Feedback of Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants: In Favor of a Qualified Disclosure Policy

被引:94
作者
Bredenoord, Annelien L. [1 ]
Onland-Moret, N. Charlotte [2 ]
Van Delden, Johannes J. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Med Eth, Div Julius Ctr, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Epidemiol, Div Julius Ctr, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
ethics; feedback; next-generation sequencing; biobanks; disclosure; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; DUTY;
D O I
10.1002/humu.21518
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
This article discusses whether and when researchers have a moral obligation to feedback individual genetic research results. This unsettled debate has rapidly gained in urgency in view of the emergence of biobanks and the advances in next-generation sequencing technology, which has the potential to generate unequalled amounts of genetic data. This implies that the generation of many known and unknown genetic variants in individual participants of genetics/genomics research as intentionally or collaterally obtained byproducts is unavoidable. As we conclude that valid reasons exist to adopt a duty to return genetic research results, a qualified disclosure policy is proposed. This policy contains a standard default package, possibly supplemented with (one or more of) three additional packages. Whereas the default package, containing life-saving information of immediate clinical utility, should be offered routinely and mandatory to all research participants, offering (one of) the three additional packages is context-specific. Such a qualified disclosure policy in our opinion best balances the potential benefits of disclosure with the potential risks for research participants and the harms of unduly hindering biomedical research. We appeal to the genetics community to make a joint effort to further refine the packages and set thresholds for result selection. Hum Mutat 32:861-867, 2011. (C) 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:861 / 867
页数:7
相关论文
共 38 条
[21]   Ethical implications of the use of whole genome methods in medical research [J].
Kaye, Jane ;
Boddington, Paula ;
de Vries, Jantina ;
Hawkins, Naomi ;
Melham, Karen .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2010, 18 (04) :398-403
[22]   The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives [J].
Knoppers, Bartha Maria ;
Joly, Yann ;
Simard, Jacques ;
Durocher, Francine .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2006, 14 (11) :1170-1178
[23]   Return of "Accurate" and "Actionable" Results: Yes! [J].
Knoppers, Bartha Maria ;
Laberge, Claude .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2009, 9 (6-7) :107-109
[24]   Multidimensional Results Reporting to Participants in Genomic Studies: Getting It Right [J].
Kohane, Isaac S. ;
Taylor, Patrick L. .
SCIENCE TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE, 2010, 2 (37)
[25]   Ethical considerations in the communication of unexpected information with clinical implications [J].
Lavieri, Robert R. ;
Garner, Samual A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2006, 6 (06) :46-48
[26]   What Physician-Investigators Owe Patients Who Participate in Research [J].
Litton, Paul ;
Miller, Franklin G. .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2010, 304 (13) :1491-1492
[27]   New mutations and intellectual function [J].
Lupski, James R. .
NATURE GENETICS, 2010, 42 (12) :1036-1038
[28]   Taking our obligations to research participants seriously: Disclosing individual results of genetic research [J].
Manolio, Teri A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2006, 6 (06) :32-34
[29]   GUILTY BYSTANDERS - ON THE LEGITIMACY OF DUTY TO RESCUE STATUTES [J].
MCINTYRE, A .
PHILOSOPHY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 1994, 23 (02) :157-191
[30]  
MELZER LA, 2006, AM J BIOETHICS, V6, P28