Time for a change: considering the rights of study participants to ownership of their personal research-grade genomic data

Alice Lu, Peter Kuhn, I. Deichaite
{"title":"Time for a change: considering the rights of study participants to ownership of their personal research-grade genomic data","authors":"Alice Lu, Peter Kuhn, I. Deichaite","doi":"10.1088/2057-1739/AAF822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Determining the ownership of a patient ’ s personal genomic data is important because it impacts how data is governed and shared, which has both clinical and research implications for precision oncology. The 21st Century Cures Act enacted in December 2016 defined the ownership of clinical genomic data, but the governance of research-grade genomic data remains a hotly contested topic. The many stakeholders often have competing perspectives about ownership of raw and processed genomic data derived in research settings and how to weigh risks versus benefits of sharing this data with study participants. A growing number of research studies, policy recommendations, and ethics reviews have not been enough to influence changes in practice. Most genomic research is conducted in academia, which is guided by Institutional Review Board-approved protocols to protect study participants. The current standard is to limit the return of research-grade data to study participants, and give data ownership solely to the researchers or the research institution, since this data is not vetted for clinical purposes and is meant for research use only. However, these practices conflict not only with recommendations from peer-reviewed literature on best practices for addressing research study participants ’ needs but might indeed run counter to legal and ethical guidelines about data ownership. For example, patient-participants faced with poorly understood or incurable diseases such as certain cancers want, and could potentially benefit from, having access to their personal genomic data in this rapidly evolving field. This commentary highlights the gap between the status quo as approved by the IRB and the literature suggesting that study participants should be given access to their personal genomic data. There is an opportunity to facilitate a more effective and ethical way to collect genomic data for research use across institutions.","PeriodicalId":91466,"journal":{"name":"Convergent science physical oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1088/2057-1739/AAF822","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Convergent science physical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1739/AAF822","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Determining the ownership of a patient ’ s personal genomic data is important because it impacts how data is governed and shared, which has both clinical and research implications for precision oncology. The 21st Century Cures Act enacted in December 2016 defined the ownership of clinical genomic data, but the governance of research-grade genomic data remains a hotly contested topic. The many stakeholders often have competing perspectives about ownership of raw and processed genomic data derived in research settings and how to weigh risks versus benefits of sharing this data with study participants. A growing number of research studies, policy recommendations, and ethics reviews have not been enough to influence changes in practice. Most genomic research is conducted in academia, which is guided by Institutional Review Board-approved protocols to protect study participants. The current standard is to limit the return of research-grade data to study participants, and give data ownership solely to the researchers or the research institution, since this data is not vetted for clinical purposes and is meant for research use only. However, these practices conflict not only with recommendations from peer-reviewed literature on best practices for addressing research study participants ’ needs but might indeed run counter to legal and ethical guidelines about data ownership. For example, patient-participants faced with poorly understood or incurable diseases such as certain cancers want, and could potentially benefit from, having access to their personal genomic data in this rapidly evolving field. This commentary highlights the gap between the status quo as approved by the IRB and the literature suggesting that study participants should be given access to their personal genomic data. There is an opportunity to facilitate a more effective and ethical way to collect genomic data for research use across institutions.
是时候做出改变了:考虑研究参与者对其个人研究级基因组数据的所有权
确定患者个人基因组数据的所有权很重要,因为它影响数据的管理和共享方式,这对精确肿瘤学具有临床和研究意义。2016年12月颁布的《21世纪治愈法案》明确了临床基因组数据的所有权,但研究级基因组数据的治理仍然是一个激烈争论的话题。许多利益相关者通常对研究环境中获得的原始和处理过的基因组数据的所有权以及如何权衡与研究参与者共享这些数据的风险与收益有不同的看法。越来越多的研究、政策建议和伦理审查不足以影响实践中的变化。大多数基因组研究是在学术界进行的,由机构审查委员会批准的协议指导,以保护研究参与者。目前的标准是限制将研究级数据返回给研究参与者,并将数据所有权完全授予研究人员或研究机构,因为这些数据未经临床目的审查,仅用于研究用途。然而,这些做法不仅与同行评议文献中关于解决研究参与者需求的最佳做法的建议相冲突,而且可能确实违反了有关数据所有权的法律和道德准则。例如,在这个快速发展的领域中,面对知之甚少或无法治愈的疾病(如某些癌症)的患者参与者希望获得他们的个人基因组数据,并且可能从中受益。这篇评论强调了IRB批准的现状与建议研究参与者应该获得其个人基因组数据的文献之间的差距。有机会促进一种更有效和道德的方式来收集跨机构研究使用的基因组数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信