A closer look at the recommended criteria for disclosing genetic results: Perspectives of medical genetic specialists, genomic researchers, and institutional review board chairs

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 544-553

  Brandt, Debra S ^a,b   Shinkunas, Laura ^c   Hillis, Stephen L ^a,c,d   Daack Hirsch, Sandra E ^b   Driessnack, Martha ^e   Downing, Nancy R ^b   Liu, Megan F ^f   Shah, Lisa L ^b   Williams, Janet K ^b   Simon, Christian M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF NURSING   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^d VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f TAIPEI MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Biomedical ethics; Genetic research; Genetic testing; Human genome; Incidental findings; Institutional review board

Indexed keywords

GENETIC COUNSELING; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; ARTICLE;

DISCLOSURE; GENETIC COUNSELING;

EID: 84879800223     PISSN: 10597700     EISSN: 15733599     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10897-013-9583-5     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Berg, J. S.; Khoury, M. J.; Evans, J. P. (2011). Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genetics in Medicine, 13(6), 499-504. doi: 10.1097/GIM. 0b013e318220aaba.
2. Beskow, L. M.; Burke, W. (2010). Offering individual genetic research results: context matters. Science Translational Medicine, 2(38), 38cm20. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000952.
3. Beskow, L. M.; Smolek, S. J. (2009). Prospective biorepository participants' perspectives on access to research results. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 4(3), 99-111. doi: 10.1525/jer.2009.4.3.99.
4. Beskow, L. M.; Burke, W.; Merz, J. F.; Barr, P. A.; Terry, S.; Penchaszadeh, V. B.; et al. (2001). Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 286(18), 2315-2321.
5. Biesecker, L. G.; Burke, W.; Kohane, I.; Plon, S. E.; Zimmern, R. (2012). Next-generation sequencing in the clinic: are we ready? Nature, 15, 818-824. doi: 10.1038/nrg3357.
6. Bollinger, J. M.; Scott, J.; Dvoskin, R.; Kaufman, D. (2012). Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genetics in Medicine, 14(4), 451-457. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.66.
7. Bookman, E. B.; Langehorne, A. A.; Eckfeldt, J. H.; Glass, K. C.; Jarvik, G. P.; Klag, M.; et al. (2006). Reporting genetic results in research studies: summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 140(10), 1033-1040. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31195.
8. Bovenberg, J.; Meulenkamp, T.; Smets, E.; Gevers, S. (2009). Biobank research: reporting results to individual participants. European Journal of Health Law, 16(3), 229-247.
9. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2010). Genomic testing. http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/gtesting/ACCE/index.htm. Accessed 22 August 2012.
10. Christenhusz, G. M.; Devriendt, K.; Dierickx, K. (2012). To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. European Journal of Human Genetics, doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.130. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ ncurrent/pdf/ejhg2012130a.pdf.
11. Downing, N. R.; Williams, J. K.; Daack-Hirsch, S.; Driessnack, M.; Simon, C. (2012). Managing genomic incidental findings in the clinical setting. Patient Education and Counseling. 2012 Oct. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.09.010 [Epub ahead of print].
12. Dressler, L. G.; Smolek, S.; Ponsaran, R.; Markey, J. M.; Starks, H.; Gerson, N.; et al. (2012). IRB perspectives on the return of individual results from genomic research. Genetics in Medicine, 14(2), 215-222. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.10.
13. Edwards, K. L.; Lemke, A. A.; Trinidad, S. B.; Lewis, S. M.; Starks, H.; Snapinn, K. W.; et al. (2012). Genetics researchers' and IRB professionals' attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis. Genetics in Medicine, 14(2), 236-242. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.57.
14. Fabsitz, R. R.; McGuire, A.; Sharp, R. R.; Puggal, M.; Beskow, L. M.; Biesecker, L. G.; et al. (2010). Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group. Circulation Cardiovascular Genetics, 3(6), 574-580. doi: 10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.110.958827.
15. Green, R. C.; Berg, J. W.; Berry, G. T.; Biesecker, L. G.; Dimmock, D. P.; Evans, J. P.; et al. (2012). Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 14(4), 405-410. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.21.
16. Hawkins, A. K. (2010). Biobanks: importance, implications and opportunities for genetic counselors. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 19(5), 423-429. doi: 10.1007/s10897-010-9305-1.
17. Henrikson, N. B.; Burke, W.; Veenstra, D. L. (2008). Ancillary risk information and pharmacogenetic tests: social and policy implications. The Pharmacogenomics Journal, 8(2), 85-89. doi: 10.1038/sj.tpj.6500457.
18. Hsieh, H. F.; Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687.
19. Keane, M. A. (2008). Institutional review board approaches to the incidental findings problem. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(2), 352-355. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00279.x. 213.
20. Kohane, I. S.; Masys, D. R.; Altman, R. B. (2006). The incidentalome: a threat to genomic medicine. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(2), 212-215. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.2.212.
21. Lemke, A. A.; Trinidad, S. B.; Edwards, K. L.; Starks, H.; Wiesner, G. L.; GRRIP Consortium. (2010). Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a national survey of professionals involved in human subjects protection. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5(1), 83-91. doi: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.1.83.
22. National Bioethics Advisory Comission (NBAC). (1999). Research involving human biological materials: Ethical issues and policy guidance, vol. 1. http://hdl.handle.net/1805/22. Accessed 30 May 2012.
23. Netzer, C.; Klein, C.; Kohlhase, J.; Kubisch, C. (2009). New challenges for informed consent through whole genome array testing. Journal of Medical Genetics, 46(7), 495-496. doi: 10.1136/jmg.2009.068015.
24. Reis-Filho, J. S. (2009). Next-generation sequencing. Breast Cancer Research, 11(Suppl 3), S12. doi: 10.1186/bcr2431.
25. Resta, R.; Biesecker, B. B.; Bennett, R. L.; Blum, S.; Hahn, S. E.; Strecker, M. N.; et al. (2006). A new definition of genetic counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors' Task Force Report. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15(2), 77-83. doi: 10.1007/s10897-005-9014-3.
26. Simon, C. M.; Williams, J. K.; Shinkunas, L.; Brandt, D.; Daack-Hirsch, S.; Driessnack, M. (2011). Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6(4), 53-67. doi: 10.1525/jer.2011.6.4.53.
27. Simon, C.; Shinkunas, L. A.; Brandt, D.; Williams, J. K. (2012). Individual genetic and genomic research results and the tradition of informed consent: exploring US review board guidance. Journal of Medical Ethics, 38(7), 417-422. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100273.
28. ten Bosch, J. R.; Grody, W. W. (2008). Keeping up with the next generation: massively parallel sequencing in clinical diagnostics. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 10(6), 484-492. doi: 10.2353/jmoldx.2008.080027.
29. Townsend, A.; Adam, S.; Birch, P. H.; Lohn, Z.; Rousseau, F.; Friedman, J. M. (2012). "I want to know what's in Pandora's box": comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 158A(10), 2519-2525. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.35554.
30. Van Ness, B. (2008). Genomic research and incidental findings. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(2), 292-297. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X. 2008.00272.x.
31. Wilfond, B. S.; Carpenter, K. J. (2008). Incidental findings in pediatric research. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(2), 332-340. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00277.x. 213.
32. Williams, J. K.; Daack-Hirsch, S.; Driessnack, M.; Downing, N.; Shinkunas, L.; Brandt, D.; et al. (2012). Researcher and institutional review board chair perspectives on incidental findings in genomic research. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers, 16(6), 508-513. doi: 10.1089/gtmb.2011.0248.
33. Wolf, S. M. (2012). The past, present, and future of the debate over return of research results and incidental findings. Genetics in Medicine, 14(4), 355-357. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.26.
34. Wolf, S. M.; Lawrenz, F. P.; Nelson, C. A.; Kahn, J. P.; Cho, M. K.; Clayton, E. W.; et al. (2008). Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36(2), 219-248. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00266.x. 211.
35. Wolf, S. M.; Crock, B. N.; Van Ness, B.; Lawrenz, F.; Kahn, J. P.; Beskow, L. M.; et al. (2012). Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genetics in Medicine, 14(4), 361-384. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.23.