Biobanking from the patient perspective

Research Involvement and Engagement

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Mitchell, Derick ^a   Geissler, Jan ^b,c   Parry Jones, Alison ^d   Keulen, Hans ^e   Schmitt, Doris C ^f   Vavassori, Rosaria ^g,h,i   Matharoo Ball, Balwir ^j,k  

^a EU Joint Programme Neurodegenerative Disease Research   (Ireland)

^b Leukemia Patient Advocates Foundation   (Switzerland)

^c European Patients Academy on Therapeutic Innovation   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

^e Chordoma Foundation   (United States)

^f Foundation PATH   (Germany)

^g Italian Association for Alternating Hemiplegia of Childhood   (Italy)

^h Biobank and Clinical Registry for Alternating Hemiplegia of Childhood   (Italy)

ⁱ International Consortium for the Research on Alternating Hemiplegia of Childhood   (France)

^j NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^k The David Evans Medical Research Centre   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

Biobank; Involvement; Partnering; Patient; Research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84965143725     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20567529     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s40900-015-0001-z     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Riegman PH, Morente MM, Betsou F, DeBlasio P, Geary P. Biobanking for better healthcare. Mol Oncol. 2008;2:213–22.
2. Harris JR, Burton P, Knoppers BM, Lindpaintner K, Bledsoe M, Brookes AJ, et al. Toward a roadmap in global biobanking for health. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012;20(11):1105–11.
3. Staley K., Buckland SA, Hayes H and Tarpey M. ‘The missing links’: understanding how context and mechanism influence the impact of public involvement in research. Health Expect. 2012; doi: 10.1111/hex.12017
4. Commission E. Biobanks for Europe—a challenge for governance. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2012.
5. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Affordable Healthcare Act 2010 (Internet). 2014. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/timeline. Accessed 25 April 2014
6. th, 2014
7. Tritter JQ. Revolution or evolution: the challenges of conceptualizing patient and public involvement in a consumerist world. Health Expect. 2009;12(3):275–87.
8. Meyer UA. Personalized medicine: a personal view. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91:373–5.
9. Yuille M, van Ommen GJ, Bréchot C, Cambon-Thomsen A, Dagher G, Landegren U, et al. Biobanking for Europe. Brief in Bioinfor. 2008;9(1):14–24.
10. International Alliance of Patients’ Organisations. What is patient-centered healthcare?: A review of definitions and principles. 2009. Available at: http://www.patientsorganizations.org/pchreview. Accessed 23 March 2014.
11. PatientPartner (Internet). 2012. Available at: http://www.patientpartner-europe.eu. Accessed 12 April, 2014.
12. Pavitt S. EUPATI: an initiative to provide expertise in patient advocacy and in medicines development processes. Regulatory Rapporteur. 2013;10(9):29–31.
13. McKenzie A, Hanley B. Consumer and community participation in health and medical research. Perth, Western Australia: University of Western Australia; 2007.
14. Health Canada (Internet). Archived 23 June 2013. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/public-consult/index-eng.php. Accessed February 2014.
15. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient and public involvement policy. (Internet). 29 November 2013. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/getinvolved/patientandpublicinvolvement/patientandpublicinvolvementpolicy/patient_and_public_involvement_policy.jsp. Accessed 14 March, 2014.
16. Gooberman-Hill R, Burston A, Clark E, et al. Involving patients in research: considering good practice. Musculoskeletal Care. 2013;11(4):187–90.
17. Caron-Flinterman JF, Broerse JE, Teerling J, Bunders JF. Patients’ priorities concerning health research: the case of asthma and COPD research in the Netherlands. Health Expect. 2005;8(3):253–63.
18. O’Connell D, Mosconi P. An active role for patients in clinical research? Drug Dev Res. 2006;67(3):188.
19. Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, Barber R. The PIRICOM study: a systematic review of the conceptualisation, measurement, impact and outcomes of patient and public involvement in health and social care research. London: United Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration; 2009.
20. Coupland H, Maher L, Enriquez J, et al. Clients or colleagues? Reflections on the process of participatory action research with young injecting drug users. Int J Drug Policy. 2005;16:191–8.
21. O'Doherty KC, Hawkins AK, Burgess MM. Involving citizens in the ethics of biobank research: informing institutional policy through structured public deliberation. Soc Sci Med. 2012;75(9):1604-11.
22. Kish L. The blockbuster drug of the century: an engaged patient. HL7 Standards. 2012. Available at: http://www.hl7standards.com/blog/2012/08/28/drug-of-the-century. Accessed 23 April 2014.
23. Mayerhofer M. Patient organisation as the (un) usual suspects. In: Herbert G, Alan P, editors. Biobanks: governance in comparative perspective. New York: Routledge; 2008. p. 71–85.
24. Rabeharisoa V. The struggle against neuromuscular diseases in France and the emergence of the “partnership model” of patient organisation. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57(11):2127–36.
25. Genethon DNA and Cell Bank (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://www.genethon.fr/en/rd-2/dna-and-cell-bank. Accessed15 April, 2014
26. EURORDIS (Internet). 2014. Available at: http://www.eurordis.org. Accessed 24 April, 2014
27. EUROBIOBANK (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://www.eurobiobank.eu. Accessed 20 March, 2014
28. Genetic Alliance Biobank (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://www.biobank.org. Accessed 24 April, 2014
29. Smit C. EPPOSI conference, data-and bio-banking for research, towards joint ventures of patient organisations, science and industry on the road to validated expertise and new therapies. May 6–9, 2006 & October 25–27, 2006
30. BBMRI stakeholder’s forum patient participation in BBMRI (Internet). updated 2010. Available at: http://bbmri.eu/events-and-consultations. Accessed 02 February, 2014
31. PatientPartner—biobanking from the patient’s perspective (Internet). 2012. Available at: http://www.patientpartner-europe.eu/en/resources/biobanking. Accessed 12 April, 2014
32. Cambon-Thomsen A, Rial-Sebbag E, Knoppers BM. Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks. Eur Respir J. 2007;30(2):373–82.
33. Boggio A. Ownership of samples and data and territorial restrictions concerning data and samples beyond national boundaries. In: Elger B, Biller-Andorno N, Mauron A, Capron AM, editors. Ethical issues in governing biobanks. Global perspectives. Farnham Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited; 2008. p. 197–205.
34. Elger B. Withdrawal of consent and destruction of samples. In: Elger B, Biller-Andorno N, Mauron A, Capron AM, editors. Ethical issues in governing biobanks. Global perspectives. Farnham Surrey: England; Ashgate Publishing Limited; 2008. p. 131–65.
35. Caulfield T, Burningham S, Joly Y, Master Z, Shabani M, Scott CT, et al. A review of the key issues associated with the commercialization of biobanks. J Law Biosciences. 2014;1:94–110.
36. Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, Kahn JP, Cho MK, Clayton EW, et al. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics. 2008;36:219–48.
37. Gottweis H, Petersen A. Biobanks: governance in comparative perspective. New York: Routledge; 2008.
38. Gaskell G, Stares S, Allansdottir A, Allum N, Castro P, Esmer Y, et al. Europeans and biotechnology in 2010: winds of change? Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2010. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_341_winds_en.pdf.
39. UK BIOBANK. (Internet). 2014. Available at: http://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk. Accessed 28 March, 2014
40. CARTaGENE (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://www.cartagene.qc.ca. Accessed 02 April, 2014
41. O’Doherty K, Ibrahim T, Hawkins A, Burgess M, Watson P. Managing the introduction of biobanks to potential participants: lessons from a deliberative public forum. Biopreservation biobanking. 2012;10(1):12–21.
42. Mayo Clinic Biobank (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/biobank. Accessed 15 February, 2014
43. O’Doherty K. From consent to institutions: designing adaptive governance for genomic biobanks. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73:367–74.
44. Vision On Information, Confidence and Engagement (VOICE) patient training course. (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://independentcancerpatientsvoice.org.uk/voice-science-for-patient-advocates. Accessed 20 March, 2014
45. Genetic Alliance Registry and Biobank Bootcamp (Internet). 2012. Available at: http://www.geneticalliance.org/about/eventsarchive. Accessed at 15 April 2014
46. P3G Biobank Training (Internet). 2014. Available at: http://www.p3g.org/resources/biobank-training. Accessed 03 April, 2014
47. Patients Tumor Bank of Hope (Internet). Undated. Available at: http://stiftungpath.org. Accessed 10 March 2014
48. Waldmann A, Anzeneder T, Katalinic A. Patients and methods of the PATH Biobank—a resource for breast cancer research. Geburtsh Frauenheilk. 2014;74:361–9. Available at: https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0033-1360263.pdf.
49. th, 2014
50. th, 2014
51. th, 2014
52. Lemeke A, Wu JT, Waudby C, Pulley J, Somkin CP, Brown Trinidad S, et al. Community engagement in biobanking: experiences from the eMERGE Network. Genomics Soc Policy. 2010;6(3):35–52.
53. th, 2014
54. th, 2015
55. th, 2014