Repositories for Sharing Human Data in Stem Cell Research
High-throughput biology is data intensive, and stem cell research is no exception to this trend. Funders often require scientists to share the data generated by high-throughput methods, because sharing speeds scientific discovery and increases the benefit of public investments in science. When human data are involved, the benefits of sharing must be balanced against the risks of inappropriately disclosing sensitive, personal information. Historically, scientists anonymized data to protect the interests of people whose data were shared. However, recent development of computational methods for re-identifying people from anonymous data and empirical demonstrations of re-identification have led many commentators to question whether anonymization still provides adequate protection for people whose data are included in shared databases. Because of disclosure concerns, data sharing repositories control who can access sensitive human data and what the approved users can do with those data. Stem cell researchers who create such repositories must develop governance mechanisms that prevent harm to individuals whose data they share.
KeywordsData Sharing Stem Cell Research Stem Cell Scientist Unauthorized Person Informational Risk
- Contreras, J. (2011). Bermuda’s legacy: Policy, patents, and the design of the genome commons. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, 12, 61–125.Google Scholar
- Department of Health and Human Services. (2005). Protection of Human Subjects, 45 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 46.102(f).Google Scholar
- Genome Canada. (2008). Data release and resource sharing. Retrieved June 25, 2012, from http://www.genomecanada.ca/medias/PDF/EN/DataReleaseandResourceSharingPolicy.pdf.
- Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, Pub. Law 110-233, 122 Stat. 881. (2008).Google Scholar
- Homer, N., Szelinger, S., Redman, M., Duggan, D., Tembe, W., et al. (2008). Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density snp genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genetics, 4(e1000167), 1000161–1000169.Google Scholar
- Lowrance, W. W. (2002). Learning from experience: Privacy and the secondary use of data in health research. London: The Nuffield Trust.Google Scholar
- Lowrance, W. W. (2006). Privacy, confidentiality and identifiability in genomic research. Workship on Privacy, Confidentiality and Identifiability in Genomic Research. Oct. 3–4. Bathesda: National Human Genome Research Institute.Google Scholar
- Malin, B. (2005). Betrayed by my shadow: Learning data identity via trail matching. Journal of Privacy Technology, 20050609001.Google Scholar
- Malin, B. (2006). Re-identification of familial database records. In AMIA 2006 symposium proceedings (pp. 525–528).Google Scholar
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289. (2012).Google Scholar
- Narayanan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2006). Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets. Retrieved July 12, 2012, from http://www.Cs.Utexas.Edu/~shmat/shmat_oak08netflix.Pdf.
- National Bioethics Advisory Commission. (1999). Research involving human biological materials: Ethical issues and policy guidance, Volume I. Rockville: National Bioethics Advisory Commission.Google Scholar
- National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2012). DbGaP. Washington, DC: National LIbrary of Medicine.Google Scholar
- National Institutes of Health. (2007). Policy for sharing of data obtained in NIH supported or conducted genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Federal Register, 72, 49290–49297.Google Scholar
- Office of Extramural Research. (2003). Nih data sharing policy and implementation guidance. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://grants.Nih.Gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.Htm.
- Ohm, P. (2010). Broken promises of privacy: Responding to the surprising failure of anonymization. UCLA Law Review, 57, 1701–1777.Google Scholar
- Ossorio, P. (2011). Bodies of data: Genomic data and bioscience data sharing. Social Research, 78, 907–932.Google Scholar
- Rai, A. K. (2005). “Open and collaborative” research: A new model for biomedicine. In R. W. Hahn (Ed.), Intellectual property rights in frontier industries. Washington, DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar
- Sweeny, L. (1996). Uniqueness of simple demographics in the u.S. Population. Working Paper LIDAP-WP4. Data Privacy Lab, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
- The Hinxton Group. (2010). Statement on policies and practices governing data and materials sharing and intellectual property in stem cell science. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.Hinxtongroup.Org/consensus_hg10_final.Pdf.
- U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (U.S.), U.S. Centers for Disease Control, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (U.S.), U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration, Hewlett Foundation (U.S.), U.S. National Institutes of Health, U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Economic and Social Research Council (UK), Medical Research Council (UK), Wellcome Trust (UK), Health Research Council of New Zealand, INSERM (FR), National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), The World Bank. The list of signatories can be found at: http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Spotlight-issues/Data-sharing/Public-health-and-epidemiology/Signatories-to-the-joint-statement/index.htm
- Wellcome Trust. (2010). Data management and sharing. Retrieved June 15, 2012, from http://www.Wellcome.Ac.Uk/about-us/policy/spotlight-issues/data-sharing/data-management-and-sharing/index.Htm.
- Wellcome Trust.(2011). Sharing research data to improve public health: Full joint statement by funders of health researcher. Retrieved July 8, 2012, from http://www.Wellcome.Ac.Uk/about-us/policy/spotlight-issues/data-sharing/public-health-and-epidemiology/wtdv030690.Htm.
- Zink, A., & Silman, A. (2008). Ethical and legal constraints on data sharing between countries in multinational epidemiological studies in Europe: Report from a joint workshop of the European League Against Rheumatism standing committee on epidemiology with the “AutoCure” Project. Annals of Rheumatic Disease, 67, 1041–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar