Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives

It is unclear how genomic incidental finding (GIF) prospects should be addressed in informed consent processes. An exploratory study on this topic was conducted with 34 purposively sampled Chairs of institutional review boards (IRBs) at centers conducting genome-wide association studies. Most Chairs (96%) reported no knowledge of local IRB requirements regarding GIFs and informed consent. Chairs suggested consent processes should address the prospect of, and study disclosure policy on, GIFs; GIF management and follow-up; potential clinical significance of GIFs; potential risks of GIF disclosure; an opportunity for participants to opt out of GIF disclosure; and duration of the researcher's duty to disclose GIFs. Chairs were concerned about participant disclosure preferences changing over time; inherent limitations in determining the scope and accuracy of claims about GIFs; and making consent processes longer and more complex. IRB Chair and other stakeholder perspectives can help advance informed consent efforts to accommodate GIF prospects.     

Biobanking and public health: is a human rights approach the tie that binds?

Ethical principles guiding public health and genomic medicine are often at odds: whereas public health practice adopts collectivist principles that emphasize population-based benefits, recent advances in genomic and personalized medicine are grounded in an individualist ethic that privileges informed consent, and the balancing of individual risk and benefit. Indeed, the attraction of personalized medicine is the promise it holds out to help individuals get the “right medicine for the right problem at the right time.” Research biobanks are an effective tool in the genomic medicine toolbox. Biobanking in public health presents a unique case study to unpack some of these issues in more detail. For example, there is a long history of using banked tissue obtained under clinical diagnostic conditions for later public health uses. But despite the collectivist approach of public health, the principles applied to the ethical challenges of biobanking (e.g. informed consent, autonomy, privacy) remain individualist. We demonstrate the value of using human rights as a public health ethics framework to address this tension in biobanking by applying it to two illustrative cases.     

Solidarity and justice as guiding principles in genomic research

In genomic research the ideal standard of free, informed, prior and explicit consent is sometimes difficult to apply. This has raised concern that important genomic research will be restricted. Different consent procedures have therefore been proposed. This paper explicitly examines the question how, in genomic research, the principles of solidarity and justice can be used to justify forms of diminished individual control over personal data and bio-samples. After a discussion of the notions of solidarity and justice and how they can be related to health care and genomic research, we examine how and in which situations these notions can form a strong moral basis for demanding certain financial sacrifices. Then we examine when these principles can justify consent procedures which diverge from the ideal standard. Because much genomic research is not expected to lead to immediate (clinical) benefits we also discuss the question of whether we can be obliged to make any sacrifices for future (not yet existing) patients. We conclude with the formulation of a number of conditions that have to be met before autonomy sacrifices can be reasonably demanded in genomic research.     

知情同意：定义、模式和挑战

从知情同意产生和发展的历史、知情同意的含义和模式方面来说明产生于一定历史背景下的知情同意,在临床和研究领域,以及生物信息库的建设中,具有一定的局限性,也面临着挑战。面对这样的挑战,不应该拘泥于对知情同意概念本身如何准确表述、模式如何创新,而更应该从知情同意所要达到的目的——保护患者、受试者和样本提供者的权益来考虑。     

Informed Consent and Genetic Information

In the last 25 years writing in bioethics, particularly in medical ethics, has generally claimed that action is ethically acceptable only if it receives informed consent from those affected. However, informed consent provides only limited justification, and may provide even less as new information technologies are used to store and handle personal data, including personal genetic data. The central philosophical weakness of relying on informed consent procedures for ethical justification is that consent is a propositional attitude, so referentially opaque: consent is given to specific propositions describing limited aspects of a situation, and does not transfer even to closely related propositions. Assembling genetic data in databases creates additional difficulties for ethical justification. This is not because genetic information is intrinsically exceptional, but because the merger of genetic and information technologies make it possible to assemble massive quantities of complex information that defeat individuals' best efforts to grasp what is at stake, or to give or withhold informed consent. The future agenda for bioethics will need to take account of both these limitations of appeals to informed consent.     

The adequacy of informed consent forms in genetic research in Oman: a pilot study

Genetic research presents ethical challenges to the achievement of valid informed consent, especially in developing countries with areas of low literacy. During the last several years, a number of genetic research proposals involving Omani nationals were submitted to the Department of Research and Studies, Ministry of Health, Oman. The objective of this paper is to report on the results of an internal quality assurance initiative to determine the extent of the information being provided in genetic research informed consent forms. In order to achieve this, we developed checklists to assess the inclusion of basic elements of informed consent as well as elements related to the collection and future storage of biological samples. Three of the authors independently evaluated and reached consensus on seven informed consent forms that were available for review. Of the seven consent forms, four had less than half of the basic elements of informed consent. None contained any information regarding whether genetic information relevant to health would be disclosed, whether participants may share in commercial products, the extent of confidentiality protections, and the inclusion of additional consent forms for future storage and use of tissue samples. Information regarding genetic risks and withdrawal of samples were rarely mentioned (1/7), whereas limits on future use of samples were mentioned in 3 of 7 consent forms. Ultimately, consent forms are not likely to address key issues regarding genetic research that have been recommended by research ethics guidelines. We recommend enhanced educational efforts to increase awareness, on the part of researchers, of information that should be included in consent forms.     

An Australian Based Study on the Readability of HIV/AIDS and Type 2 Diabetes Clinical Trial Informed Consent Documents

The aims of this study were to measure the readability of Australian based informed consent documents and determine whether informed consent readability guidelines have been established by Australian human research ethics committees (HRECs). A total of 20 informed consent documents, 10 HIV/AIDS and 10 type 2 diabetes, were measured for readability using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and Gunning Fog Index (Fog). Published guidelines and policy statements of the two local HREC who approved the 20 clinical trials under study where examined to identify whether they had any formal policies/guidelines on the readability of informed consent documents. The two HRECs were contacted via e-mail to also determine whether they utilised any informal readability standards or “rules of thumb” that may not have been mentioned in the published documents. The HIV/AIDS and type 2 diabetes informed consent documents were, on average, written at a grade 13 reading level. Formal readability standards had not been established by the two local HRECs, however, they did verify the use of informal rules for assessing readability of informed consent documents. Based on Australian literacy data, the majority of informed consent documents were written well beyond the reading ability of many Australians. Unreadable informed consent documents may result in patients rejecting trial participation altogether or conversely may result in their participating in a trial with inadequate consent. Therefore, a step toward reducing the complexity of informed consent documents may be to implement objective readability assessments into the human research ethics application and review process.     

Quality control of human tissues-experience from the Indiana University Cancer Center-Lilly Research Labs human tissue bank

The success of molecular research and its applications in both the clinical and basic research arenas is strongly dependent on the collection, handling, storage, and quality control of fresh human tissue samples. This tissue bank was set up to bank fresh surgically obtained human tissue using a Clinical Annotated Tissue Database (CATD) in order to capture the associated patient clinical data and demographics using a one way patient encryption scheme to protect patient identification. In this study, we determined that high quality of tissue samples is imperative for both genomic and proteomic molecular research. This paper also contains a brief compilation of the literature involved in the patient ethics, patient informed consent, patient de-identification, tissue collection, processing, and storage as well as basic molecular research generated from the tissue bank using good clinical practices. The current applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines for handling human tissues are briefly discussed. More than 6,610 cancer patients have been consented (97% of those that were contacted by the consenter) and 16,800 tissue specimens have been banked from these patients in 9 years. All samples collected in the bank were QC’d by a pathologist. Approximately 1,550 tissue samples have been requested for use in basic, clinical, and/or biomarker cancer research studies. Each tissue aliquot removed from the bank for a research study were evaluated by a second H&E, if the samples passed the QC, they were submitted for genomic and proteomic molecular analysis/study. Approximately 75% of samples evaluated were of high histologic quality and used for research studies. Since 2003, we changed the patient informed consent to allow the tissue bank to gather more patient clinical follow-up information. Ninety two percent of the patients (1,865 patients) signed the new informed consent form and agreed to be re-contacted for follow-up information on their disease state. In addition, eighty five percent of patients (1,584) agreed to be re-contacted to provide a biological fluid sample to be used for biomarker research.     

Western Notions of Informed Consent and Indigenous Cultures: Australian Findings at the Interface

Despite the extensive consideration the notion of informed consent has heralded in recent decades, the unique considerations pertaining to the giving of informed consent by and on behalf of Indigenous Australians have not been comprehensively explored; to the contrary, these issues have been scarcely considered in the literature to date. This deficit is concerning, given that a fundamental premise of the doctrine of informed consent is that of individual autonomy, which, while privileged as a core value of non-Indigenous Australian culture, is displaced in Indigenous cultures by the honouring of the family unit and community group, rather than the individual, as being at the core of important decision-making processes relating to the person. To address the hiatus in the bioethical literature on issues relating to informed consent for Aboriginal peoples, the following article provides findings from a two-year research project, funded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), conducted in the Northern Territory. The findings, situated in the context of the literature on cultural safety, highlight the difference between the Aboriginal and biomedical perspectives on informed consent.     

Informed consent to tissue donation: policies and practice

Nearly 10 years ago, the tissue industry’s informed consent practices with donor families in the United States were criticized. In response, the industry, along with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, suggested elements to be included in the informed consent process. This study examines which of these elements were present in the informed consent documents of 45 (78%) of the nation’s 58 Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs). Some elements, such as involvement of for-profit companies, were present in almost all. Others, such as labeling tissue as a gift from donor families, never were. The authors conclude that the time is ripe for reexamination of the informed consent process with an eye to meaningful consent that promotes the benefits of tissue transplantation and at the same time protects the rights and interests of donor families; can be realistically implemented; and, maintains the trust of the American public.     

Informed Consent in Health Research: Challenges and Barriers in Low‐and Middle‐Income Countries with Specific Reference to Nepal

Obtaining ‘informed consent’ from every individual participant involved in health research is a mandatory ethical practice. Informed consent is a process whereby potential participants are genuinely informed about their role, risk and rights before they are enrolled in the study. Thus, ethics committees in most countries require ‘informed consent form’ as part of an ethics application which is reviewed before granting research ethics approval. Despite a significant increase in health research activity in low‐and middle‐income countries (LMICs) in recent years, only limited work has been done to address ethical concerns. Most ethics committees in LMICs lack the authority and/or the capacity to monitor research in the field. This is important since not all research, particularly in LMICs region, complies with ethical principles, sometimes this is inadvertently or due to a lack of awareness of their importance in assuring proper research governance. With several examples from Nepal, this paper reflects on the steps required to obtain informed consents and highlights some of the major challenges and barriers to seeking informed consent from research participants. At the end of this paper, we also offer some recommendations around how can we can promote and implement optimal informed consent taking process. We believe that paper is useful for researchers and members of ethical review boards in highlighting key issues around informed consent.     

Participant informed consent in cluster randomized trials: review

Background

The Nuremberg code defines the general ethical framework of medical research with participant consent as its cornerstone. In cluster randomized trials (CRT), obtaining participant informed consent raises logistic and methodologic concerns. First, with randomization of large clusters such as geographical areas, obtaining individual informed consent may be impossible. Second, participants in randomized clusters cannot avoid certain interventions, which implies that participant informed consent refers only to data collection, not administration of an intervention. Third, complete participant information may be a source of selection bias, which then raises methodological concerns. We assessed whether participant informed consent was required in such trials, which type of consent was required, and whether the trial was at risk of selection bias because of the very nature of participant information.

Methods and Findings

We systematically reviewed all reports of CRT published in MEDLINE in 2008 and surveyed corresponding authors regarding the nature of the informed consent and the process of participant inclusion. We identified 173 reports and obtained an answer from 113 authors (65.3%). In total, 23.7% of the reports lacked information on ethics committee approval or participant consent, 53.1% of authors declared that participant consent was for data collection only and 58.5% that the group allocation was not specified for participants. The process of recruitment (chronology of participant recruitment with regard to cluster randomization) was rarely reported, and we estimated that only 56.6% of the trials were free of potential selection bias.

Conclusions

For CRTs, the reporting of ethics committee approval and participant informed consent is less than optimal. Reports should describe whether participants consented for administration of an intervention and/or data collection. Finally, the process of participant recruitment should be fully described (namely, whether participants were informed of the allocation group before being recruited) for a better appraisal of the risk of selection bias.     

Best Practice Guidelines on Informed Consent for Weight Loss Surgery Patients

Objective: To provide evidence‐based guidelines on informed consent and the education that underlies it for legally competent, severely obese weight loss surgery (WLS) patients. Research Methods and Procedures: We conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature published on MEDLINE between 1984 and 2004. Three articles focused on informed consent for WLS; none was based on empirical studies. We summarized each paper and assigned evidence categories according to a grading system derived from established evidence‐based models. We also relied on informed consent and educational materials from six WLS programs in Massachusetts. All evidence is Category D. Recommendations were based on a review of the available literature, informed consent materials from WLS programs, and expert opinion. Results: This Task Group found that the informed consent process contributes to long‐term outcome in multiple ways but is governed by limited legal requirements. We focused our report on the legal and ethical issues related to informed consent, i.e., disclosure vs. comprehension. Recommendations centered on the importance of assessing patient comprehension of informed consent materials, the content of those materials, and the use of active teaching/learning techniques to promote understanding. Discussion: Although demonstrated comprehension is not a legal requirement for informed consent in Massachusetts or other states, the members of this Task Group found that the best interests of WLS patients, providers, and facilities are served when clinicians engage patients in active learning and collaborative decision making.     

Ethical obligation and legal requirements: On informed consent practices in Bangladesh

Informed consent to medical intervention is fundamental in both ethics and law. But in practice it is often not taken seriously in developing countries. This paper provides an appraisal of informed consent practices in Bangladesh. Following a review of the ethical and legal principles of informed consent, it assesses the degree to which doctors adhere to it in Bangladesh. Based on findings of non-compliance, it then investigates the reasons for such non-compliance through an appraisal of informed consent practices in Bangladesh and provides recommendations aimed at improving such practices. The significance of this paper lies in unveiling the interdependence between the ethical and legal traits of informed consent and their ramifications on strengthening the patient-oriented approach of duty to care.     

Voluntary Informed Consent in Paediatric Oncology Research

In paediatric oncology, research and treatments are often closely combined, which may compromise voluntary informed consent of parents. We identified two key scenarios in which voluntary informed consent for paediatric oncology studies is potentially compromised due to the intertwinement of research and care. The first scenario is inclusion by the treating paediatric oncologist, the second scenario concerns treatments confined to the research context. In this article we examine whether voluntary informed consent of parents for research is compromised in these two scenarios, and if so whether this is also morally problematic. For this, we employ the account of voluntary consent from Nelson and colleagues, who assert that voluntary consent requires substantial freedom from controlling influences. We argue that, in the absence of persuasion or manipulation, inclusion by the treating physician does not compromise voluntariness. However, it may function as a risk factor for controlling influence as it narrows the scope within which parents make decisions. Furthermore, physician appeal to reciprocity is not controlling as it constitutes persuasion. In addition, framing information is a form of informational manipulation and constitutes a controlling influence. In the second scenario, treatments confined to the research context qualify as controlling if the available options are restricted through manipulation of options. Although none of the influences is morally problematic in itself, a combination of influences may create morally problematic instances of involuntary informed consent. Therefore, safeguards should be implemented to establish an optimal environment for parents to provide voluntary informed consent in an integrated research‐care context.     

Coding and consent: moral challenges of the database project in Iceland

A major moral problem in relation to the deCODE genetics database project in Iceland is that the heavy emphasis placed on technical security of healthcare information has precluded discussion about the issue of consent for participation in the database. On the other hand, critics who have emphasised the issue of consent have most often demanded that informed consent for participation in research be obtained. While I think that individual consent is of major significance, I argue that this demand for informed consent is neither suitable nor desirable in this case. I distinguish between three aspects of the database and show that different types of consent are appropriate for each. In particular, I describe the idea of a written authorisation based on general information about the database as an alternative to informed consent and presumed consent in database research.     

An approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in breast augmentation

Informed consent requires surgeons to provide information about all available alternatives and their associated risks and tradeoffs to every prospective breast augmentation patient. The informed patient and surgeon then make decisions based on the information the patient has received, clinical parameters that may affect those decisions, and the patient's willingness to accept specific risks and tradeoffs. During the authors' 22 years of clinical practice, substantial changes have occurred in the requirements for adequate informed consent and the methods of ensuring that patients receive it.The numbers of alternatives for augmentation and the relative benefits and risks of each method have changed substantially over the past two decades. Four specific areas of postoperative issues stimulated major changes in the authors' approach to patient education and informed consent: 1) questions or dissatisfaction with implant size postoperatively, 2) questions about financial responsibility for costs associated with untoward events requiring reoperation postoperatively including capsular contracture or other problems, 3) spouses or other concerned parties rendering opinions postoperatively when they had not been involved in the informed consent process, and 4) criteria for whether reoperations were indicated, how many were indicated, and when implant removal without replacement might be most logical.This paper describes an approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in stages by 1) providing detailed, highly specific written and verbal information, 2) utilizing a staged approach to education and informed consent that provides information and requires simultaneous, informed consent in stages, 3) repeating each critical topic at least two or three times during the process, requiring repetitive written documentation by the patient on at least three different occasions, 4) emphasizing patient accountability for choices selected, and 5) organizing the education and informed consent process so that it is clinically practical and also increases thoroughness and documentation while conserving surgeon time.This staged, integrated system of patient education and informed consent uses a comprehensive set of informed consent documents that are available for downloading from the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Web site (www.plasreconsurg.org).Before incorporating any of the informed consent documents or statements reported in this paper, each surgeon should seek review by the surgeon's malpractice insurance carrier and by appropriate legal counsel to ensure compliance with state and federal laws applicable to the surgeon's practice. These documents have evolved to prospectively address patient management issues that have occurred over the authors' 22-year experience in augmentation. The documents are not endorsed by ASPS and do not necessarily represent the views of ASPS.     

Does informed consent influence therapeutic outcome? A clinical trial of the hypnotic activity of placebo in patients admitted to hospital.

To examine whether written informed consent might influence the results of clinical trials the effect of placebo when given with or without informed consent to patients suffering from insomnia was studied. The study was a single blind observer blinded trial, and patients were paired according to sex, age, and hospital environment. Randomisation assigned the first patient of each pair to the control group (without informed consent) or the group to give informed consent. Of the 56 patients, 26 refused to give informed consent, and the age and sex distribution of these differed significantly (p less than 0.02) from the 30 pairs of patients ultimately enrolled into the study. In this "biased" sample, the hypnotic activity of placebo was significantly higher in the control group (p less than 0.05). It is concluded that the informed consent procedure biases the results of clinical trials and might affect their general applicability.