Qualitative thematic analysis of consent forms used in cancer genome sequencing

被引:21
作者
Allen, Clarissa [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Foulkes, William D. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Dept Oncol, Program Canc Genet, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Dept Human Genet, Program Canc Genet, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[3] McGill Univ, Biomed Eth Unit, Montreal, PQ, Canada
来源
BMC MEDICAL ETHICS | 2011年 / 12卷
关键词
INFORMATION; PRIVACY; FUTURE; COHORT;
D O I
10.1186/1472-6939-12-14
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Large-scale whole genome sequencing (WGS) studies promise to revolutionize cancer research by identifying targets for therapy and by discovering molecular biomarkers to aid early diagnosis, to better determine prognosis and to improve treatment response prediction. Such projects raise a number of ethical, legal, and social (ELS) issues that should be considered. In this study, we set out to discover how these issues are being handled across different jurisdictions. Methods: We examined informed consent (IC) forms from 30 cancer genome sequencing studies to assess (1) stated purpose of sample collection, (2) scope of consent requested, (3) data sharing protocols (4) privacy protection measures, (5) described risks of participation, (6) subject re-contacting, and (7) protocol for withdrawal. Results: There is a high degree of similarity in how cancer researchers engaged in WGS are protecting participant privacy. We observed a strong trend towards both using samples for additional, unspecified research and sharing data with other investigators. IC forms were varied in terms of how they discussed re-contacting participants, returning results and facilitating participant withdrawal. Contrary to expectation, there were no consistent trends that emerged over the eight year period from which forms were collected. Conclusion: Examining IC forms from WGS studies elucidates how investigators are handling ELS challenges posed by this research. This information is important for ensuring that while the public benefits of research are maximized, the rights of participants are also being appropriately respected.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[21]   Undesirable implications of disclosing individual genetic results to research participants [J].
Meltzer, Leslie A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2006, 6 (06) :28-30
[22]   Incidental findings in human subjects research: What do investigators owe research participants? [J].
Miller, Franklin G. ;
Mello, Michelle M. ;
Joffe, Steven .
JOURNAL OF LAW MEDICINE & ETHICS, 2008, 36 (02) :271-279
[23]   Public Expectations for Return of Results from Large-Cohort Genetic Research [J].
Murphy, Juli ;
Scott, Joan ;
Kaufman, David ;
Geller, Gail ;
LeRoy, Lisa ;
Hudson, Kathy .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2008, 8 (11) :36-43
[24]  
Ravitsky V, 2006, AM J BIOETHICS, V6, P8, DOI 10.1080/15265160600934772
[25]   Handling ethical, legal and social issues in birth cohort studies involving genetic research: responses from studies in six countries [J].
Ries, Nola M. ;
LeGrandeur, Jane ;
Caulfield, Timothy .
BMC MEDICAL ETHICS, 2010, 11
[26]   Application of second-generation sequencing to cancer genomics [J].
Robison, Keith .
BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, 2010, 11 (05) :524-534
[27]   Informed consent in biobank research: A deliberative approach to the debate [J].
Secko, David M. ;
Preto, Nina ;
Niemeyer, Simon ;
Burgess, Michael M. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2009, 68 (04) :781-789
[28]   The genetic information nondiscrimination act: Why your personal genetics are still vulnerable to discrimination [J].
Slaughter, Louise M. .
SURGICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2008, 88 (04) :723-+
[29]   The cancer genome [J].
Stratton, Michael R. ;
Campbell, Peter J. ;
Futreal, P. Andrew .
NATURE, 2009, 458 (7239) :719-724
[30]  
*TCGA, 2011, HUM SUBJ PROT DAT AC