Balancing the local and the universal in maintaining ethical access to a genomics biobank.

Catherine Heeney, Shona M Kerr
Author Information
  1. Catherine Heeney: Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, University of Edinburgh, High School Yards, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH1 1LZ, UK. Catherine.Heeney@ed.ac.uk.
  2. Shona M Kerr: MRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road South, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH4 2XU, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Issues of balancing data accessibility with ethical considerations and governance of a genomics research biobank, Generation Scotland, are explored within the evolving policy landscape of the past ten years. During this time data sharing and open data access have become increasingly important topics in biomedical research. Decisions around data access are influenced by local arrangements for governance and practices such as linkage to health records, and the global through policies for biobanking and the sharing of data with large-scale biomedical research data resources and consortia.
METHODS: We use a literature review of policy relevant documents which apply to the conduct of biobanks in two areas: support for open access and the protection of data subjects and researchers managing a bioresource. We present examples of decision making within a biobank based upon observations of the Generation Scotland Access Committee. We reflect upon how the drive towards open access raises ethical dilemmas for established biorepositories containing data and samples from human subjects.
RESULTS: Despite much discussion in science policy literature about standardisation, the contextual aspects of biobanking are often overlooked. Using our engagement with GS we demonstrate the importance of local arrangements in the creation of a responsive ethical approach to biorepository governance. We argue that governance decisions regarding access to the biobank are intertwined with considerations about maintenance and viability at the local level. We show that in addition to the focus upon ever more universal and standardised practices, the local expertise gained in the management of such repositories must be supported.
CONCLUSIONS: A commitment to open access in genomics research has found almost universal backing in science and health policy circles, but repositories of data and samples from human subjects may have to operate under managed access, to protect privacy, align with participant consent and ensure that the resource can be managed in a sustainable way. Data access committees need to be reflexive and flexible, to cope with changing technology and opportunities and threats from the wider data sharing environment. To understand these interactions also involves nurturing what is particular about the biobank in its local context.

Keywords

References

  1. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2013 Dec 1;9(1):1 [PMID: 25401081]
  2. Public Health Res Pract. 2015 Sep 30;25(4):e2541541 [PMID: 26536503]
  3. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2016 Mar;59(3):379-84 [PMID: 26860601]
  4. Nature. 2015 Jun 11;522(7555):129 [PMID: 26062475]
  5. Sci Data. 2016 Mar 15;3:160018 [PMID: 26978244]
  6. Soc Sci Med. 2007 Dec;65(11):2248-59 [PMID: 17854966]
  7. Health Care Anal. 2008 Mar;16(1):1-6 [PMID: 18080836]
  8. Nature. 2016 Sep 07;537(7619):S70-2 [PMID: 27602747]
  9. Nat Rev Genet. 2009 May;10(5):331-5 [PMID: 19308065]
  10. Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(2):104-14 [PMID: 20689244]
  11. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006 Feb;14(2):245-8 [PMID: 16306879]
  12. Science. 2013 Jan 18;339(6117):321-4 [PMID: 23329047]
  13. Hum Genet. 2011 Sep;130(3):425-32 [PMID: 21706343]
  14. PLoS Biol. 2008 Mar 25;6(3):e73 [PMID: 18366258]
  15. Appl Transl Genom. 2014 Apr 13;3(2):36-40 [PMID: 27275412]
  16. BMC Med Genet. 2006 Oct 02;7:74 [PMID: 17014726]
  17. PLoS Biol. 2015 Dec 31;13(12):e1002339 [PMID: 26720729]
  18. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Dec;24(12):1676-1680 [PMID: 27677416]
  19. New Genet Soc. 2015 Oct 2;34(4):417-436 [PMID: 26740793]
  20. EMBO Mol Med. 2015 Mar 09;7(5):507-9 [PMID: 25759363]
  21. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2012 Oct;21(4):466-80 [PMID: 22828041]
  22. Int J Epidemiol. 2013 Jun;42(3):689-700 [PMID: 22786799]
  23. Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(1):17-25 [PMID: 20339285]
  24. Genome Med. 2017 Mar 7;9(1):23 [PMID: 28270201]
  25. Genome Med. 2013 Nov 15;5(11):100 [PMID: 24229443]
  26. Science. 2001 Feb 16;291(5507):1192 [PMID: 11233433]
  27. Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Nov;5(11):866-73 [PMID: 15520796]
  28. Hugo J. 2014 Dec;8(1):3 [PMID: 27090251]
  29. Hum Genet. 2011 Sep;130(3):347-56 [PMID: 21766192]
  30. JMIR Med Inform. 2016 Jun 21;4(2):e22 [PMID: 27329087]
  31. PLoS Genet. 2008 Aug 29;4(8):e1000167 [PMID: 18769715]
  32. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Jul;10(3):225-38 [PMID: 26297745]
  33. Nat Genet. 2015 Jul;47(7):692-5 [PMID: 26111507]
  34. Nat Rev Genet. 2011 Sep 16;12(10):730-6 [PMID: 21921928]
  35. Nat Rev Genet. 2014 Jun;15(6):409-21 [PMID: 24805122]
  36. Public Health Ethics. 2011 Nov;4(3):226-235 [PMID: 22102849]
  37. Biopreserv Biobank. 2016 Jun;14(3):231-40 [PMID: 27200470]
  38. Eur Respir J. 2009 Feb;33(2):419-25 [PMID: 19181915]
  39. Genome Med. 2014 Jan 29;6(1):4 [PMID: 24475754]
  40. BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Jul 12;17(1):39 [PMID: 27405974]
  41. Br J Sociol. 2007 Sep;58(3):457-76 [PMID: 17727503]
  42. Sci Technol Human Values. 2017 Jan;42(1):3-28 [PMID: 28018016]
  43. Nature. 2009 Sep 10;461(7261):168-70 [PMID: 19741685]
  44. Biostatistics. 2010 Oct;11(4):661-73 [PMID: 20522729]
  45. Bioethics. 2016 Mar;30(3):210-7 [PMID: 25960157]

Grants

  1. /Wellcome Trust
  2. MC_PC_U127561128/Medical Research Council
  3. 100597/2/12/2/Wellcome Trust
  4. CZD/16/6/Chief Scientist Office

MeSH Term

Biological Specimen Banks
Biomedical Research
Ethics Committees, Research
Genomics
Health Policy
Humans
Information Dissemination
Informed Consent
Social Responsibility

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0dataaccesslocalbiobankethicalgovernanceresearchpolicyopengenomicssharingsubjectsuponuniversalconsiderationsGenerationScotlandwithinbiomedicalarrangementspracticeshealthbiobankingliteraturesampleshumansciencerepositoriesmanagedconsentDataBACKGROUND:IssuesbalancingaccessibilityexploredevolvinglandscapepasttenyearstimebecomeincreasinglyimportanttopicsDecisionsaroundinfluencedlinkagerecordsglobalpolicieslarge-scaleresourcesconsortiaMETHODS:usereviewrelevantdocumentsapplyconductbiobankstwoareas:supportprotectionresearchersmanagingbioresourcepresentexamplesdecisionmakingbasedobservationsAccessCommitteereflectdrivetowardsraisesdilemmasestablishedbiorepositoriescontainingRESULTS:DespitemuchdiscussionstandardisationcontextualaspectsoftenoverlookedUsingengagementGSdemonstrateimportancecreationresponsiveapproachbiorepositoryarguedecisionsregardingintertwinedmaintenanceviabilitylevelshowadditionfocuseverstandardisedexpertisegainedmanagementmustsupportedCONCLUSIONS:commitmentfoundalmostbackingcirclesmayoperateprotectprivacyalignparticipantensureresourcecansustainablewaycommitteesneedreflexiveflexiblecopechangingtechnologyopportunitiesthreatswiderenvironmentunderstandinteractionsalsoinvolvesnurturingparticularcontextBalancingmaintainingBiobankGenomicsInformedResearchethics

Similar Articles

Cited By