A global team of legal, scientific and ethics experts have put forward eight key recommendations to establish much needed guidelines for conducting human-genome sequencing research.
Timothy Caulfield, professor and research director of the Health Law Institute at the University of Alberta in Canada, led a consensus workshop to develop rigorous guideline recommendations for research ethics boards. The results appear in the current issue of PLOS Biology (March 2008).
Researchers met to develop these recommendations because national and international funding initiatives have substantially increased whole-gene research activities, and media coverage of both the science and the emerging commercial offerings related to human-genome research has heightened public awareness and interest in personal genomics, says Caulfield.
“Yes, these are early days in the field of human-genome research, but research ethics guidance is needed immediately,” said Caulfield. “With how fast this research is growing, it is necessary that we develop carefully considered consensus guidelines to ensure ethical research practices are defined for all.”
Some key recommendations of the paper include the right for participants to withdraw consent (which includes the destruction of tissue samples and written information); the issues associated with participants’ family members and relevant groups; and the means of obtaining clear consent from participants for possible future use of their genes.
“As technology continues to advance, whole-genome research activities seem likely to increase and expand,” says Caulfield. “As the pace of this research intensifies, we need to continue to explore the ethical, legal and social implications of this rapidly evolving field.”
The researchers note that the policy recommendations covered in the report are not the only issues that need to be considered. Commercialization, patenting, benefit sharing and the possibility of genetic discrimination are among other topics that warrant discussion in the future.
Source: University of Alberta
Related stories:
Army still using physicians in interrogation, bioethicist says
U.S. Army psychiatrists may be participating in the interrogation of detainees, while ignoring recommendations to the contrary from professional medical associations, according to a Penn State bioethicist and a Georgetown University law professor.
Landmark study reports breakdown in biotech patent system
The world's intellectual property system is broken. It's stopping lifesaving technologies from reaching the people who need them most in developed and developing countries, according to the authors of a report released in Ottawa today by an international coalition of experts.
Academic health centers should take lead in promoting the sharing of biomedical research data
Academic health centers (AHCs) have a critical role in enabling, encouraging, and rewarding the sharing of biomedical research data, say a team of academics in this week's
PLoS Medicine. "The leaders of medical schools and academic-affiliated hospitals," they say "can play a unique role in supporting this transformation of the research enterprise."
Treatment for cigarette, alcohol and drug use in pregnancy improves outcomes for mom and baby
Pregnant women who receive treatment for substance abuse early in their pregnancy can achieve the same health outcomes as pregnant women with no substance abuse, according to a Kaiser Permanente study published online in the
Journal of Perinatology.
Managing incidental findings in human subjects research
Article offers first major consensus recommendations for IFs
An incidental finding (IF) is a finding concerning an individual research participant that has potential health or reproductive importance, is discovered in the course of conducting research, but is beyond the aims of the study. IFs are an increasingly common byproduct of research using powerful technologies that generate "extra" data. Because IFs can potentially save lives but also cause alarm, the decision on whether or not to disclose them to research participants has been a major dilemma. Little guidance currently exists on how to approach this problem. A two-year project supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute at NIH has now published the first major recommendations for how to anticipate and manage IFs in genetic, genomic, and imaging research, suggesting broader application to other research domains. This project, led by Prof. Susan Wolf at the University of Minnesota's Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, involved a multidisciplinary group of leading experts from the U.S. and Canada. The project has published a 17-article symposium including the consensus paper, which appears in the Summer '08 issue of the
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.
Raising a stop sign to human traffic
Trade in people is not a new phenomenon, but the modern manifestation of slavery, according to US researchers. However, writing in the
Journal of Global Business Advancement, they point out that human trafficking and trade in human organs has intensified with increased globalization. They hope to raise awareness of the issue among the business research community with a view to finding solutions.
Toward the ethical treatment of whole genome research participants
Recent technological developments have made it possible for scientists to sequence an entire human genome, but these advances may be a mixed blessing. While much has been made of the benefits of whole-genome sequencing, from improved disease diagnosis to rational drug design, the impacts on the privacy and autonomy of individual participants has received much less scrutiny. In a new essay published in the open-access journal
PLoS Biology, Timothy Caulfield and his colleagues argue that the ability to sequence a person's entire genome has created a whole new set of moral challenges that standard research ethics guidelines were not designed to solve.
Intensive blood sugar treatment in trial of diabetes and cardiovascular disease changed
The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health has stopped one treatment within a large, ongoing North American clinical trial of diabetes and cardiovascular disease 18 months early due to safety concerns after review of available data, although the study will continue.