Genetic Research and Biobanks

  • Don Chalmers
Protocol
First Online:
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 675)

Abstract

Human biobanks, and genetic research databases, as referred to by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), are essential tools for modern biomedical research. Biobanks may consist in collections created in clinical diagnosis (such as pathology tissue samples in hospitals) or collections created for large-scale longitudinal research (such as the UK Biobank). Human tissue collections are regulated by a patchwork of national laws. However, there is an increasing international uniformity in national privacy laws based on 1980s OECD standards. There are similar uniform standards developing in national research ethics guidelines. As biobanks develop collaborations and linkages, international harmonisation of legislation and human research regulation will be required across jurisdictions. It is essential that international public trust is maintained in biobanking research.

Key words

Biobanks Regulation Privacy Public trust International governance 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article has been prepared with the support of Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP 0559760. Acknowledge­ment also to Professors T Caulfield, AV Campbell, GL Laurie, M Arbyn, and Associate Professor T Kaan Sheun-Hung for their invaluable contributions, insights, and comments.

References

  1. 1.
    Collins, F. (2003) Keynote address, XIX International Congress of Genetics – Melbourne July 7 reported in Australian Biotechnology News. 8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Knoppers, B.M., Ma´n H, A.R. and Karine, B. (2007) Genomic Databases and International Collaboration. King’s Law Journal. 18, 291–311.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Knoppers, B. and Chadwick, R. (2005) Human Genetic Research: Emerging Trends in Ethics. Nature Reviews Genetics. 6, 75–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaye, J. and Stranger, M. Principles and Practice in Biobank Governance Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, 2009 and Gibbons, S. and Kaye, J. (2007) Governing Genetic Databases: Collection, Storage and Use. King’s Law Journal. 18, 201–8. See also Gottweis H and Petersen A Biobanks –Governance in Comparative PerspectiveOxford Routledge 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caulfield, T. (2007) Biobanks and Blanket Consent: The Proper Place of the Public Good and Public Perception Rationales. King’s Law Journal. 18, 209–26.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Campbell, A. (2007) The Ethical Challenges of Genetic Databases: Safeguarding Altruism and Trust. King’s Law Journal. 18, 227–45.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brownsword, R. (2007) Genetic Databases: One for All and All for One? King’s Law Journal. 18, 247–73.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Beyleveld, D. (2007) Data Protection and Genetics: Medical Research and the Public Good. King’s Law Journal. 18, 275–89.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aldridge, S. (2005) Biobanking Emerging as a Key Growth Area. Genetic Engineering News. 25, 1.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Opinion on Biobanks for Research. Berlin: Nationaler Ethikrat; 2004 March 17.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shastry, B. (2006) Pharmacogenetics and the Concept of Individualized Medicine. The Pharmacogenomics Journal. 6, 16–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaiser, J. (2002) Biobanks: Population Databases Boom, from Iceland to the U.S. Science. 298, 1158–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cambon-Thomsen, A. (2004) The social and ethical issues of post-genomic human bio­banks. Nature Reviews Genetics. 5, 866–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knoppers, B. and Saginur, M. (2005) The Babel of Genetic Data Terminology. Nature Biotechnology. 23, 925–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council and Department of Health UK, UK Biobank Ethics and Governance Framework Version 3.0 October 2007.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cambon-Thomsen, A., Ducournau, P., Garraud, P.A. and Pontille, D. (2003) Biobanks for Genomics and Genomics for Biobanks. Comparative and Functional Genomics. 4, 628–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stranger, M., Chalmers, D. and Nicol, D. (2005) Capital, Trust & Consultation: Databanks and Regulation in Australia. Critical Public Health. 15, 349–58. And Kaye J and Stranger M Principles and Practice in Biobank Governance Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chalmers, D. and Dianne N. (2004) Commercialisation of Biotechnology: Public Trust and Research. International Journal of Biotechnology. 6, 116–33 and Gottweis, H. and Petersen, A. Biobanks –Governance in Comparative Perspective Oxford Routledge 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bovenberg, J.A. (2004) Inalienably Yours? The New Case for an Inalienable Property Right in Human Biological Material: Empowerment of Sample Donors or a Recipe for a Tragic Anti-Commons? SCRIPT-ED. 1, 591–616.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bovenberg, J. (2005) Towards an International System of Ethics and Governance of Biobanks: A “Special Status” for Genetic Data? Critical Public Health. 15, 369–83 and Kaye J and Stranger M Principles and Practice in Biobank Governance Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chalmers, D., ed. (2005) Genetic Testing and the Criminal Law. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Criminal Investigations (Blood Samples) Act (NZ); 1995.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ethical issues raised by collections of biological materials and associated information data: “biobanks” and “biolibraries”, Comité consultatif national d’éthique pour les sciences de la vie et de la santé, France; 2003. Report No.: Opinion 77.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    OECD Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy: Working Party on Biotechnology. Tokyo Workshop Report: Human Genetic Research Databases: Issues of Privacy and Security; 2005. Report No.: DSTI/STP/BIO.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tutton, R. and Corrigan, O., ed. (2004) Genetic Databases: Socio-Ethical Issues in the Collection and Use of DNA. London: Routledge. And see UK Biobank Ethics and Governance Framework Version 3.0 October 2007.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance Volume I: NBAC; 1999 August.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research involving Human Participants Volume II: Commissioned Papers. Bethesda, Maryland; 2001.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Ethical and Policy Issues in Research involving Human Participants Volume I: Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Bethesda, Maryland; 2001.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Australian Law Reform Commission. Essentially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic Information in Australia; 2003. Report No.: 96.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Longtin, R. (2004) Canadian Province Seeks Control of Its Genes. Journal National Cancer Institute. 96, 1567–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Health Sector Database Act (Iceland); 1998.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Human Genes Research Act 2001 (Estonia); 2001.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winickoff, D.E. and Winickoff, R.N. (2003) The Charitable Trust as a Model for Genomic Biobanks. The New England Journal of Medicine. 349, 1180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boggio, A. (2005) Charitable Trusts and Human Research Genetic Databases: The Way Forward? Genomics, Society and Policy. 1, 41–9.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council and Department of Health UK. UK Biobank, Ethics and Governance Framework, Version 3.0; October 2007.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Trouet, C. (2004) New European guidelines for the use of stored human biological materials in biomedical research. Journal of Medical Ethics. 30, 99–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    OECD Working Party on Biotechnology. Draft Guidelines for Human Genetic Research Databases. Paris; 2007. Report No.: DSTI/STP/Bio (2007) 17/REVI (see OECD, Guidelines on Human Biobanks and Genetic Research Databases 2009).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. First-Generation Guidelines for NCI-Supported Biorepositories; 2006 April.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kaye, J., Helgason, H., Nomper, A., Sild, T. and Wendel, I. (2004) Population Genetic Databases: A Comparative Analysis of the Law in Iceland, Sweden, Estonia and the UK. TRAMES. 8, 15–33.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nicol, D. (2006) Public Trust, Intellectual Property and Human Genetic Databases: The Need to Address Benefit Sharing. Journal of International Biotechnology Law. 3, 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Steering Committee on Bioethics. Draft Recommendations on Research on Biological Materials of Human Origin. Strasbourg; 2005 November.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cambon-Thomsen, A., et al, (2003) Ethical and Legal Aspects of Biological Sample Banks: Synthesis, Practical Questions and Proposals [Aspects ethiqués et réglementaires des collections d’échantillons biologiques: Synthèse, questions pratiques et propositions]. Revue d’Epidemiologie et de Sante Publique. 51, 99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Working Group on DNA and Epidemiology (TUKIJA). DNA Samples in Epidemiological Research: National Advisory Board on Health Care Ethics (ETENE); 2002 August.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Swedish Medical Research Council (MFR). Research ethics guidelines for using biobanks, especially projects involving genome research; 1999 June.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. Opinion of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission, Ethical Aspects of Human Tissue Banking: European Commission; 1998 July.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    ESRC Research Ethics Framework. Discussion Paper 2: The International Dimension to Research Ethics: The Significance of International and Other Non-UK Frameworks for UK Social Science; 2004 April.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Department of Health & Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute. 133rd National Cancer Advisory Board, Summary of Meeting; 2005 February.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bioethics Advisory Committee of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Population-Based Large-Scale Collections of DNA Samples and Databases of Genetic Information; 2002 December.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Human Tissue Act (UK); 2004.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kaye, J. and Stranger, M. Principles and Practice in Biobank Governance Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, 2009 and Tutton, R. (2007) Constructing Participation in Genetic Databases: Citizenship, Governance, and Ambivalence. Science Technology and Human Values. 32, 172–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hansson, M.G. (2005) Building on Relationships of Trust in Biobank Research. Journal of Medical Ethics. 31, 415–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    OECD, Guidelines on Human Biobanks and Genetic Research Databases 2009.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) (2005) Best Practices for Repositories I: Collection, Storage, and Retrieval of Human Biological Materials for Research. Cell Preservation Technology. 3, 5–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Blumenthal, D. and Glaser, J. (2007) Information Technology Comes to Medicine. New England Journal of Medicine. 356, 2527–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ministry of Economic Development. Review of New Zealand’s Standards and Conformance Infrastructure. Wellington, New Zealand; 2005 September.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Eiseman, E., Bloom, G., Brower, J., Clancy, N. and Olmsted, S.S. Case Studies of Existing Human Tissue Repositories: “Best Practices” for a Biospecimen Resource for the Genomic and Protemic Era: Prepared for the National Cancer Institute, National Dialogue on Cancer; 2003.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council and Department of Health UK. UK Biobank, Ethics and Governance Framework, Version 3.0; October 2007.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Brownsword, R. (2003) Bioethics Today, Bioethics Tomorrow: Stem Cell Research and the Dignitarian Alliance. Notre Dame Journal of Law Ethics and Public Policy. 17, 15.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Beyleveld, D. and Brownsword, R. (2001) Human Dignity in Human Ethics and Bio-law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    CIHR. CIHR Guidelines for Health Research involving Aboriginal People; 2007 May.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fleming, J. (1996) Ethics and the Human Genome Diversity Project. Law and the Human Genome Review. 4, 141.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Calderon, R. (1996) The Human Genome Diversity Project: Ethical Aspects. Law and the Human Genome Review. 4, 107.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    (1996) Declaration of Indigenous Peoples of the Western Hemisphere Regarding the Human Genome Diversity Project. Law and the Human Genome Review. 4, 209.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    NHMRC. National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007; 2007.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Hansson, M. (2006) Should Donors be Allowed to Give Broad Consent to Future Biobank Research? The Lancet Oncology. 7, 266–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kaye, J. (2004) Abandoning Informed consent: The Case of Genetic Research in Population Collections. In: Tutton R, Corrigan O, eds. Genetic Data Bases: Socio- Ethical Issues in the Collection and Use of DNA. London: Routledge. And Kaye, J. and Stranger, M. Principles and Practice in Biobank Governance Surrey, Ashgate Publishing, 2009.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Johnston, C. and Kaye, J. (2004) Does the UK Biobank have a Legal Obligation to Feedback Individual Findings to Participants? Medical Law Review. 2, 239–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    The British Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC).Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Chalmers, D. (2004) Research Involving Humans: A Time for Change? The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. 32, 583–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    An analysis of the Icelandic Supreme Court judgement on the Health Sector Database Act. Script-ed, 2004. (Accessed 7 March 2006, at http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrb/script-ed/issue2/iceland.pdf.)
  71. 71.
    (2005) The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies the European Commission. EGE Newsletter “Ethically Speaking”. 5, 27.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Knoppers, B.M. (2005) Biobanking: International Norms. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics. 33, 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kaye, J. (2006) Do We Need a Uniform Regulatory System for Biobanks Across Europe? European Journal of Human Genetics. 14, 245–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Quebec Network of Applied Genetic Medicine. Ethical Conduct of Human Genetic Research Involving Populations; 2003.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Chalmers, D. (2006) Ethical Principles for Research Governance of Biobanks. International Journal of Biotechnology Law. 3, 221–30.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    German National Ethics Council. Biobanks for Research; 2004.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Weisbrot, D. Public Conspiracy, Genetic Counselling and the Required Legal Infrastructure; 2005 August.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Haddow, G., Laurie, G., Cunningham-Burley, S. and Hunter, K.G. (2007) Tackling Community Concerns About Commer­cialization and Genetic Research: A Modest Interdisciplinary Proposal. Social Sciences & Medicine. 64, 272–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Elger, B. and Caplan, A. (2006) Consent and Anonymization in Research Involving Biobanks: Differing Terms and Norms Present Serious Barriers to an International Framework. EMBO reports. 7, 661–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance: Volume II Commissioned Papers; 2000 January.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Medical Research Council policy and guidance on human tissue.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Scott, R. (1981) The Body as Property. London: Alan Lane.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Knoppers, B. (2002) DNA Banking: A Retrospective-Prospective. In: Burley, J. and Harris J, eds. A Companion to Genethics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing: 379–86.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Knoppers, B.M., ed. (1997) Human DNA: Law and Policy – International and Comparative Perspectives. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Bioethics Advisory Committee, S. Human Tissue Research; 2002.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zeps, N., Iacopetta, B.J., Schofield, L., George, J.M. and Goldblatt, J. (2007) Waiver of Individual Patient Consent in Research: When do Potential Benefits to the Community Outweigh Private Rights? Medical Journal of Australia. 186, 88–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Glasner, P., Atkinson, P. and Greenslade, H. (2006) New Genetics, New Social Forma­tions. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Thomasma, D. (2001) Proposing a New Agenda on Bioethics and International Human Rights. Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics. 10, 299–310.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Sleeboom-Faulkner, M. (Ed.) (2009) Human Genetic Biobanks in Asia: Politics of Trust and Scientific Advancement. Oxford: Routledge, and see Jing-Bao, N. (2007) The Specious Idea of an Asian Bioethics.  Chapter 19 In: Ashcroft, R. et al, eds. Principles in Health Care Ethics: John Wiley. London at 144–149.
  90. 90.
    UNESCO. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights; 2005.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    HUGO, E.C. Statement on Benefit Sharing: The Council of the Human Genome Organisation; 2000.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Simm, K. (2005) Benefit-sharing: an inquiry regarding the meaning and limits of the concept in human genetic research. Genomics, Society and Policy. 1, 29–40.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Chadwick, R. and Berg, K. (2001) Solidarity and Equity: New Ethical Frameworks for Genetic Databases. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2, 318–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Knoppers, B.M. and Sheremeta, L. (2003) Beyond the Rhetoric: Population Genetics and Benefit-Sharing. Health Law Journal. 11, 89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Hirtzlin, I., Dubreuil, C., Préaubert, N., Duchier, J., Jansen, B., Simon, J., Lobato de Faria, P., Perez-Lezaun, A., Visser, B., Williams, G.D., Cambon-Thomsen, A. and EUROGENBANK Consortium. (2003) An Empirical Survey on Biobanking of Human Genetic Material and Data in Six EU Countries P/C. European Journal of Human Genetics. 11, 475–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Caulfield, T. and Outerbridge, T. (2002) DNA Databanks, Public Opinion and the Law. Clinical and Investigative Medicine. 25, 252–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Caulfield, T. (2002) Perceptions of Risk and Human Genetic Databases: Consent and Confidentiality Policies. In: Armason, G., et al, eds. Blood and Data: Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Genetic Databases: University of Iceland Press and Centre for Ethics: Reykjavik: 283–9.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Cousins, G., McGee, H., Ring, L., Conroy, R., Kay, E., Croke, D. and Tomkin, D. Public Perceptions of Biomedical Research: A Survey of the General Population in Ireland: Health Services Research Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland; 2005.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Williams, C. (2005) Australian Attitudes to DNA Sample Banks and Genetic Screening. Current Medical Research and Opinions. 21, 1773–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Fleming, J. (2007) Issues with Tissues: Perspectives of Tissue Bank Donors and the Public Towards Biobanks and Related Genetic Research. Biobanks: Centre for Law and Genetics Symposium.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Kettis-Lindblad, A., Ring, L., Viberth, E. and Hansson, M.G. (2007) Perceptions of Potential Donors in the Swedish Public Towards Information and Consent Procedures in Relation to Use of Human Tissue Samples in Biobanks: A Population-Based Study. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 35, 148–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Harris, J. (2000) Research on Human Subjects. In: Freeman, M. and Lewis, A., eds. Law and Medicine, Current Legal Issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 379–97.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Reymond, M., Steinert, R., Escourrou, J. and Fartainer, G. (2002) Ethical, Legal and Economical Issues Raised by the Use of Human Tissue in Postgenomic Research. Digestive Diseases. 20, 257–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Don Chalmers
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations