Incidental findings: The time is not yet ripe for a policy for biobanks

European Journal of Human Genetics

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 437-441

  Viberg, Jennifer ^a   Hansson, Mats G ^a   Langenskiöld, Sophie ^a   Segerdahl, Pär ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC DATABASE; GENETIC RISK; GENETICS; INCIDENTAL FINDING; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; GENETIC RESEARCH; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; HUMANS; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; POLICY MAKING; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84896542722     PISSN: 10184813     EISSN: 14765438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2013.217     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA et al: Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: Analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 219-248, 211
2. Wolf SM, Crock BN, Van Ness B et al: Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genet Med 2012; 14: 361-384
3. Knoppers BM, Deschenes M, Zawati MH, Tasse AM: Population studies: Return of research results and incidental findings Policy Statement. Eur J Hum Genet 2012; 21: 1-3
4. Wolf SM, Paradise J, Caga-Anan C: The law of incidental findings in human subjects research: Establishing researchers' duties. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 361-383, 214
5. Affleck P: Is it ethical to deny genetic research participants individualised results?. J Med Ethics 2009; 35: 209-213
6. Quaid KA, Jessup NM, Meslin EM: Disclosure of genetic information obtained through research. Genet Test 2004; 8: 347-355
7. Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, LeRoy L, Hudson K: Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research. Am J Bioeth 2008; 8: 36-43
8. Meulenkamp TM, Gevers SK, Bovenberg JA, Koppelman GH, van Hylckama Vlieg A, Smets EM: Communication of biobanks' research results: What do (potential) participants want?. Am J Med Genet A 2010; 152A: 2482-2492
9. Gaskell G, Gottweis H, Starkbaum J et al: Biobanks and European public opinion: Explaining heterogeneity. http://www.univie.ac.at/LSG/papers2011/ LSG%20Working% 20Paper.pdf. Accessed 23 January 2013
10. Bollinger JM, Scott J, Dvoskin R, Kaufman D: Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: Findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genet Med 2012; 14: 451-457
11. Bledsoe MJ, Clayton EW, McGuire AL, Grizzle WE, O'Rourke P, Zeps N: Return of research results from genomic biobanks: Cost matters. Genet Med 2012; 15: 103-105
12. Bledsoe MJ, Grizzle WE, Clark BJ, Zeps N: Practical implementation issues and challenges for biobanks in the return of individual research results. Genet Med 2012; 14: 478-483
13. Kaye J, Boddington P, de Vries J, Hawkins N, Melham K: Ethical implications of the use of whole genome methods in medical research. Eur J Hum Genet 2010; 18: 398-403
14. Ravitsky V, Wilfond BS: Disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006; 6: 8-17
15. Cho MK: Understanding incidental findings in the context of genetics and genomics. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 280-285, 212
16. Hens K, Nys H, Cassiman JJ, Dierickx K: The return of individual research findings in paediatric genetic research. J Med Ethics 2011; 37: 179-183
17. Forsberg JS, Hansson MG, Eriksson S: Changing perspectives in biobank research: From individual rights to concerns about public health regarding the return of results. Eur J Hum Genet 2009; 17: 1544-1549
18. Solberg B, Steinsbekk K: Managing incidental findings in population based biobank research. Nor Epidemiol 2012; 21: 195-201
19. Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz CW, Benson P, Winslade W: False hopes and best data: Consent to research and the therapeutic misconception. Hastings Cent Rep 1987; 17: 20-24
20. Clayton EW: Incidental findings in genetics research using archived DNA. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 286-291
21. Meltzer LA: Undesirable implications of disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006; 6: 28-30
22. Fryer-Edwards K, Fullerton SM: Relationships with test-Tubes: Where's the reciprocity?. Am J Bioeth 2006; 6: 36-38
23. Christenhusz GM, Devriendt K, Dierickx K: To tell or not to tell?. A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. Eur J Hum Genet 2012; 21: 248-255
24. Manson AC, O0Neill O: Rethinking Informed Consent in Bioethics. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2007
25. Bredenoord AL, Kroes HY, Cuppen E, Parker M, van Delden JJ: Disclosure of individual genetic data to research participants: The debate reconsidered. Trends Genet 2011; 27: 41-47
26. Beskow LM, Dean E: Informed consent for biorepositories: Assessing prospective participants' understanding and opinions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 1440-1451
27. Ruiz-Canela M, Valle-Mansilla JI, Sulmasy DP: What research participants want to know about genetic research results: The impact of "genetic exceptionalism". J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2011; 6: 39-46