4.4 Article

Qualitative thematic analysis of consent forms used in cancer genome sequencing

Journal

BMC MEDICAL ETHICS
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6939-12-14

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. APOGEE-Net/CanGeneTest Research Network
  2. American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC)
  3. Peter Simpson and Sunil Lakhani of the University of Queensland
  4. UQ Centre for Clinical Research & the School of Medicine
  5. Royal Brisbane & Women1s Hospital
  6. Roswell Park Cancer Institute
  7. Hani Gabra of Imperial College London
  8. Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative
  9. Daniel Auclair at The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard University
  10. Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
  11. Tissue Bank of the Cambridge NIHR Biomedical Research Centre
  12. Michael J. Birrer and Nilsa Ramirez of The Gynecologic Oncology Group
  13. Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory of the Jules Bordet Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Large-scale whole genome sequencing (WGS) studies promise to revolutionize cancer research by identifying targets for therapy and by discovering molecular biomarkers to aid early diagnosis, to better determine prognosis and to improve treatment response prediction. Such projects raise a number of ethical, legal, and social (ELS) issues that should be considered. In this study, we set out to discover how these issues are being handled across different jurisdictions. Methods: We examined informed consent (IC) forms from 30 cancer genome sequencing studies to assess (1) stated purpose of sample collection, (2) scope of consent requested, (3) data sharing protocols (4) privacy protection measures, (5) described risks of participation, (6) subject re-contacting, and (7) protocol for withdrawal. Results: There is a high degree of similarity in how cancer researchers engaged in WGS are protecting participant privacy. We observed a strong trend towards both using samples for additional, unspecified research and sharing data with other investigators. IC forms were varied in terms of how they discussed re-contacting participants, returning results and facilitating participant withdrawal. Contrary to expectation, there were no consistent trends that emerged over the eight year period from which forms were collected. Conclusion: Examining IC forms from WGS studies elucidates how investigators are handling ELS challenges posed by this research. This information is important for ensuring that while the public benefits of research are maximized, the rights of participants are also being appropriately respected.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available