The public-private research ecosystem in the genome editing era

Biomedical research in the US has long been conducted in a public-private (PP) "ecosystem." Today, especially with gene therapies and genome editing-based medicine, publicly funded researchers frequently hand off their research to the private sector for clinical development, often to small, venture capital-funded startups in which they have a financial interest. This trend raises ethical questions about conflicts of interest, effectiveness of regulatory oversight, and justice in therapy access, that we are addressing in a multi-year, multidisciplinary study of the evolving governance of genome editing. This paper draws on interviews with scientists working across the PP divide and their private sector business and financial partners. We find little concern about potential ethical dilemmas, with two exceptions expressed by public sector scientists: concerns about inequitable access to treatments due to disparities in wealth, ethnicity, and health insurance benefits; and about whether their private collaborators' profit motive may affect their research objectives.

Facilitators and Barriers to Adherence to Anti-Retroviral Treatment Among Pregnant or Breastfeeding Women Living with HIV and Perinatally Infected Infants: A Scoping Review

In 2022, 54% of 1.5 million children (age 0-14) living with HIV had access to anti-retroviral medication (ART). Adherence to ART for pregnant or breastfeeding HIV + women is critical for maintaining their personal health and to prevent mother-to-child-transmission (MTCT). For HIV + infants, adherence is essential to establish early viremic control and is contingent on caregiver administration. We conducted a scoping review to systematically identify and categorize the influences on ART adherence for pregnant or breastfeeding HIV + women and their HIV + infants. We searched databases in June 2023 and employed the Social-Ecological Model (SEM) to organize facilitators and barriers to adherence referenced in published articles. All articles published before 2016 were excluded due to updated guidelines from WHO on MTCT and ART. Our analysis included 52 articles. 50/52 took place in Africa and used cross-sectional and mixed-methods design. Barriers to adherence for pregnant or breastfeeding HIV + women included maternal education, self-efficacy, social support, and social/economic context. Barriers to infant adherence included development, nutrition, age of treatment initiation, disclosure, and ART side effects. Additional facilitators and barriers to adherence are presented at family, extra-familial, and socio-cultural SEM levels. Stigma was the most salient barrier referenced across the entire continuum of HIV care and all SEM levels. This review revealed a dearth of literature focusing on HIV + infants who are dependent on their caregivers for ART adherence and lack of a standard adherence measure. We identified multi-leveled influences on adherence impacting both the mother and infant and are amenable to public health intervention.

Why Climate Literacy Is Health Literacy

Health problems of global warming are daunting in severity and magnitude and will only get worse. Yet literacy about these problems is poor and plans to alleviate them are too early in development to be responsive to current levels of global threat and individual need. Social and ecological determinants of health and illness are exacerbated by excessive heat and flooding; lack of food, safe water, and secure shelter; and loss of arable land for farming. This article considers the nature and scope of ethicists' roles in awakening clinicians and the public to this crisis and offers 4 recommendations to reduce morbidity and mortality from climate change.

Perceptions of Rapid Antiretroviral Therapy Initiation Among Participants of The Netherlands Cohort Study on Acute HIV Infection

Starting antiretroviral therapy (ART) same-day, or as soon as possible after HIV diagnosis is advised in guidelines worldwide. Especially during acute HIV infection (AHI), rapid ART start may be more urgent because of a higher risk of transmission or symptoms of acute retroviral syndrome. During this phase, rapid ART start may have additional benefits for viral reservoir size and host immunity. We explored perceptions of rapid ART start among participants of The Netherlands Cohort Study on Acute HIV infection (NOVA study), who started ART rapidly after diagnosis of AHI. We conducted 20 in-depth qualitative interviews with NOVA study participants between October and December 2018. Data were analyzed thematically, using inductive and iterative coding techniques. Roughly half of the participants stated they felt well-informed about the importance of (rapid) ART. Starting ART rapidly was perceived positively by almost all participants, mostly because of the expected benefits on their health, and to prevent HIV transmission. Rapid ART start was seen as a way to cope with the diagnosis. However, a more negative perception was that rapid ART start confronted participants with their diagnosis, when they were still adjusting to a new situation. Our results show that among people diagnosed during AHI, rapid ART is well-accepted. These results should be encouraging to HIV care providers who encounter people with AHI in their clinical practice and to researchers who carry out cure-related studies, in which early ART is often included. The Clinical Trial Registration number is NCT05728996.

Corrigendum to "HIV remission trial investigators' attitudes towards risk and risk mitigation in trials that include treatment interruption" [J Virus Erad 9 (2) (June 2023) 100331]

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.jve.2023.100331.].

HIV remission trial investigators' attitudes towards risk and risk mitigation in trials that include treatment interruption

Early-phase HIV remission ("cure") trials aim to test interventions developed to eradicate HIV or to sustainably control HIV without antiretroviral treatment (ART). Many remission trials include analytic treatment interruption (ATI) to evaluate interventions, which increases the risk to participants and their sexual partners. We conducted an online questionnaire of international HIV remission trial investigators and other study team members to assess their expectations regarding the time to achieve long-term control of HIV replication without treatment (functional cure) or complete eradication of replication-competent HIV virus (sterilizing cure); attitudes toward HIV remission research and the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of six HIV transmission risk mitigation strategies during trials with ATI of fixed duration. Nearly half of respondents (47%) reported expecting a functional cure for HIV to be achieved in 5-10 years, and one-third (35%) reported 10-20 years for a sterilizing cure to be achieved. On a scale of -3 to 3, mean scores indicated greater respondent concern about the risk of HIV transmission to partners during ATI (Time to rebound Mean: 0.4 and Fixed duration Mean: 11), compared to participant health risks from ATI (Time to Rebound Mean: -.9 and Fixed duration Mean: 0.0). With regard to feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy respectively, mitigation efforts rated positively included: requiring counseling for potential participants (Means: 2.3; 2.1; and 1.1), providing partner referrals for PrEP (Means: 1.3; 1.3; 1.5), providing pre-exposure proxylaxis directly to partners (Means: 1.0; 1.5; 1.6), and monitoring participants for new sexually transmitted disease acquisition (Means: 1.9; 1.4; 1.0). Respondents were less positive about requiring that participants' sexual partner(s) participate in risk counseling or limiting participation to those who commit to abstaining from sex during the entire ATI period. Our study demonstrates that HIV remission trial investigators and study team members are concerned about the risk of transmission to sexual partners during ATI. Separating the assessment of risk mitigation strategies for transmission risk into feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy allows the discovery of strategies that may best achieve all three outcomes. Additional research is needed to compare these more fine-grained assessments with views held by other investigators, people living with HIV, and trial participants.

The Promise and Reality of Public Engagement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing Research

This paper analyses the activities of five organizations shaping the debate over the global governance of genome editing in order to assess current approaches to public engagement (PE). We compare the recommendations of each group with its own practices. All recommend broad engagement with the general public, but their practices vary from expert-driven models dominated by scientists, experts, and civil society groups to citizen deliberation-driven models that feature bidirectional consultation with local citizens, as well as hybrid models that combine elements of both approaches. Only one group practices PE that seeks community perspectives to advance equity. In most cases, PE does little more than record already well-known views held by the most vocal groups, and thus is unlikely to produce more just or equitable processes or policy outcomes. Our exploration of the strengths, weaknesses, and possibilities of current forms of PE suggests a need to rethink both "public" and "engagement."

Reporting Individual-Level Research Results from Neurocognitive and Psychological Research in People Living with HIV: Lessons from Dementia Research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are growing expectations for the return of individual-level research results (RoR), which promotes autonomy and potential clinical and personal benefits. There are ethical and practical challenges, however, that may be exacerbated in research that assesses neurocognitive and psychological outcomes, including HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND). This paper reviews central concepts for RoR and recent empirical and conceptual articles from Alzheimer's disorder (AD) as a model for HIV.

RECENT FINDINGS

Data from AD studies indicate high participant interest and low risk of harm from RoR, though additional research is needed. Investigators report a range of benefits, potential risks, and feasibility concerns. Standardized, evidence-based approaches are needed for RoR. For HIV research, we recommend a default position of offering RoR for cognitive and psychological outcomes. Investigators should justify decisions not to return results after assessing the potential value and feasibility of RoR. Longitudinal research is needed for feasible and evidence-based best practices.

Corrigendum to 'Decision making for invasive and non-invasive optional procedures within an acute HIV research cohort in Bangkok,' [Contemporary Clinical Trials Communication (2023)101054]

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.101054.].

Decision making for invasive and non-invasive optional procedures within an acute HIV research cohort in Bangkok

Clinical research regularly includes required, nontherapeutic procedures to answer research questions. Optional procedures usually offer minimal or no personal benefit and may involve harms and burdens. Members from the Bangkok SEARCH010/RV254 HIV research cohort of individuals acutely HIV-infected are recruited to six optional procedures varying in invasiveness: leukapheresis, genital secretions collection, lumbar puncture, brain MRI/MRS/DTI, colon biopsy, and lymph node biopsy. We surveyed cohort members about their first recruitment for each procedure to examine factors associated with decision making and attitudes about compensation. 406 members (68%) completed the survey. Reported procedure participation ranged from 71% (MRI) to 27% (lymph node biopsy). Respondents underwent 0-6 procedure types (median 3). Ordinal regression indicated that lower perceived HIV impact and HIV remission trial participation were associated with more procedures completed. Reports of decision difficulty varied, and feeling pressured by research staff was low overall. Notably, those who declined procedures and those who underwent more invasive procedures reported greater decision difficulty and perceived pressure. Most respondents felt compensation amounts were appropriate, although opinions differed by procedure, and for some procedures, between people who agreed and declined. There is limited literature regarding consent to and attitudes about optional research procedures. Researchers must consider how to best support voluntary decisions for procedures with little personal benefit, particularly in lower-income or marginalized populations. In this longitudinal research cohort, perceived pressure to participate may be a concern, although our finding of variation in participation rates corresponding to invasiveness is reassuring. Data from different research contexts would provide important comparators.

Scientists' Views on Scientific Self-Governance for Human Genome Editing Research

As research on human gene editing has grown, a variety of prominent international organizations are considering how best to govern such research. But what role do scientists engaged in genome editing think they should have in developing research governance? In this study, we present results from a survey of 212 U.S.-based scientists regarding views on human genome editing governance. Most did not believe that scientists should be allowed to self-govern human genome editing research. Open-ended responses revealed four main reasons: conflicts of interest, the inevitability of rare "bad apples," historical evidence to the contrary, and the limitations of scientific expertise. Analyses of open-ended responses also revealed scientists' views on how human gene editing research should be governed. These views emphasize interdisciplinary professional and public input. The study results illustrate a noteworthy shift in the scientific community's traditional vision of professional autonomy and can inform ongoing efforts to develop research governance approaches.

Public Interest in Population Genetic Screening for Cancer Risk

An emerging role for DNA sequencing is to identify people at risk for an inherited cancer syndrome in order to prevent or ameliorate the manifestation of symptoms. Two cancer syndromes, Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndrome meet the “Tier 1” evidence threshold established by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for routine testing of patients with a personal or family history of cancer. Advancements in genomic medicine have accelerated public health pilot programs for these highly medically actionable conditions. In this brief report, we provide descriptive statistics from a survey of 746 US respondents from a Qualtrics panel about the public’s awareness of genetic testing, interest in learning about their cancer risk, and likelihood of participating in a population genetic screening (PGS) test. Approximately of half the respondents were aware of genetic testing for inherited cancer risk (n = 377/745, 50.6%) and would choose to learn about their cancer risk (n-309/635, 48.7%). Characteristics of those interested in learning about their cancer risk differed by educational attainment, age, income, insurance status, having a primary care doctor, being aware of genetic testing, and likelihood of sharing information with family (p < 0.05). A sizeable majority of the respondents who were interested in about learning their cancer risk also said that they were likely to participate in a PGS test that involved a clinical appointment and blood draw, but no out-of-pocket cost (n = 255/309, 82.5%). Reasons for not wanting to participate included not finding test results interesting or important, concerns about costs, and feeling afraid to know the results. Overall, our results suggest that engaging and educating the general population about the benefits of learning about an inherited cancer predisposition may be an important strategy to address recruitment barriers to PGS.

Attitudes About Analytic Treatment Interruption (ATI) in HIV Remission Trials with Different Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Resumption Criteria

HIV remission trials often require temporary stopping of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-an approach called analytic treatment interruption (ATI). Trial designs resulting in viremia raise risks for participants and sexual partners. We conducted a survey on attitudes about remission trials, comparing ART resumption criteria (lower-risk "time to rebound" and higher-risk "sustained viremia") among participants from an acute HIV cohort in Thailand. Analyses included Wilcoxon-Ranks and multivariate logistic analysis. Most of 408 respondents supported ATI trials, with slightly higher approval of, and willingness to participate in, trials using time to rebound versus sustained viremia criteria. Less than half of respondents anticipated disclosing trial participation to partners and over half indicated uncertainty or unwillingness about whether partners would be willing to use PrEP. Willingness to participate was higher among those who rated higher trial approval, lower anticipated burden, and those expecting to make the decision independently. Our findings support acceptability of ATI trials among most respondents. Participant attitudes and anticipated behaviors, especially related to transmission risk, have implications for future trial design and informed consent.

What Bioethicists Need to Know About the Social Determinants of Health-and Why

What more can be said about COVID-19 and the social determinants of health? This article describes neglected perspectives that derive from the history of social epidemiology, a field that identifies the social etiology of disease and variations in disease incidence among people differentially located in the social structure. The "discovery" of social determinants of diseases like COVID-19 is nothing new for epidemiology: debate over how to analyze structural determinants versus individual-level risk factors persisted throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. By the late 20th century, research had highlighted fundamental causes of health disparities, such as social conditions and structural racism; these are structural factors, embedded in the social fabric of life. Measurement of structured inequalities within systems faces complex and challenging problems, as research aims to better account for these lived realities at different levels of analysis and as multiple factors merge to influence outcomes (revealed in intersectionality theory). At each of these intersections, there are opportunities for bioethicists to consider their ethical implications. It is imperative to understand the social and ethical roots of our present conversations about health inequalities, in order to partner intelligently with researchers on the forefront of advocating for change.

Burden or benefit? Effects of providing education about and the option to request additional genomic findings from diagnostic exome sequencing: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Many people prefer to learn secondary or "additional" findings from genomic sequencing, including findings with limited medical actionability. Research has investigated preferences for and effects of learning such findings, but not psychosocial and behavioral effects of receiving education about them and the option to request them, which could be burdensome or beneficial (e.g., causing choice overload or satisfying strong preferences, respectively).

METHODS

335 adults with suspected genetic disorders who had diagnostic exome sequencing in a research study and were randomized to receive either diagnostic findings only (DF; n = 171) or diagnostic findings plus education about additional genomic findings and the option to request them (DF + EAF; n = 164). Assessments occurred after enrollment (Time 1), after return of diagnostic results and-for DF + EAF-the education under investigation (Time 2), and three and six months later (Times 3, 4).

RESULTS

Time 2 test-related distress, test-related uncertainty, and generalized anxiety were lower in the DF + EAF group (ps = 0.025-0.043). There were no other differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings show limited benefits and no harms of providing education about and the option to learn additional findings with limited medical actionability.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings can inform recommendations for returning additional findings from genomic sequencing (e.g., to research participants or after commercial testing).

The View from the Benches: Scientists' Perspectives on the Uses and Governance of Human Gene-Editing Research

The advent of human gene editing has stimulated international interest in how best to govern this research. However, research on stakeholder views has neglected scientists themselves. We surveyed 212 scientists who use gene editing in their work. Questions captured views on oversight and use of somatic and germline human gene editing for treatment, prevention, and enhancement. More respondents were supportive of somatic than germline editing, and more supported gene editing for treatment compared to prevention. Few supported its use for enhancement. When presented with specific conditions, levels of support for somatic editing differed by type of condition. Almost all respondents said scientists and national government representatives should be involved in oversight, but only 28% said scientists are best positioned to oversee gene-editing research. These results can inform the development of sound approaches to research governance, demonstrating the importance of identifying specific gene-editing uses when considering oversight.

Ethical, legal and social implications of human genome studies in radiation research: a workshop report for studies on atomic bomb survivors at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation

The Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) is the primary organization in Japan dedicated to studying the health consequences of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings in World War II. In December 2020, RERF held a virtual international workshop on the ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI) of genome studies. In this workshop, the ELSI considerations of future human genome studies on radiation research including atomic bomb survivors and their families were discussed. Since genome sequencing (GS) is now practical and affordable, RERF now plans GS of parents/child trios to examine genetic effects of atomic bomb radiation. As such studies may engender some novel risks and benefits, ethics review and engagement with families (including consent) need to be considered. These include protection of individual privacy, use of samples from deceased prior participants, return of results to the participants, public sharing of genome data and advance science and social welfare. Specifically with regard to social welfare, the results of such studies may have implications for public and government decision-making regarding social benefits of victims and other important questions. Based on these broad-ranging discussions we have developed the following concepts to guide this work: "trust," "compromise" and "relationship building," inclusive of the concerned stakeholders, scientific aims and Japanese society at large. We conclude that in order to realize, establish and maintain these concepts, it is essential to put procedures into place to ensure the successful, consensus-based implementation of the RERF studies.

Cohorts as collections of bodies and communities of persons: insights from the SEARCH010/RV254 research cohort

Longitudinal research cohorts are uniquely suited to answer research questions about morbidity and mortality. Cohorts may be comprised of individuals identified by specific conditions or other shared traits. We argue that research cohorts are more than simply aggregations of individuals and their associated data to meet research objectives. They are social communities comprised of members, investigators and organizations whose own interests, identities and cultures interact and evolve over time. The literature describes a range of scientific and ethical challenges and opportunities associated with cohorts. To advance these deliberations, we report examples from the literature and our own research on the Thai SEARCH010/RV254 cohort, comprising individuals diagnosed with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) during acute infection. We reflect on the impact of cohort experiences and identity, and specifically how people incorporate cohort participation into meaning making associated with their diagnosis, the influence of cohort participation on decision making for early-phase clinical trials recruited from within the cohort, and the impact of the relationships that exist between researchers and participants. These data support the concept of cohorts as communities of persons, where identity is shaped, in part, through cohort experiences. The social meanings associated with cohorts have implications for the ethics of cohort-based research, as social contexts inevitably affect the ways that ethical concerns manifest.

Recommendations from Thai stakeholders about protecting HIV remission ('cure') trial participants: report from a participatory workshop

Background

The social/behavioral HIV Decision-Making Study (DMS) assesses informed consent and trial experiences of individuals in HIV remission trials in Thailand. We convened a 1-d multi-stakeholder participatory workshop in Bangkok. We provide a meeting summary and reactions from DMS investigators.

Methods

Workshop members viewed de-identified interview excerpts from DMS participants. They deliberated on the findings and made recommendations regarding informed choice for remission trials. Notes and recordings were used to create a summary report, which was reviewed by members and refined.

Results

Workshop members’ recommendations included HIV education and psychosocial support to establish the basis for informed choice, key trial information to be provided in everyday language, supportive decision-making processes and psychosocial care during and after the trial. Concerns included participant willingness to restart antiretrovirals after trial-mandated treatment interruption, unintended influence of the research team on decision-making and seemingly altruistic motivations for trial participation that may signal attempts to atone for stigmatized behavior.

Conclusions

The workshop highlighted community perspectives and resulted in recommendations for supporting informed choice and psychosocial and physical health. These are the first such recommendations arising from a deliberative process. Although some elements are rooted in the Thai context, most are applicable across remission trials.

A New Governance Approach to Regulating Human Genome Editing

For years, genomic medicine-medicine based on the growing understanding of the genetic contribution to many diseases and conditions-has been hailed as the future of medical treatment, but it has thus far had limited effect on day-to-day medical practice. The ultimate goal of genomic medicine has always been the ability not just to identify dangerous gene mutations, but to fix them. Now CRISPR and related genome-editing technologies may have the potential to provide a safe and effective way to repair dangerous mutations. In the wake of ethically dubious experiments with human embryos in China, the international governance of human genome editing is emerging as an urgent topic for scientists, regulators, and the public. Efforts to develop a governance model are underway at national and international levels. These efforts are the subject of multiple initiatives by national and international health and science organizations and are topics of discussion at scientific conferences, summits, and meetings. This Article reports on the Authors' multi-year, interdisciplinary project to identify and investigate the practical, ethical, and policy considerations that are emerging as the greatest concerns about human genome editing, and ultimately to develop policy options. The project involves monitoring the discussions of groups, both government-sponsored and private, that are considering how genome editing should be governed; observing conferences where the topic is discussed; analyzing emerging policy reports by national and international bodies; and interviewing a wide range of stakeholders, including scientists, ethicists, and those who make and comment on public policy. The Article identifies several stakeholder concerns that are especially prominent in the research to date and begins to explore the implications of these concerns for alternative models of governance. There are current indications that, for practical purposes, a focus on "soft," hybrid forms of governance based on networks of multiple public and private stakeholders may turn out to be the most promising course to pursue. The "new governance" paradigm developed in the corporate and financial sectors offers a useful model for understanding the dynamics of this approach.

Parallel but connected: Nuances of conducting behavioral and social science research alongside ethically challenging HIV remission trials

Collaborations between clinical investigators and behavioral and social science researchers (BSSR) produce many benefits, but also may generate challenges and complexities. Ongoing relationships between teams may affect the research carried out by the BSSR team and the way they interpret their findings. Here we describe our experiences conducting the HIV Remission ('Cure') Trials Decision-Making Study (DMS), in Thailand; these trials include potentially risky interventions and interruption of standard antiretroviral treatment, with little personal benefit. The DMS is a longitudinal study of the experiences of individuals recruited to such early-phase trials, and conducted alongside these trials. It originated in clinical investigators' concerns about the ability of those recruited to make voluntary and informed decisions about scientifically complex studies, and is led by an independent group of BSSR and ethics researchers. In conducting this study, we experienced three overarching challenges to achieving a successful and dynamic collaboration: managing emerging findings as data were collected alongside clinical trial participation; evolving interconnectedness and shifting partnership boundaries among investigators; and the process of incorporating new research questions. By describing these challenges, we provide experiential evidence on how to manage multidimensional aspects of these collaborations. We describe how our research teams came together as well as the challenges and opportunities we experienced along the way. Our aim is to raise awareness of the scientific, practical, and ethical complexities of establishing and maintaining this kind of broad multidisciplinary collaboration over time. By describing our experiences, we hope to advance an agenda for others who undertake similar partnerships.

Parents' perceptions of personal utility of exome sequencing results

PURPOSE

Clinical genome or exome sequencing (GS/ES) provides a diagnosis for many individuals with suspected genetic disorders, but also yields negative or uncertain results for the majority. This study examines how parents of a child with an undiagnosed condition attribute personal utility to all types of ES results.

METHODS

Return of 31 exome sequencing results was observed during clinic sessions, followed by semistructured interviews with parents one month later. Observations and interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data display matrices were used for content analysis and systematic comparisons of parents' perceptions of utility.

RESULTS

ES results could not provide all the answers to parents' questions, especially in cases of clinically uninformative results, but parents nonetheless attributed utility to the knowledge gained. Parents across all results categories used the genomic information to rule out possible causes, end or postpone the diagnostic odyssey, and shift focus to treatment and management of symptoms.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that parents value even uninformative ES results while expressing hope for future discoveries. As pediatric genetics moves toward GS/ES as a first-tier test, how parents perceive the personal utility of negative or uncertain results is an important topic for genetic counseling and further research.

Assessing the implications of positive genomic screening results

Aim:

Before population screening of ‘healthy’ individuals is widely adopted, it is important to consider the harms and benefits of receiving positive results and how harms and benefits may differ by age.

Subjects & methods:

Participants in a preventive genomic screening study were screened for 17 genes associated with 11 conditions. We interviewed 11 participants who received positive results.

Results:

Interviewees expressed little concern about their positive results in light of their older age, the risk condition for which they tested positive, or other pressing health concerns.

Conclusion:

Researchers and clinicians should recognize that returning positive results may not have the impact they presume given the diversity of the conditions screened and those who choose to undergo screening.

The Role of Inclusion Benefits in Ethics Committee Assessment of Research Studies

The relationship between risks and benefits is central to the ethics of research involving human participants. Traditionally, to be ethically justifiable, risks should be reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits (if any) to subjects and to the potential social benefits resulting from research. This calculus is being further complicated by findings from an increasing number of social science studies that reveal that prospective and actual research participants frequently describe various types of inclusion benefits (for example, personal benefits such as access to or improved health care, increased knowledge about their disease or condition, and greater solidarity with the local community) as important to them. What is the ethical significance of such inclusion benefits, particularly those nonmedical in nature, for research ethics committees' risk-benefit assessment of research studies? We argue that, unless participants are clearly mistaken in their perceptions, ethics committees should take these types of inclusion benefits into account, and we suggest a few ways this might look in practice.

Genomic knowledge in the context of diagnostic exome sequencing: changes over time, persistent subgroup differences, and associations with psychological sequencing outcomes

Purpose

People undergoing diagnostic genome-scale sequencing are expected to have better psychological outcomes when they can incorporate and act on accurate, relevant knowledge that supports informed decision making.

Methods

This longitudinal study used data from the NCGENES study of diagnostic exome sequencing to evaluate associations between factual genomic knowledge (measured with the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale at three assessments from baseline to after return of results) and sequencing outcomes that reflected participants’ perceived understanding of the study and sequencing, regret for joining the study, and responses to learning sequencing results. It also investigated differences in genomic knowledge associated with subgroups differing in race/ethnicity, income, education, health literacy, English proficiency, and prior genetic testing.

Results

Multivariate models revealed higher genomic knowledge at baseline for non-Hispanic Whites and those with higher income, education, and health literacy (ps<.001). These subgroup differences persisted across study assessments despite a general increase in knowledge among all groups. Greater baseline genomic knowledge was associated with lower test-related distress (p=.047) and greater perceived understanding of diagnostic genomic sequencing (ps .04 to <.001).

Conclusion

Findings extend understanding of the role of genomic knowledge in psychological outcomes of diagnostic exome sequencing, providing guidance for additional research and interventions.

Going off antiretroviral treatment in a closely monitored HIV "cure" trial: longitudinal assessments of acutely diagnosed trial participants and decliners

INTRODUCTION

The South East Asia Research Collaboration in HIV (SEARCH) RV411 clinical trial in Thailand was a systematic investigation of analytic treatment interruption (ATI) in individuals diagnosed and treated since Fiebig stage I acute HIV infection. Here, we explore decision-making processes and perceptions of trial participation in a phase I trial that raised important ethical considerations, to identify potential areas of improvement in this relatively new field of HIV research. Similar considerations apply to other HIV phase I trials, especially those involving ATI, making this trial a model to identify challenges and opportunities in promoting informed choice.

METHODS

Using longitudinal semi-structured interviews and a validated questionnaire, we examined how decisions to join or decline the trial were made, whether there was evidence of decisional conflict, and reactions to the trial outcomes. We also explored contrasting views and experiences in this small trial cohort. We report analyses of data from these questionnaires and interviews, conducted from February through December of 2016 with the 14 SEARCH cohort participants who either joined (n = 8) or declined (n = 6) participation in RV411.

RESULTS

The eight participants and six decliners had low overall decisional conflict, which remained low over time. Decision making was more difficult for decliners than participants, at least initially. While all interviewees described being satisfied with their decisions, our study identified important negative consequences for a few individuals, including seroconversion, negative experiences with optional procedures and disappointment due to rapid viral rebound.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our results reflect the experiences of a small group invited to join this trial, our overall finding of low decisional conflict even while some individuals reported negative experiences provides lessons for clinical trial investigators. We developed points-to-consider in helping participants make informed choices, to support participants during the trial and to support decliners in their decisions.

Traditional, complementary, and alternative medical cures for HIV: rationale and implications for HIV cure research

Traditional, complementary, and alternative medicine (TCAM) has been used by some people living with HIV (PLHIV) in an attempt to cure HIV. This article reviews the main factors influencing their decision to choose TCAM to cure HIV and discusses implications for HIV cure research. Those who decide to pursue traditional, complementary, and alternative medical cures may be influenced by the health system, cultural, and social dynamics, and their own individual beliefs and preferences. These same factors may impact participation in HIV cure research. People who search for traditional, complementary, and alternative medical cures may face special challenges as they are recruited, consented, and retained within HIV cure research studies. To address these potential challenges, we have suggested solutions focusing on culturally tailored communication and education, formative social science research, and community partnerships with key stakeholders. The social conditions that have promoted traditional, complementary and alternative medical cures will likely impact how PLHIV participate and experience HIV remission trials. Despite the potential challenges, it will be crucial to involve those who have previously sought out traditional cures for HIV in HIV cure research.

Is Enhancement the Price of Prevention in Human Gene Editing?

New gene-editing tools challenge conventional policy proscriptions of research aimed at either human germline gene editing or human enhancement by potentially lowering technical barriers to both kinds of intervention. Some recent gene-editing reports have begun to take up the prospect of germline editing, but most experts are in broad agreement that research should prioritize medical applications over attempts to enhance human traits. However, there is little consensus about what counts as human enhancement in this context, or how to deal with the issues it flags. Moreover, several influential reports interpret medical applications to include disease prevention as well as treatment as a goal for gene-editing research. This challenges the current policy consensus because using gene editing to prevent disease would incidentally facilitate human enhancement applications in a variety of ways. If such research efforts are penalized by policy concerns about enhancement, then their preventive health benefits could be lost. To avoid being caught off guard by such challenges, science policy makers will need to think more carefully about what "prevention" might mean in the gene-editing context, and develop research governance that can anticipate and address the human enhancement concerns it will raise. To accomplish the latter, the scope of policy making will need to expand from its narrow focus on human clinical trials to engage with basic researchers driving the translational pipeline toward preventive gene editing and the science policy makers who have to address its "off-label" uses.

Examining the Cascade of Participant Attrition in a Genomic Medicine Research Study: Barriers and Facilitators to Achieving Diversity

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recent genomic medicine initiatives underscore the importance of including diverse participants in research. Considerable literature has identified barriers to and facilitators of increasing diversity, yet disparities in recruiting and retaining adequate numbers of participants from diverse groups continue to limit the generalizability of clinical genomic research.

METHODS

The North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-gen Exome Sequencing study employed evidence-based strategies to enhance the participation of under-represented minority patients. In this study, we evaluate the impact of our efforts by systematically analyzing the "cascade" of attrition of participants throughout study interactions.

RESULTS

Although successful in recruiting a cohort that included ~30% non-Caucasian patients overall, the study still enrolled and retained a lower proportion of minorities compared to the pool of eligible patients who were nominated. We evaluated sociodemographic characteristics and related variables as potential factors associated with attrition throughout these phases of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that varied approaches will be needed to increase participation in genomic medicine research. Our findings highlight factors to consider when developing strategies to address this critical need. Failing to include a broad range of populations in research studies will exacerbate existing disparities in the translation of genomic sequencing to medical care.

Ethics of treatment interruption trials in HIV cure research: addressing the conundrum of risk/benefit assessment

Though antiretroviral therapy is the standard of care for people living with HIV, its treatment limitations, burdens, stigma and costs lead to continued interest in HIV cure research. Early-phase cure trials, particularly those that include analytic treatment interruption (ATI), involve uncertain and potentially high risk, with minimal chance of clinical benefit. Some question whether such trials should be offered, given the risk/benefit imbalance, and whether those who choose to participate are acting rationally. We address these questions through a longitudinal decision-making study nested in a Thai acute HIV research cohort.In-depth interviews revealed central themes about decisions to join. Participants felt they possessed an important identity as members of the acute cohort, viewing their bodies as uniquely suited to both testing and potentially benefiting from HIV cure approaches. While acknowledging risks of ATI, most perceived they were given an opportunity to interrupt treatment, to test their own bodies and increase normalcy in a safe, highly monitored circumstance. They were motivated by potential benefits to themselves, the investigators and larger acute cohort, and others with HIV. They believed their own trial experiences and being able to give back to the community were sufficient to offset participation risks.These decisions were driven by the specific circumstances experienced by our participants. Judging risk/benefit ratios without appreciating these lived experiences can lead to false determinations of irrational decision- making. While this does not minimise vital oversight considerations about risk reduction and protection from harm, it argues for inclusion of a more participant-centered approach.

Age and perceived risks and benefits of preventive genomic screening

Purpose

As genome sequencing moves from research to clinical practice, sequencing technologies focused on “medically actionable” targets are being promoted for preventive screening despite the dearth of systematic evidence of risks and benefits and criteria for who should be screened. This study investigates researchers’ and research participants’ perceptions of these issues within the context of a preventive genomic screening study, GeneScreen.

Methods

We recorded researcher deliberations regarding age eligibility criteria and the risks and benefits of screening, and conducted interviews with 50 GeneScreen participants about their motivations for joining and perceptions of risks and benefits.

Results

Researchers made assumptions about who would want and benefit from screening based on age. After discussion, researchers opted not to have an upper age limit for enrollment. Participants of all ages perceived similar benefits, including prevention, treatment, and cascade testing, and similar risks such as insurance discrimination and worry.

Conclusion

While clinical benefits of preventive genomic screening for older adults are debatable, our respondents perceived a range of benefits of screening in both clinical and research settings. Researchers and clinicians should carefully consider decisions about excluding older adults and providing information about benefits and risks across age groups.

Online Education and e-Consent for GeneScreen, a Preventive Genomic Screening Study

BACKGROUND

Online study recruitment is increasingly popular, but we know little about the decision making that goes into joining studies in this manner. In GeneScreen, a genomic screening study that utilized online education and consent, we investigated participants' perceived ease when deciding to join and their understanding of key study features.

METHODS

Individuals were recruited via mailings that directed them to a website where they could learn more about GeneScreen, consent to participate, and complete a survey.

RESULTS

Participants found it easy to decide to join GeneScreen and had a good understanding of study features. Multiple regression analyses revealed that ease of deciding to join was related to confidence in one's genetic self-efficacy, limited concerns about genetic screening, trust in and lack of frustration using the website, and the ability to spend a limited time on the website. Understanding of study features was related to using the Internet more frequently and attaining more information about GeneScreen conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The ease of deciding to join a genomic screening study and comprehension of its key features should be treated as different phenomena in research and practice. There is a need for a more nuanced understanding of how individuals respond to web-based consent information.

The who, what, and why of research participants' intentions to request a broad range of secondary findings in a diagnostic genomic sequencing study

PURPOSE

In a diagnostic exome sequencing study (the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-Generation Exome Sequencing project, NCGENES), we investigated adult patients' intentions to request six categories of secondary findings (SFs) with low or no medical actionability and correlates of their intentions.

METHODS

At enrollment, eligible participants (n = 152) completed measures assessing their sociodemographic, clinical, and literacy-related characteristics. Prior to and during an in-person diagnostic result disclosure visit, they received education about categories of SFs they could request. Immediately after receiving education at the visit, participants completed measures of intention to learn SFs, interest in each category, and anticipated regret for learning and not learning each category.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight percent of participants intended to learn at least some SFs. Logistic regressions examined their intention to learn any or all of these findings (versus none) and interest in each of the six individual categories (yes/no). Results revealed little association between intentions and sociodemographic, clinical, or literacy-related factors. Across outcomes, participants who anticipated regret for learning SFs reported weaker intention to learn them (odds ratios (ORs) from 0.47 to 0.71), and participants who anticipated regret for not learning these findings reported stronger intention to learn them (OR 1.61-2.22).

CONCLUSION

Intentions to request SFs with low or no medical actionability may be strongly influenced by participants' desire to avoid regret.

Navigating the research-clinical interface in genomic medicine: analysis from the CSER Consortium

Purpose

The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium encompasses nine National Institutes of Health–funded U-award projects investigating translation of genomic sequencing into clinical care. Previous literature has distinguished norms and rules governing research versus clinical care. This is the first study to explore how genomics investigators describe and navigate the research–clinical interface.

Methods

A CSER working group developed a 22-item survey. All nine U-award projects participated. Descriptive data were tabulated and qualitative analysis of text responses identified themes and characterizations of the research–clinical interface.

Results

Survey responses described how studies approached the research–clinical interface, including in consent practices, recording results, and using a research versus clinical laboratory. Responses revealed four characterizations of the interface: clear separation between research and clinical care, interdigitation of the two with steps to maintain separation, a dynamic interface, and merging of the two. All survey respondents utilized at least two different characterizations. Although research has traditionally been differentiated from clinical care, respondents pointed to factors blurring the distinction and strategies to differentiate the domains.

Conclusion

These results illustrate the difficulty in applying the traditional bifurcation of research versus clinical care to translational models of clinical research, including in genomics. Our results suggest new directions for ethics and oversight.

Informed Consent and Decision Making Among Participants in Novel-Design Phase I Oncology Trials

BACKGROUND

Although phase I clinical trials are the gateway to progress in cancer therapies, this setting poses ethical challenges to ensure that patients provide consent free from misunderstandings of therapeutic intent or unrealistic expectations of benefit. The design of phase I oncology trials has evolved rapidly over time and today includes more targeted agents and combinations of experimental drugs with standard drugs, which may further complicate how patients understand phase I research participation.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews regarding motivations, decision making, and understanding of trial purpose nested within a phase I clinical trial of a novel PI3kinase inhibitor combined with a standard oral chemotherapy in 18 participants.

RESULTS

Fewer than half of patients correctly identified the safety and dosing objectives. The inclusion of a targeted agent was attractive to participants and was perceived as an indicator of less toxic or more efficacious therapy, with less appreciation for added risks. The significance of a cellular drug target, without a known predictive biomarker of response, was unclear to patients. The inclusion of a standard drug in the regimen attracted patients with more treatment options than traditional first-in-human participants. Patients frequently expressed a realistic understanding of prognosis and uncertainty of benefit, but simultaneous hopes for extraordinary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Novel phase I oncology trial designs may attract patients with less constrained treatment options, but the inclusion of targeted drugs and combinations including standard chemotherapies is likely to complicate understanding of safety and dosing objectives and likelihood of personal benefit for purposes of informed consent.

"Forward-Thinking" in U.S. Biobanking

AIMS

Do biobanks enact policies and plans that allow them to anticipate and respond to potential challenges? If a biobank has one such policy or plan, is it likely to have more? Using survey data from 456 U.S. biobanks, we assess four possible indicators of such "forward-thinking."

METHODS

We present response frequencies and cross-tabulations regarding policies for return of results and ownership of specimens, and for having a formal business plan and a plan for what happens to specimens if the biobank closes. We analyze the relationships among these indicators, using chi-square for tests of statistical significance.

RESULTS

Policies-Sixty-two percent of biobanks have a policy about returning individual research results; 70% have a policy designating ownership of specimens and/or technology. Having these two policies is significantly related (p < 0.001). Plans-34% of biobanks have a formal business plan; 26% have a written plan for what will happen to the specimens if the biobank closes. Having these two plans is significantly related (p < 0.001). Relationships among indicators-only 7% of biobanks are forward-thinking across all four indicators; 12% are forward-thinking across none.

DISCUSSION

The two policies we examined tend to occur together, as do the two plans. These policies and plans seem to tap different aspects of accountability and responsiveness. Specifically, the policies reflect issues most commonly raised in the ethical and legal literature on biobanking, while the plans are indicators of sustainability, a separate area of concern in biobanking.

Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The emerging dual imperatives of personalized medicine and technologic advances make population screening for preventable conditions resulting from genetic alterations a realistic possibility. Lynch syndrome is a potential screening target due to its prevalence, penetrance, and the availability of well-established, preventive interventions. However, while population screening may lower incidence of preventable conditions, implementation without evidence may lead to unintentional harms. We examined the literature to determine whether evidence exists that screening for Lynch-associated mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations leads to improved overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or quality of life. Documenting evidence and gaps is critical to implementing genomic approaches in public health and guiding future research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our 2014-2015 systematic review identified studies comparing screening with no screening in the general population, and controlled studies assessing analytic validity of targeted next-generation sequencing, and benefits or harms of interventions or screening. We conducted meta-analyses for the association between early or more frequent colonoscopies and health outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria. No adequate evidence directly addressed the main question or the harms of screening in the general population. Meta-analyses found relative reductions of 68% for colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.23-0.43, three cohort studies, 590 participants) and 78% for all-cause mortality (relative risk: 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.09-0.56, three cohort studies, 590 participants) for early or more frequent colonoscopies among family members of people with cancer who also had an associated MMR gene mutation.

CONCLUSION

Inadequate evidence exists examining harms and benefits of population-based screening for Lynch syndrome. Lack of evidence highlights the need for data that directly compare benefits and harms.

Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine.

The promise and peril of genomic screening in the general population

Purpose

Utilization of sequencing to screen the general population for preventable monogenic conditions is receiving substantial attention due to its potential to decrease morbidity and mortality. However, the selection of which variants to return is a serious implementation challenge. Procedures must be investigated to ensure optimal test characteristics and avoidance of harm from false positive test results.

Methods

We scanned exome sequences from 478 well-phenotyped individuals for potentially pathogenic variants in 17 genes representing 11 conditions that are among the most medically actionable Mendelian disorders in adults. We developed 5 variant selection algorithms with increasing sensitivity and measured their specificity in these 17 genes.

Results

Variant selection algorithms with increasing sensitivity exhibited decreased specificity, and performance was highly dependent on the genes analyzed. The most sensitive algorithm ranged from 88.8% to 99.6% specificity among the 17 genes.

Conclusion

For very low prevalence conditions, small reductions in specificity greatly increase false positives. This inescapable test characteristic governs the predictive value of genomic sequencing in the general population. To address this issue, test performance must be evaluated systematically for each condition so that the false negatives and false positives can be tailored for optimal outcomes, depending on the downstream clinical consequences.

Public Comments on Proposed Regulatory Reforms That Would Impact Biospecimen Research: The Good, the Bad, and the Puzzling

The regulations governing human subjects research (45 CFR 46) remain largely unchanged since their adoption. As a first step in their revision, the federal government published the Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM) in 2011. The public responded with over 1100 comments. We selected a random sample of 300 comments, examining whether they addressed biospecimen research in terms of views on mandated consent, waivers of consent, use of a short general consent form, or identifiability of biospecimens. We conducted content analysis on the 109 comments that fulfilled these criteria Findings reveal little support for the proposal to mandate consent, strong support for the current waiver system, confusion about use of a standard general consent form, and disagreement about the implications of biospecimen identifiability. As the government moves ahead in its rulemaking process, it is important to consider what the public comments reveal about support and/or concerns for proposed changes.

Framing expectations in early HIV cure research

Language used to describe clinical research represents a powerful opportunity to educate volunteers. In the case of HIV cure research there is an emerging need to manage expectations by using the term 'experiment'. Cure experiments are proof-of-concept studies designed to evaluate novel paradigms to reduce persistent HIV-1 reservoirs, without any expectation of medical benefit.

How can psychological science inform research about genetic counseling for clinical genomic sequencing?

Next generation genomic sequencing technologies (including whole genome or whole exome sequencing) are being increasingly applied to clinical care. Yet, the breadth and complexity of sequencing information raise questions about how best to communicate and return sequencing information to patients and families in ways that facilitate comprehension and optimal health decisions. Obtaining answers to such questions will require multidisciplinary research. In this paper, we focus on how psychological science research can address questions related to clinical genomic sequencing by explaining emotional, cognitive, and behavioral processes in response to different types of genomic sequencing information (e.g., diagnostic results and incidental findings). We highlight examples of psychological science that can be applied to genetic counseling research to inform the following questions: (1) What factors influence patients' and providers' informational needs for developing an accurate understanding of what genomic sequencing results do and do not mean?; (2) How and by whom should genomic sequencing results be communicated to patients and their family members?; and (3) How do patients and their families respond to uncertainties related to genomic information?

Biobanks in the United States: how to identify an undefined and rapidly evolving population

As part of a larger organizational study, we sought to survey biobanks in the United States. However, we encountered two problems with this population. First, no common definition of biobanks exists. Second, no census is available of these facilities from which to sample in order to implement a survey. In light of these problems, we employed a multifaceted approach using electronic searches of PubMed, RePORTER, and Google. In addition, we systematically searched for biobanks housed within universities that have NIH-designated Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA). We expanded this part of the search by looking for biobanks among all members of the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). Finally, we added banks to our database found previously by other researchers and banks found via correspondence with our colleagues. Our search strategy produced a database of 624 biobanks for which we were able to confirm contact information in order to conduct our online survey. Another 140 biobanks were identified but did not respond to our requests to confirm their existence or contact information. In order to maximize both the uniqueness of banks found and the greatest return on effort for each search, we suggest targeting resources that are already organized. In our work, these included the CTSA, AAMC, and part of the Google searches. We contend that our search provides a model for analysis of new fields of research and/or rapidly evolving industries. Furthermore, our approach demonstrates that with the appropriate tools it is possible to develop a systematic and comprehensive database to investigate undefined populations.