Human Genetics

, 130:369 | Cite as

Biobanking and international interoperability: samples

  • Michael KiehntopfEmail author
  • Michael Krawczak
Original Investigation


In terms of sample exchange, international collaborations between biobanks, or between biobanks and their research partners, have two important aspects. First, the donors’ consent usually implies that the scope and purpose of any sample transfer to third parties is subject to major constraints. Since the legal, ethical and political framework of biobanking may differ substantially, even between countries of comparable jurisdictional systems, general rules for the international sharing of biomaterial are difficult, if not impossible, to define. Issues of uncertainty include the right to transfer the material, the scope of research allowed, and intellectual property rights. Since suitable means of international law enforcement may not be available in the context of biobanking, collaborators are advised to clarify any residual uncertainty by means of bilateral contracts, for example, in the form of material transfer agreements. Second, biobank partners may rightly expect that the biomaterial they receive for further analysis attains a certain level of quality. This implies that a biobank has to implement stringent quality control measures covering, in addition to the material transfer itself, the whole process of material acquisition, transport, pre-analytical handling and storage. Again, it may be advisable for biobank partners to claim contractual warranties for the type and quality of the biomaterial they wish to acquire.


Alternative Dispute Resolution Bilateral Contract Material Transfer Agreement Broad Consent Sample Sharing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ahmad S, Sundaramoorthy E, Arora R, Sen S, Karthikeyan G, Sengupta S (2009) Progressive degradation of serum samples limits proteomic biomarker discovery. Anal Biochem 394:237–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asslaber M, Zatloukal K (2007) Biobanks: transnational, European and global networks. Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic 6:193–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks RE (2008) Preanalytical influences in clinical proteomic studies: raising awareness of fundamental issues in sample banking. Clin Chem 54:6–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banks RE, Stanley AJ, Cairns DA, Barrett JH, Clarke P, Thompson D, Selby PJ (2005) Influences of blood sample processing on low-molecular-weight proteome identified by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry. Clin Chem 51:1637–1649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Betsou F, Roussel B, Guillaume N, Lefrere JJ (2009) Long-term stability of coagulation variables: protein S as a biomarker for preanalytical storage-related variations in human plasma. Thromb Haemost 101:1172–1175PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Betsou F, Lehmann S, Ashton G, Barnes M, Benson EE, Coppola D, DeSouza Y, Eliason J, Glazer B, Guadagni F, Harding K, Horsfall DJ, Kleeberger C, Nanni U, Prasad A, Shea K, Skubitz A, Somiari S, Gunter E (2010) Standard preanalytical coding for biospecimens: defining the sample PREanalytical code. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19:1004–1011PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caboux E, Plymoth A, Hainaut P (2007) Common minimum technical standards and protocols for biological resource centres dedicated to cancer research. WHO Press, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  8. Chalmers D, Nicol D (2008) Human genetic research databases and biobanks: towards uniform technology and Australian best practise. J Law Med 15:538–555PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Christians U, Klawitter J, Hornberger A, Klawitter J (2011) How unbiased is non-targeted metabolomics and is targeted pathway screening the solution? Curr Pharm Biotechnol 12(7):1053–1066PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Denery JR, Nunes AA, Dickerson TJ (2011) Characterization of differences between blood sample matrices in untargeted metabolomics. Anal Chem 83:1040–1047PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elger BS, Caplan AL (2006) Consent and anonymisation in research involving biobanks. EMBO Reports 7:661–666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gasser U, Palfrey J (2007) Breaking down digital barriers: when and how ICT interoperability drives innovation. Berkman Publication Series, HarvardGoogle Scholar
  13. Goebel JW, Pickardt T, Bedau M, Fuchs M, Lenk C, Paster I, Spranger TM, Stockter U, Bauer U, Cooper DN, Krawczak M (2010) Legal and ethical consequences of international biobanking from a national perspective: the German BMB-EUCoop project. Eur J Hum Genet 18:522–525PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hannisdal R, Gislefoss RE, Grimsrud TK, Hustad S, Morkrid L, Ueland PM (2010) Analytical recovery of folate and its degradation products in human serum stored at −25°C for up to 29 years. J Nutr 140:522–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hansson MG, Dillner J, Bartram CR, Carlson JA, Helgesson G (2006) Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research? Lancet Oncol 7:266–269PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harris JR, Burton P, Brand A, Brooks A, Cambon-Thomsen A, Dillner J, Litton JE, Riegman P, Vuorio E, Zatloukal K (2008) Report and Recommendations: Networking Meeting for EU-Funded Biobanking Projects. Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI), TurkuGoogle Scholar
  17. Hewitt RE (2011) Biobanking: the foundation of personalized medicine. Curr Opin Oncol 23:112–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hsieh SY, Chen RK, Pan YH, Lee HL (2006) Systematical evaluation of the effects of sample collection procedures on low-molecular-weight serum/plasma proteome profiling. Proteomics 6:3189–3198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karsan A, Eigl BJ, Flibotte S, Gelmon K, Switzer P, Hassell P, Harrison D, Law J, Hayes M, Stillwell M, Xiao Z, Conrads TP, Veenstra T (2005) Analytical and preanalytical biases in serum proteomic pattern analysis for breast cancer diagnosis. Clin Chem 51:1525–1528PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lengelle J, Panopoulos E, Betsou F (2008) Soluble CD40 ligand as a biomarker for storage-related preanalytic variations of human serum. Cytokine 44:275–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Medical Research Council (2001) Human tissue and biological samples for use in research: operational and ethical guidelines. MRC Ethics Series, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. National Cancer Institute (2007) National Cancer Institute Best Practices for Biospecimen Resources. National Cancer Institute, RockvilleGoogle Scholar
  23. OECD Task Force on Biological Resource Centres (2007) OECD Best Practise Guidelines for BRCs—2007. OECD Publishing, ParisGoogle Scholar
  24. Rai AJ, Gelfand CA, Haywood BC, Warunek DJ, Yi J, Schuchard MD, Mehigh RJ, Cockrill SL, Scott GB, Tammen H, Schulz-Knappe P, Speicher DW, Vitzthum F, Haab BB, Siest G, Chan DW (2005) HUPO Plasma Proteome Project specimen collection and handling: towards the standardization of parameters for plasma proteome samples. Proteomics 5:3262–3277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ransohoff DF (2007) How to improve reliability and efficiency of research about molecular markers: roles of phases, guidelines, and study design. J Clin Epidemiol 60:1205–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ransohoff DF, Gourlay ML (2010) Sources of bias in specimens for research about molecular markers for cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:698–704PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Riegman PH, Oomen MH, Dinjens WN, Oosterhuis JW, Lam KH, Spatz A, Ratcliffe C, Knox K, Mager R, Kerr D, Pezzella F, Van Damme B, Van De Vijver M, Van Boven H, Morente MM, Alonso S, Kerjaschki D, Pammer J, Lopez-Guerrero JA, Llombart-Bosch A, Carbone A, Gloghini A, Teodorovic I, Isabelle M, Passioukov A, Lejeune S, Therasse P, Van Veen EB (2006) TuBaFrost: European virtual tumor tissue banking. Adv Exp Med Biol 587:65–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Salvaterra E, Lecchi L, Giovanelli S, Butti B, Bardella MT, Bertazzi PA, Bosari S, Coggi G, Coviello DA, Lalatta F, Moggio M, Nosotti M, Zanella A, Rebulla P (2008) Banking together: a unified model for informed consent for biobanking. EMBO Reports 9:307–313PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stankovic AK, Parmar G (2006) Assay interferences from blood collection tubes: a cautionary note. Clin Chem 52:1627–1628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Timms JF, Arslan-Low E, Gentry-Maharaj A, Luo Z, T’Jampens D, Podust VN, Ford J, Fung ET, Gammerman A, Jacobs I, Menon U (2007) Preanalytic influence of sample handling on SELDI-TOF serum protein profiles. Clin Chem 53:645–656PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vaught JB, Caboux E, Hainaut P (2010) International efforts to develop biospecimen best practices. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19:912–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vysekantsev IP, Gurina TM, Martsenyuk VF, Petrenko TF, Kudokotseva EV, Koshchiy SV, Groshevoy MI (2005) Probability of lethal damages of cryopreserved biological objects during storage. Cryo Letters 26:401–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Woodhams B, Girardot O, Blanco MJ, Colesse G, Gourmelin Y (2001) Stability of coagulation proteins in frozen plasma. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 12:229–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yi J, Liu Z, Gelfand CA, Craft D (2011) Investigation of peptide biomarker stability in plasma samples using time-course MS analysis. Methods Mol Biol 728:161–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yuille M, van Ommen GJ, Brechot C, Cambon-Thomsen A, Dagher G, Landegren U, Litton JE, Pasterk M, Peltonen L, Taussig M, Wichmann HE, Zatloukal K (2008) Biobanking for Europe. Brief Bioinform 9:14–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yuille M, Dixon K, Platt A, Pullum S, Lewis D, Hall A, Ollier W (2010) The UK DNA banking network: a “fair access” biobank. Cell Tissue Bank 11:241–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zika E, Paci S, Schulte in den Bäumen T, Braun A, RijKers-Defrasne S, Deschênes M, Fortier I, Laage-Hellman J, Scerri CA, Ibarreta D (2010) Biobanks in Europe: prospects for harmonisation and networking. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory DiagnosticsJena University HospitalJenaGermany
  2. 2.TMF-Technology, Methods, and Infrastructure for Networked Medical ResearchBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Medical Informatics and StatisticsChristian-Albrechts UniversityKielGermany

Personalised recommendations