions and experiences related to the research process; and enabled participants to become partners within the conduct of research. Conclusions:  Constructs such as ‘co-production’, ‘engagement of knowledges’, ‘rules of engagement’ and ‘stewardship’ emerge as significant mechanisms that can address the ethical challenges and the governance of biobanking and genetic research in India. Given the inherent diversity of the Indian population and its varying cultural values and beliefs, there is a need to invest time and research funds for engagement as a continuum of participatory activity, involving communication, consultation and collaboration in relation to biobanking and genetic research. Further research into these findings is required to explore their effective employment within India

Four Faces of Fair Subject Selection

Although the principle of fair subject selection is a widely recognized requirement of ethical clinical research, it often yields conflicting imperatives, thus raising major ethical dilemmas regarding participant selection. In this paper, we diagnose the source of this problem, arguing that the principle of fair subject selection is best understood as a bundle of four distinct sub-principles, each with normative force and each yielding distinct imperatives: (1) fair inclusion; (2) fair burden sharing; (3) fair opportunity; and (4) fair distribution of third-party risks. We first map out these distinct sub-principles, and then identify the ways in which they yield conflicting imperatives for the design of inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the recruitment of participants. We then offer guidance for how decision makers should navigate these conflicting imperatives to ensure that participants are selected fairly.

Responsiveness and adaptability in community engaged biobanking research: experiences from a Hispanic community

The success of biobanking research relies on the willingness of the public to provide biological and sociological information, donate tissue samples, and complete psychosocial questionnaires. Medical advances made through biobanking research have limited reach if tissues are not obtained from a diverse sample of individuals. Within, we describe the process of transitioning a small group of Hispanic community members who met regularly into a more formal Hispanic Community Advisory Board (HCAB) for the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project. The sole purpose of the HCAB was to provide input and feedback on GTEx and, specifically, how researchers can best address the concerns of the Hispanic community related to tissue donation. This initial purpose was adapted to be responsive to the HCAB's request to include educating others in the Hispanic community who were not a part of the advisory board about genomic biobanking. While HCAB members' knowledge of biobanking was limited, a strong need for culturally tailored information about the impact of biobanking medical discoveries and their potential benefit to the Hispanic community was expressed. The HCAB's feedback guided revisions to GTEx study documents to specifically address concerns about language use, clarity, and context including the need for consent forms to address cultural concerns and fears. HCAB members also collaborated on the development of a walk-through exhibition which provided a visual, narrative-based explanation of GTEx and the process of tissue donation for research and biobanking purposes. The HCAB demonstrated the value of including community participation in scientific research projects, for both scientists and lay communities, and underscored the importance of developing community engagement approaches that are adaptable and responsive to community needs. Our experience with the HCAB serves as exemplar for a unique paradigm of community inclusiveness and education in research.

A Review of African Americans' Beliefs and Attitudes About Genomic Studies: Opportunities for Message Design

Precision Medicine, the practice of targeting prevention and therapies according to an individual’s lifestyle, environment or genetics, holds promise to improve population health outcomes. Within precision medicine, pharmacogenomics (PGX) uses an individual’s genome to determine drug response and dosing to tailor therapy. Most PGX studies have been conducted in European populations, but African Americans have greater genetic variation when compared with most populations. Failure to include African Americans in PGX studies may lead to increased health disparities. PGX studies focused on patients of African American descent are needed to identify relevant population specific genetic predictors of drug responses. Recruitment is one barrier to African American participation in PGX. Addressing recruitment challenges is a significant, yet potentially low-cost solution to improve patient accrual and retention. Limited literature exists about African American participation in PGX research, but studies have explored barriers and facilitators among African American participation in genomic studies more broadly. This paper synthesizes the existing literature and extrapolates these findings to PGX studies, with a particular focus on opportunities for message design. Findings from this review can provide guidance for future PGX study recruitment.

Attitudes of publics who are unwilling to donate DNA data for research

With the use of genetic technology, researchers have the potential to inform medical diagnoses and treatment in actionable ways. Accurate variant interpretation is a necessary condition for the utility of genetic technology to unfold. This relies on the ability to access large genomic datasets so that comparisons can be made between variants of interest. This can only be successful if DNA and medical data are donated by large numbers of people to 'research', including clinical, non-profit and for-profit research initiatives, in order to be accessed by scientists and clinicians worldwide. The objective of the 'Your DNA, Your Say' global survey is to explore public attitudes, values and opinions towards willingness to donate and concerns regarding the donation of one's personal data for use by others. Using a representative sample of 8967 English-speaking publics from the UK, the USA, Canada and Australia, we explore the characteristics of people who are unwilling (n = 1426) to donate their DNA and medical information, together with an exploration of their reasons. Understanding this perspective is important for making sense of the interaction between science and society. It also helps to focus engagement initiatives on the issues of concern to some publics.

African American Living Donors' Attitudes About APOL1 Genetic Testing: A Mixed Methods Study

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

African American live kidney donors ("donors") have a greater risk for kidney failure than European American donors. Apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1) variants in African Americans may be associated with this disparity.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional mixed-methods design.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

African American donors at 1 transplantation center.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Semistructured interviews assessed attitudes about APOL1 genetic testing, willingness to undergo APOL1 testing, hypothetical decisions about donating with 2 APOL1 variants, and demographics. Surveys assessed perceptions of ethnic identity and genetics knowledge. Interview transcriptions were analyzed using thematic analysis. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

23 donors participated in semistructured interviews. Most (96%) reported that transplantation centers should routinely offer APOL1 genetic testing to all African American potential donors. Most (87%) would have been willing to undergo APOL1 testing before donating. Although study participants noted that APOL1 testing may deter African American potential donors from donating, most (61%) would have donated even if they had 2 high-risk APOL1 variants. Several themes emerged. Study participants believed that APOL1 testing was beneficial for providing information to help donors make informed donation decisions. Participants expressed concern about APOL1 variants placing donors at harm for kidney failure, and therefore valued taking preventive health measures. Participants believed that potential donors would experience psychological distress from learning that they have 2 gene variants and could harm their recipients. Participants were apprehensive about insurance coverage and costs of APOL1 testing and feared that APOL1 genetic test results could discriminate against African Americans.

LIMITATIONS

Findings may not be generalizable to African American potential donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that African American donors support APOL1 genetic testing yet fear that APOL1 variants and genetic testing could adversely affect donors' health and ethnic identity. Transplantation centers using APOL1 genetic testing should address African American donors' concerns about APOL1 genetic testing to optimize future donors' informed consent practices.

A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the United States

Concerns about genetic privacy affect individuals' willingness to accept genetic testing in clinical care and to participate in genomics research. To learn what is already known about these views, we conducted a systematic review, which ultimately analyzed 53 studies involving the perspectives of 47,974 participants on real or hypothetical privacy issues related to human genetic data. Bibliographic databases included MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, and Sociological Abstracts. Three investigators independently screened studies against predetermined criteria and assessed risk of bias. The picture of genetic privacy that emerges from this systematic literature review is complex and riddled with gaps. When asked specifically "are you worried about genetic privacy," the general public, patients, and professionals frequently said yes. In many cases, however, that question was posed poorly or only in the most general terms. While many participants expressed concern that genomic and medical information would be revealed to others, respondents frequently seemed to conflate privacy, confidentiality, control, and security. People varied widely in how much control they wanted over the use of data. They were more concerned about use by employers, insurers, and the government than they were about researchers and commercial entities. In addition, people are often willing to give up some privacy to obtain other goods. Importantly, little attention was paid to understanding the factors-sociocultural, relational, and media-that influence people's opinions and decisions. Future investigations should explore in greater depth which concerns about genetic privacy are most salient to people and the social forces and contexts that influence those perceptions. It is also critical to identify the social practices that will make the collection and use of these data more trustworthy for participants as well as to identify the circumstances that lead people to set aside worries and decide to participate in research.

Precisely Where Are We Going? Charting the New Terrain of Precision Prevention

In addition to genetic data, precision medicine research gathers information about three factors that modulate gene expression: lifestyles, environments, and communities. The relevant research tools-epidemiology, environmental assessment, and socioeconomic analysis-are those of public health sciences rather than molecular biology. Because these methods are designed to support inferences and interventions addressing population health, the aspirations of this research are expanding from individualized treatment toward precision prevention in public health. The purpose of this review is to explore the emerging goals and challenges of such a shift to help ensure that the genomics community and public policy makers understand the ethical issues at stake in embracing and pursuing precision prevention. Two emerging goals bear special attention in this regard: (a) public health risk reduction strategies, such as screening, and (b) the application of genomic variation studies to understand and reduce health disparities among population groups.

Relevant Information and Informed Consent in Research: In Defense of the Subjective Standard of Disclosure

In this article, we seek to contribute to the debate on the requirement of disclosure in the context of informed consent for research. We defend the subjective standard of disclosure and describe ways to implement this standard in research practice. We claim that the researcher should make an effort to find out what kinds of information are likely to be relevant for those consenting to research. This invites researchers to take empirical survey information seriously, attempt to understand the cultural context, talk to patients to be better able to understand what can be potentially different concerns and interests prevalent in the target population. The subjective standard of disclosure should be seen as a moral ideal that perhaps can never be perfectly implemented but still can and should be used as a normative ideal guiding research practice. In the light of these discussions, we call for more empirical research on what considerations are likely to be perceived as relevant by potential research participants recruited from different socio-economic and cultural groups.

Prioritizing Approaches to Engage Community Members and Build Trust in Biobanks: A Survey of Attitudes and Opinions of Adults within Outpatient Practices at the University of Maryland

Background: Achieving high participation of communities representative of all sub-populations is needed in order to ensure broad applicability of biobank study findings. This study aimed to understand potentially mutable attitudes and opinions commonly correlated with biobank participation in order to inform approaches to promote participation in biobanks. Methods: Adults from two University of Maryland (UMD) Faculty Physicians, Inc. outpatient practices were invited to watch a video and complete a survey about a new biobank initiative. We used: Chi-square to assess the relationship between willingness to join the biobank and participant characteristics, other potentially mutable attitudes and opinions, and trust in the UMD. We also used t-test to assess the relationship with trust in medical research. We also prioritize proposed actions to improve attitudes and opinions about joining biobanks according to perceived responsiveness. Results: 169 participants completed the study, 51% of whom indicated a willingness to join the biobank. Willingness to join the biobank was not associated with age, gender, race, or education but was associated with respondent comfort sharing samples and clinical information, concerns related to confidentiality, potential for misuse of information, trust in UMD, and perceived health benefit. In ranked order, potential actions we surveyed that might alleviate some of these concerns include: increase chances to learn more about the biobank, increase opportunities to be updated, striving to put community concerns first, including involving community members as leaders of biobank research, and involving community members in decision making. Conclusions: This study identified several attitudes and opinions that influence decisions to join a biobank, including many concerns that could potentially be addressed by engaging community members. We also demonstrate our method of prioritizing ways to improve attitudes and opinions about joining a biobank according to perceived responsiveness.

Attitudes of African Americans toward return of results from exome and whole genome sequencing

Exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing (ES/WGS) present patients and research participants with the opportunity to benefit from a broad scope of genetic results of clinical and personal utility. Yet, this potential for benefit also risks disenfranchising populations such as African Americans (AAs) that are already underrepresented in genetic research and utilize genetic tests at lower rates than other populations. Understanding a diverse range of perspectives on consenting for ES/WGS and receiving ES/WGS results is necessary to ensure parity in genomic health care and research. We conducted a series of 13 focus groups (n = 76) to investigate if and how attitudes toward participation in ES/WGS research and return of results from ES/WGS differ between self-described AAs and non-AAs. The majority of both AAs and non-AAs were willing to participate in WGS studies and receive individual genetic results, but the fraction not interested in either was higher in AAs. This is due in part to different expectations of health benefits from ES/WGS and how results should be managed. Our results underscore the need to develop and test culturally tailored strategies for returning ES/WGS results to AAs.

Predictors of consent to pharmacogenomics testing in the IDEAL study

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacogenomic testing is important in developing individualized therapeutic approaches. In the phase 3 IDEAL (Individualized Dosing to Assess Optimal Pegylated Interferon Therapy) clinical trial, a subset of patients receiving peginterferon and ribavirin for treatment of chronic hepatitis C agreed to provide blood samples for genetic testing. Genome-wide association studies subsequently identified associations between IL28B polymorphism and sustained virologic response, and ITPA polymorphism and ribavirin-associated anemia.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the groups of patients who accepted or declined pharmacogenomic testing in the IDEAL study.

METHODS

Clinical and demographic factors and treatment outcomes were compared at all sites that had approved pharmacogenomic testing. Differences between patients who consented to and declined pharmacogenomic testing were analyzed using Student's t-test and χ²-test.

RESULTS

In total, 109 of 118 sites participated in the pharmacogenomic substudy, and 1674 of 2949 (57%) patients enrolled at these sites consented to pharmacogenomic testing. More patients treated in academic medical centers than in community centers (60 vs. 52%, P<0.001) provided consent. More men than women (58 vs. 54%, P=0.04) consented to pharmacogenomic testing. There was no significant difference in pharmacogenomic participation between patients from different racial groups, including whites and African Americans (58 vs. 54%, P=0.07). Treatment outcomes were also similar according to pharmacogenomic participation.

CONCLUSION

In the IDEAL study, patient consent to pharmacogenomic testing did not introduce selection bias. Treatment at an academic center and male sex were associated with higher rates of pharmacogenomic testing consent. Efficacy and safety outcomes were similar in patients who accepted and declined pharmacogenomic testing.

Gene-environment interactions and health inequalities: views of underserved communities

This article examines the beliefs and experiences of individuals living in underserved ethnically diverse communities in Cleveland, Ohio, regarding the influence of genetic, social, and environmental factors on health and health inequalities. Using a community-engaged methodological approach, 13 focus groups were conducted with African American, Hispanic, and White individuals residing in the Cleveland area to explore attitudes and beliefs about genetics, genetic research, and health disparities and inequalities. Results of this study highlight the range of meanings that individuals attach to genetic variation, genomic research, and gene-environment interactions, and their implications for addressing health inequalities. The majority of participants in all focus groups reported that social and environmental factors were more important than genetics in contributing to health inequalities. Most participants were unfamiliar with genetic research. These data have implications for how genetic information and research might be applied in conjunction with addressing social determinants of health to improve prevention strategies in underserved communities and ultimately reduce health inequalities.

Evolving approaches to the ethical management of genomic data

The ethical landscape in the field of genomics is rapidly shifting. Plummeting sequencing costs, along with ongoing advances in bioinformatics, now make it possible to generate an enormous volume of genomic data about vast numbers of people. The informational richness, complexity, and frequently uncertain meaning of these data, coupled with evolving norms surrounding the sharing of data and samples and persistent privacy concerns, have generated a range of approaches to the ethical management of genomic information. As calls increase for the expanded use of broad or even open consent, and as controversy grows about how best to handle incidental genomic findings, these approaches, informed by normative analysis and empirical data, will continue to evolve alongside the science.

Ethical and legal implications of whole genome and whole exome sequencing in African populations

BACKGROUND

Rapid advances in high throughput genomic technologies and next generation sequencing are making medical genomic research more readily accessible and affordable, including the sequencing of patient and control whole genomes and exomes in order to elucidate genetic factors underlying disease. Over the next five years, the Human Heredity and Health in Africa (H3Africa) Initiative, funded by the Wellcome Trust (United Kingdom) and the National Institutes of Health (United States of America), will contribute greatly towards sequencing of numerous African samples for biomedical research.

DISCUSSION

Funding agencies and journals often require submission of genomic data from research participants to databases that allow open or controlled data access for all investigators. Access to such genotype-phenotype and pedigree data, however, needs careful control in order to prevent identification of individuals or families. This is particularly the case in Africa, where many researchers and their patients are inexperienced in the ethical issues accompanying whole genome and exome research; and where an historical unidirectional flow of samples and data out of Africa has created a sense of exploitation and distrust. In the current study, we analysed the implications of the anticipated surge of next generation sequencing data in Africa and the subsequent data sharing concepts on the protection of privacy of research subjects. We performed a retrospective analysis of the informed consent process for the continent and the rest-of-the-world and examined relevant legislation, both current and proposed. We investigated the following issues: (i) informed consent, including guidelines for performing culturally-sensitive next generation sequencing research in Africa and availability of suitable informed consent documents; (ii) data security and subject privacy whilst practicing data sharing; (iii) conveying the implications of such concepts to research participants in resource limited settings.

SUMMARY

We conclude that, in order to meet the unique requirements of performing next generation sequencing-related research in African populations, novel approaches to the informed consent process are required. This will help to avoid infringement of privacy of individual subjects as well as to ensure that informed consent adheres to acceptable data protection levels with regard to use and transfer of such information.

Reporting actionable research results: shared secrets can save lives

In this Commentary, we describe a cryptographic method for returning research results to individuals who participate in clinical studies. Controlled use of this method, which relaxes the typical anonymization guarantee, can ensure that clinically actionable results reach participants while also addressing most privacy concerns.

Engaging African-Americans about biobanks and the return of research results

We conducted a deliberative engagement to assess attitudinal changes regarding biobank research, governance, and the return of results. We recruited African-Americans from two Southside Chicago health care facilities that serve communities of very different socioeconomic and educational backgrounds in order to examine similarities and differences within the African-American population. We used a mixed method, deliberative engagement process involving a convenience sample of parents recruited from a Federally Qualified Health Clinic (FQHC) [n = 23] and a university-based practice (UBP) [n = 22]. Four coding categories illustrate similarities and differences between participants from the two different practices: (1) reasons for and against participation; (2) trust and mistrust; (3) return of research results; and (4) religion. Overall, there was strong interest in receiving results, which was a main motivator for participation. While participants from both health care facilities expressed distrust of research, UBP participants also expressed trust in the research enterprise. FQHC participants more frequently mentioned religion. Studies about participation in biobanks often focus on participants' race as the sole significant variable, while our work supports the importance of other demographic factors. Medical researchers must move beyond research analyses that consider the African-American population to be monolithic and value the diversity within it.

Protecting participants, promoting progress: public perspectives on community advisory boards (CABs) in biobanking

Few studies have explored public perspectives on community advisory board (CAB) involvement in biobank-based research. This study held focus groups (n = 7) with 48 individuals residing in the catchment of an emerging comprehensive tissue and DNA biobank in the state of Iowa. Participants recognized benefits of bringing CABs into biobank oversight, including additional levels of protection they could afford research participants. Yet, CAB goals of protecting participants were also seen as potentially antithetical to research and medical progress. Participants expressed uncertainty about the relationship of CABs to IRBs, communities, and industry. Findings suggest members of the public are in principle supportive of CAB involvement in biobanking, yet anticipate a range of problems and concerns. These perceptions will need to be proactively addressed.