Biobank participants' preferences for disclosure of genetic research results: perspectives from the OurGenes, OurHealth, OurCommunity project.

OBJECTIVE To assess biobank participants' preferences for disclosure of genetic research results. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a cross-sectional survey of participants in the OurGenes, OurHealth, OurCommunity biobank. Respondents were surveyed about preferences for disclosure, importance of disclosure, communication of results with practitioners, and sharing of results after respondents' death. Multivariate regression analysis was used to assess independent sociodemographic and clinical predictors of disclosure preferences. Data collection occurred from June 6, 2011, to June 25, 2012. RESULTS Among 1154 biobank participants, 555 (48%) responded. Most thought that research result disclosure was important (90%). Preference for disclosure varied, depending on availability of disease treatment (90% vs 64%, P<.001), high vs low disease risk (79% vs 66%, P<.001), and serious vs mild disease (83% vs 68%, P<.001). More than half of respondents (57%) preferred disclosure even when there is uncertainty about the results' meaning, and 87% preferred disclosure if the disease is highly heritable. Older age was positively associated with interest in disclosure, whereas female sex, nonwhite race, diabetes mellitus, and depression and/or anxiety were negatively associated with disclosure. More than half of respondents (52%) would want their results returned to their nearest biological relative after death. CONCLUSIONS OurGenes biobank participants report strong preferences for disclosure of research results, and most would designate a relative to receive results after death. Participant preferences for serious vs mild disease, high vs low disease risk, and availability of disease treatment differed significantly. Future research should consider family members' preferences for receiving research results from enrolled research participants.

[1]  A. McGuire,et al.  Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[2]  L. Dressler,et al.  Disclosure of Research Results from Cancer Genomic Studies: State of the Science , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[3]  Michelle L. McGowan,et al.  Personal genomics and individual identities: motivations and moral imperatives of early users , 2010, New genetics and society.

[4]  L. Biesecker,et al.  Genomic Inheritances: Disclosing Individual Research Results From Whole-Exome Sequencing to Deceased Participants’ Relatives , 2012, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[5]  B. Wilfond,et al.  Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants , 2006, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[6]  L. Parker.  Returning Individual Research Results: What Role Should People’s Preferences Play? , 2012 .

[7]  W. Burke,et al.  Researcher Perspectives on Disclosure of Incidental Findings in Genetic Research , 2010, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[8]  P. Harris,et al.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support , 2009, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[9]  S. Gruber,et al.  Returning Individual Research Results: Development of a Cancer Genetics Education and Risk Communication Protocol , 2010, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[10]  Gail Geller,et al.  Public Expectations for Return of Results from Large-Cohort Genetic Research , 2008, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[11]  Marylyn D. Ritchie,et al.  Return of individual research results from genome-wide association studies: experience of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[12]  George Church,et al.  Ethical and Practical Guidelines for Reporting Genetic Research Results to Study Participants: Updated Guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group , 2010, Circulation. Cardiovascular genetics.

[13]  Joan Scott,et al.  Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[14]  J. V. van Delden,et al.  Disclosing Individual Genetic Research Results to Deceased Participants’ Relatives by Means of a Qualified Disclosure Policy , 2012, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[15]  Catherine C. Eckel,et al.  Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence , 2008 .

[16]  F. Miller,et al.  Communicating the Results of Clinical Research to Participants: Attitudes, Practices, and Future Directions , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[17]  F. Lawrenz,et al.  An empirical examination of the management of return of individual research results and incidental findings in genomic biobanks , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[18]  Y. Bombard,et al.  Risks to Relatives in Genomic Research: A Duty to Warn? , 2012, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

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

[20]  Kathy Hudson,et al.  Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[21]  Keith Marsolo,et al.  Challenges in creating an opt-in biobank with a registrar-based consent process and a commercial EHR , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[22]  Christopher A Cassa,et al.  Disclosing pathogenic genetic variants to research participants: quantifying an emerging ethical responsibility. , 2012, Genome research.

[23]  Leslie G Biesecker,et al.  Motivators for participation in a whole-genome sequencing study: implications for translational genomics research , 2011, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[24]  S. Haga,et al.  Researcher practices on returning genetic research results. , 2010, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[25]  C. Murray,et al.  Enhancing the Validity and Cross-Cultural Comparability of Measurement in Survey Research , 2003, American Political Science Review.

[26]  L. Beskow,et al.  Prospective Biorepository Participants' Perspectives on Access to Research Results , 2009, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[27]  Frances P Lawrenz,et al.  Managing Incidental Findings in Human Subjects Research: Analysis and Recommendations , 2008, The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[28]  Robert C. Green,et al.  Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

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

[30]  W. Chung,et al.  Researchers’ views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[31]  L. Dressler,et al.  IRB perspectives on the return of individual results from genomic research , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[32]  J. Cassiman,et al.  The return of individual research findings in paediatric genetic research , 2010, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[33]  Nikolajs Zeps,et al.  Practical implementation issues and challenges for biobanks in the return of individual research results , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[34]  M. Parchman,et al.  Preferences regarding Genetic Research Results: Comparing Veterans and Nonveterans Responses , 2010, Public Health Genomics.