Public Attitude towards Biobanking: An Italian University Survey

Biobanks have established a critical role in biomedical research by collecting, preserving, organizing, and disseminating biospecimens and related health data, contributing to precision medicine development. Participation in biobanks is influenced by several factors, such as trust in institutions and scientists, knowledge about biobanking, and the consideration of benefit sharing. Understanding public attitudes, fears, and concerns toward biobanking is fundamental to designing targeted interventions to increase trust towards biobanks. The aim of our study was to investigate the level of knowledge and perception of biobanks in students and personnel of the University of Piemonte Orientale. An online questionnaire was designed and administered via e-mail. A total of 17,758 UPO personnel and students were invited to participate in the survey, and 1521 (9.3%) subjects completed the survey. The results showed that 65.0% of the participants were aware of the term “biobank” and knew what the activity of a biobank was, and 76.3% of subjects were willing to provide biospecimens to a research biobank, whereas 67.3% of the respondents were willing to contribute, in addition to biospecimens, their health and lifestyle data. Concerns were raised about the confidentiality of the information (25.6%) and the commercial use of the samples (25.0%). In conclusion, participants were aware of the role that biobanks play in research and were eager to participate for the sake of furthering scientific research. Still, several concerns need to be addressed regarding the confidentiality of the data along with the commercial use of the samples and associated data.

[1]  W. Chung,et al.  Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2021 update: a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) , 2021, Genetics in Medicine.

[2]  W. Khairy,et al.  Knowledge, perceptions and attitude of Egyptian physicians towards biobanking issues , 2021, PloS one.

[3]  M. Ahram,et al.  Views of university students in Jordan towards Biobanking , 2020, BMC medical ethics.

[4]  L. Tzivian,et al.  Public awareness of and attitudes towards research biobanks in Latvia , 2020, BMC Medical Ethics.

[5]  R. Stolk,et al.  Motives of contributing personal data for health research: (non-)participation in a Dutch biobank , 2019, BMC medical ethics.

[6]  W. Chung,et al.  Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies , 2019, Genetics in Medicine.

[7]  J. Pawlikowski,et al.  Public Attitudes toward Biobanking of Human Biological Material for Research Purposes: A Literature Review , 2019, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[8]  Luigi Coppola,et al.  Biobanking in health care: evolution and future directions , 2019, Journal of Translational Medicine.

[9]  D. Strech,et al.  The Public’s Awareness of and Attitude Toward Research Biobanks – A Regional German Survey , 2018, Front. Genet..

[10]  Edward Blair,et al.  “Not pathogenic until proven otherwise”: perspectives of UK clinical genomics professionals toward secondary findings in context of a Genomic Medicine Multidisciplinary Team and the 100,000 Genomes Project , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[11]  L. Caenazzo,et al.  Young people’s awareness on biobanking and DNA profiling: results of a questionnaire administered to Italian university students , 2017, Life Sciences, Society and Policy.

[12]  J. Vaught,et al.  Assessment of knowledge about biobanking among healthcare students and their willingness to donate biospecimens , 2017, BMC medical ethics.

[13]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  A qualitative study of participants’ views on re-consent in a longitudinal biobank , 2017, BMC medical ethics.

[14]  Sara Chandros Hull,et al.  A Clinical Service to Support the Return of Secondary Genomic Findings in Human Research. , 2016, American journal of human genetics.

[15]  Melissa L McPheeters,et al.  A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on broad consent and data sharing in the United States , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[16]  K. Eritsyan,et al.  Russian students’ awareness of and attitudes toward donating to biobanks , 2016 .

[17]  Avni Santani,et al.  Actionable exomic incidental findings in 6503 participants: challenges of variant classification , 2015, Genome research.

[18]  Council conclusions on personalised medicine for patients , 2015 .

[19]  P. Pasqualetti,et al.  Public’s attitudes on participation in a biobank for research: an Italian survey , 2014, BMC Medical Ethics.

[20]  Magalie S Leduc,et al.  Molecular findings among patients referred for clinical whole-exome sequencing. , 2014, JAMA.

[21]  L. Bezuidenhout,et al.  Attitudes of research participants and the general public towards genomic data sharing: a systematic literature review , 2014, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[22]  Sandi Dheensa,et al.  Defining and managing incidental findings in genetic and genomic practice , 2014, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[23]  P. Pasqualetti,et al.  The policies of ethics committees in the management of biobanks used for research: an Italian survey , 2013, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[24]  L. Hood,et al.  P4 medicine: how systems medicine will transform the healthcare sector and society. , 2013, Personalized medicine.

[25]  J. Corfield,et al.  Public views on the donation and use of human biological samples in biomedical research: a mixed methods study , 2013, BMJ Open.

[26]  Marc S. Williams,et al.  ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[27]  B. Knoppers,et al.  Funding considerations for the disclosure of genetic incidental findings in biobank research , 2013, Clinical genetics.

[28]  M. Minden,et al.  Cancer patient perceptions on the ethical and legal issues related to biobanking , 2013, BMC Medical Genomics.

[29]  T. Caulfield,et al.  Biobanking, consent, and control: a survey of Albertans on key research ethics issues. , 2012, Biopreservation and biobanking.

[30]  G. Gaskell,et al.  Biobanks need publicity , 2011, Nature.

[31]  G. Koppelman,et al.  Communication of biobanks' research results: What do (potential) participants want? , 2010, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[32]  Wendy A. Wolf,et al.  Public and Biobank Participant Attitudes toward Genetic Research Participation and Data Sharing , 2010, Public Health Genomics.

[33]  Joan Scott,et al.  Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. , 2009, American journal of human genetics.

[34]  Susanne B Haga,et al.  Ethical, legal, and social implications of biobanks for genetics research. , 2008, Advances in genetics.

[35]  B. Godard,et al.  Community Engagement in Genetic Research: Results of the First Public Consultation for the Quebec CARTaGENE Project , 2007, Public Health Genomics.

[36]  L. Ring,et al.  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 , 2007, Scandinavian journal of public health.