Investments in cancer genomics: Who benefits and who decides

American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 96, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 1960-1964

  Foster, Morris W ^a   Mulvihill, John J ^b   Sharp, Richard R ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

^c BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER GENETICS; DECISION MAKING; FUNDING; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; HUMAN GENOME PROJECT; INVESTMENT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ONCOGENE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; SOCIAL ASPECT;

ATLASES; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; DEMOCRACY; HUMAN GENOME PROJECT; HUMANS; INVESTMENTS; PATIENT ADVOCACY; POLICY MAKING; RARE DISEASES; RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUPPORT; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SOCIAL VALUES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33750480246     PISSN: 00900036     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.075424     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Sze J, Prakash S. Human genetics, environment, and communities of color: ethical and social implications. Environ Health Perspect. 2004;112:740-745.
2. National Cancer Institute/National Human Genome Research Institute. The Cancer Genome Atlas. Available at: http://cancergenome.nih.gov/index.asp. Accessed July 24, 2006.
3. Kaiser J. NCI gears up for cancer genome project. Science. 2005;307: 1182.
4. NCAB Working Group on Biomedical Technology. Report to National Cancer Advisory Board. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute; 2005.
5. Bonetta L. Going on a cancer hunt. Cell. 2005;123:735-737.
6. Garber K. Human Cancer Genome Project moving forward despite some doubts in community. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1322-1324.
7. Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. The Cancer Genome Project Available at: http://www.sanger.ac.uk/genetics/CGP. Accessed July 24, 2006.
8. Resnik D. Setting biomedical research priorities: justice, science, and public participation. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2001;11:181-204.
9. Fintor L. Advocacy group update-setting the cancer agenda. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:607-608.
10. Waller M, Batt S. Advocacy groups for breast-cancer patients. Can Med Assoc J. 1995;152:829-833.
11. Young-McCaughan S, Rich IM, Lindsay GC, Bertram KA. The Department of Defense Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program: innovations in the federal funding of biomedical research. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8:957-962.
12. Fernandez-Zapico ME, Kaczynski JA, Urrutia R. Pancreatic cancer research: challenges, opportunities, and recent developments. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2002;18:563-567.
13. Andejeski Y, Breslau ES, Hart E, et al. Benefits and drawbacks of including consumer reviewers in the scientific merit review of breast cancer research. J Womens Health Gender-Based Med. 2002;11:119-136.
14. Foster MW, Sharp RR. Will investments in biobanks, prospective cohorts, and markers of common patterns of variation benefit other populations for drug response and disease susceptibility gene discovery? Pharmacogenomics J. 2005;5:75-80.
15. Mishra R. New funding spurs battle against pancreatic cancer. Boston Globe. May 23, 2003A1.
16. Stephens P, Edkins S, Davies H, et al. A screen of the complete protein kinase gene family identifies diverse patterns of somatic mutations in human breast cancer. Natl Genet. 2005;37:590-592.
17. International HapMap Consortium. Integrating ethics and science in the International HapMap Project. Nat Rev Genet. 2004;5:467-475.
18. Oscarson M. Genetic polymorphisms in the cytochrome P450 2A6 (CYP2A6) gene: implications for interindividual differences in nicotine metabolism. Drug Metab Dispos. 2001;29:91-95.
19. Thomas CB, Nelson DO, Pleshanov P, et al. Elevated frequencies of hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase lymphocyte mutants are detected in Russian liquidators 6 to 10 years after exposure to radiation from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident. Mutat Res. 1999;439:105-119.
20. Giovannucci E. An updated review of the epidemiological evidence that cigarette smoking increases risk of colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2001;10:725-731.
21. Potter JD. Colorectal cancer: molecules and populations. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:916-932.
22. Eaden J. Review article: colorectal carcinoma and inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20(suppl 4):24-30.
23. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1999.
24. Kitcher P. Responsible biology. Bioscience. 2004;54:331-336.
25. National Cancer Institute/National Human Genome Research Institute. The Cancer Genome Atlas: Ethics, Law, and Policy. Available at: http://cancergenome. nih.gov/components/elp.asp. Accessed July 24, 2006.