Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature

被引:75
作者
Otten, Ellen [1 ]
Plantinga, Mirjam [1 ]
Birnie, Erwin [1 ]
Verkerk, Marian A. [2 ]
Lucassen, Anneke M. [3 ,4 ]
Ranchor, Adelita V. [5 ]
Van Langen, Irene M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Genet, Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Internal Med, Groningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Southampton, Fac Med Clin Eth & Law, Southampton, Hants, England
[4] Wessex Clin Genet Serv, Southampton, Hants, England
[5] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Hlth Psychol, Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
clinical genetics; duty to recontact; ethical; legal; and social (including psychological) issues; next-generation technologies; professional and patient perspectives; MEDICAL GENETICS; ETHICAL-ISSUES; LEGAL; PERSPECTIVES; INFORMATION; RECOMMENDATIONS; KNOWLEDGE; RELATIVES; SERVICES; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1038/gim.2014.173
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 [遗传学];
摘要
Purpose: With rapid advances in genetic technologies, new genetic information becomes available much faster today than just a few years ago. This has raised questions about whether clinicians have a duty to recontact eligible patients when new genetic information becomes available and, if such duties exist, how they might be implemented in practice. Methods: We report the results of a systematic literature search on the ethical, legal, social (including psychological), and practical issues involved in recontacting former patients who received genetic services. We identified 1,428 articles, of which 61 are covered in this review. Results: The empirical evidence available indicates that most but not all patients value being recontacted. A minority of (older) articles conclude that recontacting should be a legal duty. Most authors consider recontacting to be ethically desirable but practically unfeasible. Various solutions to overcome these practical barriers have been proposed, involving efforts of laboratories, clinicians, and patients. Conclusion: To advance the discussion on implementing recontacting in clinical genetics, we suggest focusing on the question of in what situations recontacting might be regarded as good standard of care. To this end, reaching a professional consensus, obtaining more extensive empirical evidence, and developing professional guidelines are important.
引用
收藏
页码:668 / 678
页数:11
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]
Whole Genome Scanning: Resolving Clinical Diagnosis and Management Amidst Complex Data [J].
Ali-Khan, Sarah E. ;
Daar, Abdallah S. ;
Shuman, Cheryl ;
Ray, Peter N. ;
Scherer, Stephen W. .
PEDIATRIC RESEARCH, 2009, 66 (04) :357-363
[2]
Risk reversals in predictive testing for Huntington disease [J].
Almqvist, E ;
Adam, S ;
Bloch, M ;
Fuller, A ;
Welch, P ;
Eisenberg, D ;
Whelan, D ;
Macgregor, D ;
Meschino, W ;
Hayden, MR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 1997, 61 (04) :945-952
[3]
ANDREWS LB, 1991, YALE J BIOL MED, V64, P29
[4]
Andrews LB., 1997, HUMAN DNA LAW POLICY, P133
[5]
Andrews Lori B, 1992, Houst Law Rev, V29, P149
[6]
Communicating new knowledge on previously reported genetic variants [J].
Aronson, Samuel J. ;
Clark, Eugene H. ;
Varugheese, Matthew ;
Baxter, Samantha ;
Babb, Lawrence J. ;
Rehm, Heidi L. .
GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 14 (08) :713-719
[7]
Informed consent for whole-genome sequencing studies in the clinical setting. Proposed recommendations on essential content and process [J].
Ayuso, Carmen ;
Millan, Jose M. ;
Mancheno, Marta ;
Dal-Re, Rafael .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2013, 21 (10) :1054-1059
[8]
Free the Data: One Laboratory's Approach to Knowledge-Based Genomic Variant Classification and Preparation for EMR Integration of Genomic Data [J].
Bean, Lora J. H. ;
Tinker, Stuart W. ;
da Silva, Cristina ;
Hegde, Madhuri R. .
HUMAN MUTATION, 2013, 34 (09) :1183-1188
[9]
DUTY TO RECALL [J].
BERG, D ;
HIRSH, HL .
SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1980, 73 (08) :1041-&
[10]
Bernard Lynn E, 1999, J Genet Couns, V8, P3, DOI 10.1023/A:1022878402764