Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants

Investigators and institutional review boards should integrate plans about the appropriate disclosure of individual genetic results when designing research studies. The ethical principles of beneficence, respect, reciprocity, and justice provide justification for routinely offering certain results to research participants. We propose a result-evaluation approach that assesses the expected information and the context of the study in order to decide whether results should be offered. According to this approach, the analytic validity and the clinical utility of a specific result determine whether it should be offered routinely. Different results may therefore require different decisions even within the same study. We argue that the threshold of clinical utility for disclosing a result in a research study should be lower than the threshold used for clinical use of the same result. The personal meaning of a result provides additional criteria for evaluation. Finally, the context of the study allows for a more nuanced analysis by addressing the investigators' capabilities for appropriate disclosure, participants' alternative access to the result, and their relationship with the investigators. This analysis shows that the same result may require different decisions in different contexts.

[1]  K. Hudson,et al.  Privacy in Genetics Research , 1999, Science.

[2]  R. Green,et al.  Who seeks genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer’s disease? Findings from a multisite, randomized clinical trial , 2004, Genetics in Medicine.

[3]  Wylie Burke,et al.  Ensuring the appropriate use of genetic tests , 2004, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[4]  F. Collins,et al.  A vision for the future of genomics research , 2003, Nature.

[5]  MK Pelias.  Research in human genetics: the tension between doing no harm and personal autonomy , 2004, Clinical genetics.

[6]  E. Dougherty,et al.  Gene-expression profiles in hereditary breast cancer. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  M. Verweij,et al.  Unexpected findings in identifiable stored blood samples after analysis without consent: moral arguments for and against disclosure. , 2002, Genetic counseling.

[8]  M Gwinn,et al.  Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics. , 2001, JAMA.

[9]  Holtzman Na,et al.  Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States. Final report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. , 1999, Journal of child and family nursing.

[10]  P. de Knijff,et al.  ApoE polymorphism and predisposition to coronary heart disease in youths of different European populations. The EARS Study. European Atherosclerosis Research Study. , 1994, Arteriosclerosis and thrombosis : a journal of vascular biology.

[11]  H. Richardson,et al.  The ancillary-care responsibilities of medical researchers. An ethical framework for thinking about the clinical care that researchers owe their subjects. , 2004, The Hastings Center report.

[12]  Bandman El.  Protection of human subjects. , 1980, JAMA.

[13]  Gail P Jarvik,et al.  Reporting genetic results in research studies: Summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group , 2006, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[14]  B. Wilfond,et al.  Genetic Research Involving Human Biological Materials: A Need to Tailor Consent Forms , 2004 .

[15]  C. Grady,et al.  What makes clinical research ethical? , 2000, JAMA.

[16]  Yudong D. He,et al.  A Gene-Expression Signature as a Predictor of Survival in Breast Cancer , 2002 .

[17]  Groups, communities, and contested identities in genetic research. , 2000, The Hastings Center report.

[18]  S. Ehrmeyer,et al.  Has compliance with CLIA requirements really improved quality in US clinical laboratories? , 2004, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[19]  J. Thompson,et al.  BRCA1 mutations and breast cancer in the general population: analyses in women before age 35 years and in women before age 45 years with first-degree family history. , 1998, JAMA.

[20]  P. Schulte.  Ethical issues in the communication of results. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[21]  E. Clayton,et al.  Implications of disclosing individual results of clinical research. , 2006, JAMA.

[22]  K. Schwartz,et al.  A primer of the HIPAA Privacy Rule for practice-based researchers. , 2004, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[23]  D. Bennett,et al.  Vitamin E and donepezil for the treatment of mild cognitive impairment. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  S. Plattner,et al.  National Bioethics Advisory Commission , 2001 .

[25]  Charles Weijer,et al.  Informing study participants of research results: an ethical imperative. , 2003, IRB.

[26]  J. Stengård,et al.  Genotypes with the apolipoprotein ε4 allele are predictors of coronary heart disease mortality in a longitudinal study of elderly Finnish men , 1996, Human Genetics.

[27]  C. Weijer,et al.  Considerations and costs of disclosing study findings to research participants , 2004, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[28]  J. Hirschhorn,et al.  A comprehensive review of genetic association studies , 2002, Genetics in Medicine.

[29]  F. Miller,et al.  Disclosing individual results of clinical research: implications of respect for participants. , 2005, JAMA.

[30]  D. Easton,et al.  Apolipoprotein E Genetic Variation and Alzheimer’s Disease , 1999, Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.

[31]  P. Sullivan,et al.  Translating emerging research on the genetics of smoking into clinical practice: ethical and social considerations. , 2004, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[32]  E. Winer,et al.  Informing clinical trial participants about study results. , 2002, JAMA.

[33]  M. Hammer,et al.  Multiple origins of Ashkenazi Levites: Y chromosome evidence for both Near Eastern and European ancestries. , 2003, American journal of human genetics.