Advertisement

Ethical Considerations in the Genomic Era

  • Bridget EllulEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine book series (APPPM, volume 9)

Abstract

Pharmacogenomics is a powerful molecular tool in biomedical research aimed at providing personalised medicine in everyday clinical practice, best described as the provision of ‘the right drug for the right patient at the right dose’, that is safe, effective therapy, with minimal adverse reactions. The patient, is the main beneficiary but is also the indispensable key player, providing biological material for research.

This chapter focuses primarily on ethical issues as they affect the patient undergoing pharmacogenetic tests for personalised treatment, the subject enrolled in a clinical trial or participating in genomic research or the healthy person donating biological material for biobanking and research. Issues affecting the other stakeholders will also be pointed out, but again mainly from the perspective of the consumer.

Discussion centres on the right to beneficience, explored through benefit to risk ratio and the right to autonomy, exercised through informed consent with safeguards to ensure privacy and confidentiality in the handling of biological samples and data. Elements of justice will be introduced in relation to the target of equitable access to healthcare.

The basic ethical principles must be upheld through regulatory frameworks. States have embraced various instruments, from local and international guidelines to national legislation, but as genomic research increasingly moves into the global non interventional arena, the vision is of facilitation of international cooperation through harmonised regulations.

Keywords

Informed consent Ethical approval Pharmacogenetic test uptake Data protection Clinical trials - Biobank 

References

  1. 1.
    Motulsky AG (1957) Drug reactions enzymes, and biochemical genetics. J Am Med Assoc 165(7):835–837PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vogel F (1959) Moderne problem der humangenetik. Ergeb Inn Med Kinderheilkd 12:52–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurwitz D, Motulsky AG (2007) ‘Drug reactions, enzymes, and biochemical genetics’: 50 years later. Pharmacogenomics 8(11):1479–1484. doi:10.2217/14622416.8.11.1479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kalow W (ed) (1962) Pharmacogenetics. Heredity and the response to drugs. W. B. Saunders Company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marshall A (1997) Genset-Abbott deal heralds pharmacogenomics era. Nat Biotechnol 15(9):829–830. doi:10.1038/nbt0997-829bPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pirmohamed M (2011) Pharmacogenetics: past, present and future. Drug Discov Today 16(19–20):852–861. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2011.08.006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ICH harmonized tripartite guideline: definitions for genomic biomarkers, pharmacogenomics, pharmacogenetics, genomic data and sample coding categories E 15. (2007) Paper presented at the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human UseGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Five Rights (1999) ISMP medication safety alert. Acute Care Edition, vol 4. Institute for Safe Medication Practices, ISMPGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McGowan ML, Settersten RA Jr, Juengst ET, Fishman JR (2014) Integrating genomics into clinical oncology: ethical and social challenges from proponents of personalized medicine. Urol Oncol 32(2):187–192. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.10.009PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rosell R, Moran T, Queralt C, Porta R, Cardenal F, Camps C, Majem M, Lopez-Vivanco G, Isla D, Provencio M, Insa A, Massuti B, Gonzalez-Larriba JL, Paz-Ares L, Bover I, Garcia-Campelo R, Moreno MA, Catot S, Rolfo C, Reguart N, Palmero R, Sanchez JM, Bastus R, Mayo C, Bertran-Alamillo J, Molina MA, Sanchez JJ, Taron M (2009) Screening for epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in lung cancer. N Engl J Med 361(10):958–967. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0904554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoskins JM, Carey LA, McLeod HL (2009) CYP2D6 and tamoxifen: DNA matters in breast cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 9(8):576–586. doi:10.1038/nrc2683PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    The Human Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Allele Nomenclature Database. http://www.cypalleles.ki.se/. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  13. 13.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365(9472):1687–1717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Becquemont L (2011) Practical recommendations for pharmacogenomics-based prescription: 2010 ESF–UB Conference on Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics. Pharmacogenomics 12(1):113–124Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lum DW, Perel P, Hingorani AD, Holmes MV (2013) CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen response for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 8(10):e76648. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076648PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hansson M (2010) Taking the patient’s side: the ethics of pharmacogenetics. Pers Med 7(1):75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Isacson D, Johansson L, Bingefors K (2008) Nationwide survey of subjectively reported adverse drug reactions in Sweden. Ann Pharmacother 42(3):347–353. doi:10.1345/aph.1K488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN (1998) Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 279(15):1200–1205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leendertse AJ, Visser D, Egberts AC, van den Bemt PM (2010) The relationship between study characteristics and the prevalence of medication-related hospitalizations: a literature review and novel analysis. Drug Saf 33(3):233–244. doi:10.2165/11319030-000000000-00000PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gyllensten H, Hakkarainen KM, Hagg S, Carlsten A, Petzold M, Rehnberg C, Jonsson AK (2014) Economic impact of adverse drug events–a retrospective population-based cohort study of 4970 adults. PLoS One 9(3):e92061. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092061PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gyllensten H, Rehnberg C, Jonsson AK, Petzold M, Carlsten A, Andersson Sundell K (2013) Cost of illness of patient-reported adverse drug events: a population-based cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open 3(6). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002574Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Limdi NA, Veenstra DL (2010) Expectations, validity, and reality in pharmacogenetics. J Clin Epidemiol 63(9):960–969. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.09.006PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Table of Pharmacogenomic Biomarkers in Drug Labeling. US Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/drugs/scienceresearch/researchareas/pharmacogenetics/ucm083378.htm. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  24. 24.
    Buchanan A, Califano A, Kahn J, McPherson E, Robertson J, Brody B (2002) Pharmacogenetics: ethical and regulatory issues in research and clinical practice. Report of the consortium on pharmacogenetics. Findings and recommendations. http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/jrobertson/finalcop.pdf. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  25. 25.
    Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: convention on human rights and biomedicine (1996) Council of Europe. http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/164.htm. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  26. 26.
    Bonter K, Desjardins C, Currier N, Pun J, Ashbury FD (2011) Personalised medicine in Canada: a survey of adoption and practice in oncology, cardiology and family medicine. BMJ Open 1(1):e000110. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000110 . http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000110.long. Accessed 04 Oct 2014PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Issa AM, Tufail W, Hutchinson J, Tenorio J, Baliga MP (2009) Assessing patient readiness for the clinical adoption of personalized medicine. Public Health Genomics 12(3):163–169. doi:10.1159/000189629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rogausch A, Prause D, Schallenberg A, Brockmoller J, Himmel W (2006) Patients’ and physicians’ perspectives on pharmacogenetic testing. Pharmacogenomics 7(1):49–59. doi:10.2217/14622416.7.1.49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    O’Daniel J, Lucas J, Deverka P, Ermentrout D, Silvey G, Lobach DF, Haga SB (2010) Factors influencing uptake of pharmacogenetic testing in a diverse patient population. Public Health Genomics 13(1):48–54. doi:10.1159/000217795PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Haga SB, O’Daniel JM, Tindall GM, Lipkus IR, Agans R (2012) Survey of US public attitudes toward pharmacogenetic testing. Pharmacogenomics J 12(3):197–204. doi:10.1038/tpj.2011.1PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Haga SB, LaPointe NM (2013) The potential impact of pharmacogenetic testing on medication adherence. Pharmacogenomics J 13(6):481–483. doi:10.1038/tpj.2013.33PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Bokhoven MA Koch H van der Weijden T Grol RP Kester AD Rinkens PE Bindels PJ Dinant GJ (2009) Influence of watchful waiting on satisfaction and anxiety among patients seeking care for unexplained complaints. Ann Fam Med 7(2):112–120. doi:10.1370/afm.958PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Peters N, Rose A, Armstrong K (2004) The association between race and attitudes about predictive genetic testing. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13(3):361–365PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Suther S, Kiros GE (2009) Barriers to the use of genetic testing: a study of racial and ethnic disparities. Genet Med 11(9):655–662. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181ab22aaPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roses AD (2000) Pharmacogenetics and the practice of medicine. Nature 405(6788):857–865. doi:10.1038/35015728PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Genomic Testing ACCE Model List of 44 targeted questions aimed at a comprehensive review of genetic testing. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/gtesting/ACCE/acce_proj.htm. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  37. 37.
    Ball M Personal Genome Project Study Material. http://www.personalgenomes.org/static/docs/harvard/v20120430-study-guide.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  38. 38.
    Rosenfeld JA, Mason CE, Smith TM (2012) Limitations of the human reference genome for personalized genomics. PLoS One 7(7):e40294. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040294PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Scott SA (2011) Personalizing medicine with clinical pharmacogenetics. Genet Med 13(12):987–995. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e318238b38cPubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    van Staveren MC Guchelaar HJ van Kuilenburg AB Gelderblom H Maring JG (2013) Evaluation of predictive tests for screening for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency. Pharmacogenomics J 13(5):389–395. doi:10.1038/tpj.2013.25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Shields AE (2011) Ethical concerns related to developing pharmacogenomic treatment strategies for addiction. Addict Sci Clin Pract 6(1):32–43PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang L, McLeod HL, Weinshilboum RM (2011) Genomics and drug response. N Engl J Med 364(12):1144–1153. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1010600PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Au N, Rettie AE (2008) Pharmacogenomics of 4-hydroxycoumarin anticoagulants. Drug Metab Rev 40(2):355–375. doi:10.1080/03602530801952187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Valdes R Jr, Payne DA, Linder MW (eds) (2010) Laboratory analysis and application of pharmacogenetics to clinical practice. Laboratory medicine practice guidelines. National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry. https://www.aacc.org/~/media/practice-guidelines/pharmacogenetics/pgx_guidelines.pdf?la=en. Accessed Oct 2014
  45. 45.
    OECD, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Guidelines for quality assurance in molecular genetic testing (2007). http://www.oecd.org/science/biotech/38839788.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  46. 46.
    Jorgensen AL, Hughes DA, Hanson A, van Eker D, Toh CH, Pirmohamed M, Williamson PR (2013) Adherence and variability in warfarin dose requirements: assessment in a prospective cohort. Pharmacogenomics 14(2):151–163. doi:10.2217/pgs.12.199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Foster MW, Mulvihill JJ, Sharp RR (2009) Evaluating the utility of personal genomic information. Genet Med 11(8):570–574. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181a2743ePubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Trosman JR, Van Bebber SL, Phillips KA (2010) Coverage policy development for personalized medicine: private payer perspectives on developing policy for the 21-gene assay. J Oncol Pract 6(5):238–242. doi:10.1200/JOP.000075PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Shah RR, Shah DR (2012) Personalized medicine: is it a pharmacogenetic mirage? Br J Clin Pharmacol 74(4):698–721. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2125.2012.04328.xPubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Galesic M, Garcia-Retamero R (2010) Statistical numeracy for health: a cross-cultural comparison with probabilistic national samples. Arch Intern Med 170(5):462–468. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Scheuner MT, Sieverding P, Shekelle PG (2008) Delivery of genomic medicine for common chronic adult diseases: a systematic review. JAMA 299(11):1320–1334. doi:10.1001/jama.299.11.1320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Relling MV, Klein TE (2011) CPIC: clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium of the pharmacogenomics research network. Clin Pharmacol Ther 89(3):464–467. doi:10.1038/clpt.2010.279PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Amstutz U, Carleton BC (2011) Pharmacogenetic testing: time for clinical practice guidelines. Clin Pharmacol Ther 89(6):924–927. doi:10.1038/clpt.2011.18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Haga SB, Burke W, Ginsburg GS, Mills R, Agans R (2012) Primary care physicians’ knowledge of and experience with pharmacogenetic testing. Clin Genet 82(4):388–394. doi:10.1111/j.1399–0004.2012.01908.xPubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Zika E, Gurwitz D, Ibarreta D (2006) Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics: state-of-the-art and potential socio-economic impact in the EU. Scientific and Technical Research Series. European Commission. EUR22214—DG Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/eur22214en.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  56. 56.
    Green JS, O’Brien TJ, Chiappinelli VA, Harralson AF (2010) Pharmacogenomics instruction in US and Canadian medical schools: implications for personalized medicine. Pharmacogenomics 11(9):1331–1340. doi:10.2217/pgs.10.122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Higgs JE, Andrews J, Gurwitz D, Payne K, Newman W (2008) Pharmacogenetics education in British medical schools. Genomic Med 2(3–4):101–105. doi:10.1007/s11568-009-9032-6PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Priorities for Personalised Medicine (2008) Report of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. https://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/ostp/PCAST/pcast_report_v2.pdf. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  59. 59.
    Kääriäinen H, Hietala M, Kristoffersson U, Nippert I, Rantanen E, Sequeiros J, Schmidtke J, Kerzin-Storrar L (2008) Recommendations for genetic counselling related to genetic testing. Eurogentest. http://www.eurogentest.org/index.php?id=674. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  60. 60.
    Bryc K, Auton A, Nelson MR, Oksenberg JR, Hauser SL, Williams S, Froment A, Bodo JM, Wambebe C, Tishkoff SA, Bustamante CD (2010) Genome-wide patterns of population structure and admixture in West Africans and African Americans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107(2):786–791. doi:10.1073/pnas.0909559107PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Zimmerman RK, Tabbarah M, Nowalk MP, Raymund M, Jewell IK, Wilson SA, Ricci EM (2006) Racial differences in beliefs about genetic screening among patients at inner-city neighborhood health centers. J Natl Med Assoc 98(3):370–377PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Thompson HS, Valdimarsdottir HB, Jandorf L, Redd W (2003) Perceived disadvantages and concerns about abuses of genetic testing for cancer risk: differences across African American, Latina and Caucasian women. Patient Educ Couns 51(3):217–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Haga SB, Kawamoto K, Agans R, Ginsburg GS (2011) Consideration of patient preferences and challenges in storage and access of pharmacogenetic test results. Genet Med 13(10):887–890. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e31822077a5PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wertz DC (2003) Ethical, social and legal issues in pharmacogenomics. Pharmacogenomics J 3(4):194–196. doi:10.1038/sj.tpj.6500188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, Kalia SS, Korf BR, Martin CL, McGuire AL, Nussbaum RL, O’Daniel JM, Ormond KE, Rehm HL, Watson MS, Williams MS, Biesecker LG (2013) ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med 15(7):565–574. doi:10.1038/gim.2013.73PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Allyse M, Michie M (2013) Not-so-incidental findings: the ACMG recommendations on the reporting of incidental findings in clinical whole genome and whole exome sequencing. Trends Biotechnol 31(8):439–441. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.04.006PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    McGuire AL, Joffe S, Koenig BA, Biesecker BB, McCullough LB, Blumenthal-Barby JS, Caulfield T, Terry SF, Green RC (2013) Point-counterpoint. Ethics and genomic incidental findings. Science 340(6136):1047–1048. doi:10.1126/science.1240156PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wolf SM, Annas GJ, Elias S (2013) Point-counterpoint. Patient autonomy and incidental findings in clinical genomics. Science 340(6136):1049–1050. doi:10.1126/science.1239119PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gene Planet. http://www.geneplanet.com. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  70. 70.
    Bunnik EM, Schermer MH, Janssens AC (2012) The role of disease characteristics in the ethical debate on personal genome testing. BMC Med Genomics 5:4. doi:10.1186/1755-8794-5-4PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Additional Protocol to the Convention on human rights and biomedicine, concerning genetic testing for health purposes (2008) Council of Europe. http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/203.htm. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  72. 72.
    Bunnik EM, Janssens AC, Schermer MH (2013) A tiered-layered-staged model for informed consent in personal genome testing. Eur J Hum Genet 21(6):596–601. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2012.237PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    McGuire AL, Hamilton JA, Lunstroth R, McCullough LB, Goldman A (2008) DNA data sharing: research participants’ perspectives. Genet Med 10(1):46–53. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e31815f1e00PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Darst BF, Madlensky L, Schork NJ, Topol EJ, Bloss CS (2014) Characteristics of genomic test consumers who spontaneously share results with their health care provider. Health Commun 29(1):105–108. doi:10.1080/10410236.2012.717216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Bloss CS, Schork NJ, Topol EJ (2011) Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. N Engl J Med 364(6):524–534. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1011893PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ayme S GL, Matthijs G, Waligora J, Aygun SB, Barton D, Borry P, Brdicka R, Brookes AJ, Dequeker E, De la Villa I, Goossens M, Howard HC, Kääriäinen H, Kroese M, Levy P, Macchia F, Macek M, Nourissier C, Owen L, Sanne J-L, Schmidtke J, Sequeiros J, Stenhouse S, Taruscio D, Westwood J (2013) European Workshop on Genetic Testing Offer in Europe, JRC 77944 EUR 25684 EN European Commission. http://www.eurogentest.org/fileadmin/templates/eugt/pdf/News_documents/JRC_Genetic_testing_offer_in_Europe.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  77. 77.
    World Medical Association. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/. Accessed October 04, 2014
  78. 78.
    Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use Official Journal of the European Communities 2001;L121:34-44. http://www.eortc.be/services/doc/clinical-eu-directive-04-april-01.pdf. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  79. 79.
    Additional Protocol to the Convention on human rights and biomedicine concerning biomedical research (2005) Council of Europe. http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/ html/195.htm. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  80. 80.
    Directive 2001/20/EC Article 4 Official Journal of the European Communities 2001;L121:34-44. http://www.eortc.be/services/doc/clinical-eu-directive-04-april-01.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  81. 81.
    Sheehan M (2011) Can broad consent be informed consent? Public Health Ethics 4(3):226–235. doi:10.1093/phe/phr020PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Helgesson G (2012) In defense of broad consent. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21(01):40–50Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Segerdahl P (2012) How unspecific is broad consent? http://ethicsblog.crb.uu.se/2012/09/13/how-unspecific-is-broad-consent/. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  84. 84.
    Caulfield T, Upshur RE, Daar A (2003) DNA databanks and consent: a suggested policy option involving an authorization model. BMC Med Ethics 4:E1PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Hofmann B (2009) Broadening consent–and diluting ethics? J Med Ethics 35(2):125–129. doi:10.1136/jme.2008.024851PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Hoppe N (2013) The issue with tissue: why making human biomaterials available for research purposes is still controversial. Diagn Histopathol 19:315–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Pharmacogenetics: ethical issues (2003) London edn. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Pharmacogenetics-Report.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  88. 88.
    Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data Official Journal L 281, 23/11/1995 P. 0031–0050. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.1995.281.01.0031.01EN. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  89. 89.
    Forrest LE, Delatycki MB, Skene L, Aitken M (2007) Communicating genetic information in families—a review of guidelines and position papers. Eur J Hum Genet 15(6):612–618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gaff CL, Clarke AJ, Atkinson P, Sivell S, Elwyn G, Iredale R, Thornton H, Dundon J, Shaw C, Edwards A (2007) Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 15(10):999–1011PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Forrest LE, Curnow L, Delatycki MB, Skene L, Aitken M (2008) Health first, genetics second: exploring families’ experiences of communicating genetic information. Eur J Hum Genet 16:1329–1335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Rathi V, Dzara K, Gross CP, Hrynaszkiewicz I, Joffe S, Krumholz HM, Strait KM, Ross JS (2012) Sharing of clinical trial data among trialists: a cross sectional survey. BMJ 345:e7570. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7570PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Chalmers I (2013) Health Research Authority’s great leap forward on UK trial registration. BMJ 347:f5776. doi:10.1136/bmj.f5776Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Regulation No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC Official Journal of the European Union, L 158, 27.5.2014, 1–76. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.158.01.0001.01.ENG. Accessed 11 Oct 2014
  95. 95.
    Eichler HG, Pignatti F, Flamion B, Leufkens H, Breckenridge A (2008) Balancing early market access to new drugs with the need for benefit/risk data: a mounting dilemma. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7(10):818–826. doi:10.1038/nrd2664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Guideline on key aspects for the use of pharmacogenomic methodologies in the pharmacovigilance evaluation of medicinal products (2013) European Medicines Agency. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2014/01/WC500160232.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2014
  97. 97.
    Master Z, Nelson E, Murdoch B, Caulfield T (2012) Biobanks, consent and claims of consensus. Nat Methods 9(9):885–888. doi:10.1038/nmeth.2142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Caulfield T, Kaye J (2009) Broad consent in biobanking: reflections on seemingly insurmountable dilemmas. Med Law Int 102:85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    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(3):266–269PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Dove ES, Knoppers BM, Zawati MH (2014) Towards an ethics safe harbor for global biomedical research. J Law Biosci 1(1):3–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Rial-Sebbag E, Cambon-Thomsen A (2012) The emergence of biobanks in the legal landscape: towards a new model of governance. J Law Soc 39(1):113–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Caenazzo L, Tozzo P, Pegoraro R (2013) Biobanking research on oncological residual material: a framework between the rights of the individual and the interest of society. BMC Med Ethics 14:17. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-14-17PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    van Diest PJ (2002) No consent should be needed for using leftover body material for scientific purposes. For. BMJ 325(7365):648–651PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Savulescu J (2002) No consent should be needed for using leftover body material for scientific purposes. Against. BMJ 325(7365):648–651PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Lewis C, Clotworthy M, Hilton S, Magee C, Robertson MJ, Stubbins LJ, Corfield J (2013) Consent for the use of human biological samples for biomedical research: a mixed methods study exploring the UK public’s preferences. BMJ Open 3(8):e003022 doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003022Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Helgesson G, Dillner J, Carlson J, Bartram CR, Hansson MG (2007) Ethical framework for previously collected biobank samples. Nat Biotechnol 25(9):973–976PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Recommendation Rec (2006) 4 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on research on biological materials of human origin. https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=977859. Accessed 31 Oct 2014
  108. 108.
    Mascalzoni D, Hicks A, Pramstaller P, Wjst M (2008) Informed consent in the genomics era. PLoS Med 5(9):e192. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050192PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Kanelloupoulou NK, Kaye J, Whitley E, Creese S, Lund D, Hughes K (2011) Dynamic consent—a solution to a perennial problem. BMJ Recent Rapid Responses available at http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6900?tab=responses. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  110. 110.
    Segerdahl P (2013) Dynamic consent in biobank research: better than broad consent? http://ethicsblog.crb.uu.se/2013/10/02/dynamic-consent-in-biobank-research-better-than-broad-consent/. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  111. 111.
    OECD Guidelines on human biobanks and genetic research databases (2009). http://www.oecd.org/science/biotech/44054609.pdf. Accessed 04 Oct 2014
  112. 112.
    Wolf SM, Crock BN, Van Ness B, Lawrenz F, Kahn JP, Beskow LM, Cho MK, Christman MF, Green RC, Hall R, Illes J, Keane M, Knoppers BM, Koenig BA, Kohane IS, Leroy B, Maschke KJ, McGeveran W, Ossorio P, Parker LS, Petersen GM, Richardson HS, Scott JA, Terry SF, Wilfond BS, Wolf WA (2012) Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genet Med 14(4):361–384. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.23PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Commission Decision 2000/520/EC pursuant to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adequacy of the protection provided by the safe harbour privacy principles and related frequently asked questions issued by the US Department of Commerce Official Journal of the European Communities L215:25/08/2000 P. 0007–0047. Accessed 31 Oct 2014Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Frueh FW, Rudman A, Simon K, Gutman S, Reed C, Dorner AJ (2006) Experience with voluntary and required genomic data submissions to the FDA: summary report from track 1 of the third FDA-DIA-PWG-PhRMA-BIO pharmacogenomics workshop. Pharmacogenomics J 6(5):296–300PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Roberts DE (2008) Is race-based medicine good for us?: African American approaches to race, biomedicine, and equality. J Law Med Ethics 36(3):537–545. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.302.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Brody H, Hunt LM (2006) BiDil: assessing a race-based pharmaceutical. Ann Fam Med 4(6):556–560PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Bevan JL, Lynch JA, Dubriwny TN, Harris TM, Achter PJ, Reeder AL, Condit CM (2003) Informed lay preferences for delivery of racially varied pharmacogenomics. Genet Med 5(5):393–399. doi:10.109701.GIM.0000087989.12317.3FPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Hresko AHS (2012) Insurance coverage policies for personalised medicine. J Pers Med 2:201–216PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Weldon CB, Trosman JR, Gradishar WJ, Benson AB, 3rd, Schink JC (2012) Barriers to the use of personalized medicine in breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 8(4):e24–31. doi:10.1200/JOP.2011.000448Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Phillips KA, Veenstra DL, Oren E, Lee JK, Sadee W (2001) Potential role of pharmacogenomics in reducing adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. JAMA 286(18):2270–2279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Juengst ET FM, Settersten RA Jr (2012) Personalised genomic medicine and the rhetoric of empowerment. Hastings Cent Rep 42(5):34–34. doi:10.1002/hast.65PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Medicine and SurgeryUniversity of Malta Medical SchoolMsidaMalta

Personalised recommendations