Inclusion of Residual Tissue in Biobanks: Opt-In or Opt-Out?

被引:33
作者
Giesbertz, Noor A. A. [1 ]
Bredenoord, Annelien L. [1 ]
van Delden, Johannes J. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr, Dept Med Humanities, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
TIME GENERAL CONSENT; BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES; INFORMED-CONSENT; MEDICAL-RESEARCH; FUTURE-RESEARCH; PARTICIPANTS; INFORMATION; RECRUITMENT; ATTITUDES; OPINIONS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pbio.1001373
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
070307 [化学生物学]; 071010 [生物化学与分子生物学];
摘要
Residual samples are an important source of tissue for biobanks. They refer to leftover tissue that is obtained in the course of clinical care. Residual samples can be included through an opt-in method-that is, a person explicitly expresses consent to include residual tissue-or an opt-out method-that is, the tissue is stored unless a person explicitly refuses. At the moment there is a renewed interest in the appropriate method for the inclusion of residual samples in biobanks. The expansion of biobanks and rapid developments in biomedical research underscore the need to evaluate the proper procedure. In this article we revisit the arguments in favor and against opt-in and opt-out methods for residual tissue research. We conclude firstly that an opt-out method is only justifiable when certain conditions are met: (1) awareness has to be raised, (2) sufficient information has to be provided, and (3) a genuine possibility to object has to be offered. An opt-out procedure that fulfills these conditions can be called a "thick" opt-out method. As a consequence, the dichotomy between opt-in and opt-out is less stark than usually suggested, as both methods require a certain amount of effort. Secondly, we conclude that because of the diversity of tissue and research, not every situation can be treated alike. There are at least four situations that require opt-in procedures: (1) research with higher risks or increased burdens, (2) the use of controversial or high-impact techniques, (3) research on sensitive tissue types, and (4) research involving vulnerable patients. We suggest that further interdisciplinary debate should answer the question when to opt-in or when to opt-out.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]
Obtaining Consent for Future Research with Induced Pluripotent Cells: Opportunities and Challenges [J].
Aalto-Setaelae, Katriina ;
Conklin, Bruce R. ;
Lo, Bernard .
PLOS BIOLOGY, 2009, 7 (02) :204-208
[2]
Lessons from the central Hampshire electronic health record pilot project: issues of data protection and consent [J].
Adams, T ;
Budden, M ;
Hoare, C ;
Sanderson, H .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 328 (7444) :871-874
[3]
[Anonymous], 2002, INT ETH GUID BIOM RE
[4]
[Anonymous], 2008, INT ETH GUID EP STUD
[5]
[Anonymous], 1969, 4 ESSAYS LIBERTY
[6]
[Anonymous], CONSENT IN THE LAW
[7]
Arnason V, 2009, ETHICS OF RESEARCH BIOBANKING, P131, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-93872-1_10
[8]
LADDER OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION [J].
ARNSTEIN, SR .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS, 1969, 35 (04) :216-224
[9]
John Harris' argument for a duty to research [J].
Brassington, Iain .
BIOETHICS, 2007, 21 (03) :160-168
[10]
Feedback of Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants: In Favor of a Qualified Disclosure Policy [J].
Bredenoord, Annelien L. ;
Onland-Moret, N. Charlotte ;
Van Delden, Johannes J. M. .
HUMAN MUTATION, 2011, 32 (08) :861-867