Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Apr;14(4):361-84.
doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.23.

Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets

Susan M Wolf  1 , Brittney N Crock, Brian Van Ness, Frances Lawrenz, Jeffrey P Kahn, Laura M Beskow, Mildred K Cho, Michael F Christman, Robert C Green, Ralph Hall, Judy Illes, Moira Keane, Bartha M Knoppers, Barbara A Koenig, Isaac S Kohane, Bonnie Leroy, Karen J Maschke, William McGeveran, Pilar Ossorio, Lisa S Parker, Gloria M Petersen, Henry S Richardson, Joan A Scott, Sharon F Terry, Benjamin S Wilfond, Wendy A Wolf
Affiliations

Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets

Susan M Wolf et al. Genet Med. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Biobanks and archived data sets collecting samples and data have become crucial engines of genetic and genomic research. Unresolved, however, is what responsibilities biobanks should shoulder to manage incidental findings and individual research results of potential health, reproductive, or personal importance to individual contributors (using "biobank" here to refer both to collections of samples and collections of data). This article reports recommendations from a 2-year project funded by the National Institutes of Health. We analyze the responsibilities involved in managing the return of incidental findings and individual research results in a biobank research system (primary research or collection sites, the biobank itself, and secondary research sites). We suggest that biobanks shoulder significant responsibility for seeing that the biobank research system addresses the return question explicitly. When reidentification of individual contributors is possible, the biobank should work to enable the biobank research system to discharge four core responsibilities to (1) clarify the criteria for evaluating findings and the roster of returnable findings, (2) analyze a particular finding in relation to this, (3) reidentify the individual contributor, and (4) recontact the contributor to offer the finding. We suggest that findings that are analytically valid, reveal an established and substantial risk of a serious health condition, and are clinically actionable should generally be offered to consenting contributors. This article specifies 10 concrete recommendations, addressing new biobanks as well as those already in existence.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Notification: Ralph Hall is a counsel at Baker & Daniels Law Firm and a shareholder in MR3 Medical, LLC. Karen Maschke receives modest salary support as a consultant to the Mayo Clinic Biobank.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Depiction of primary researchers, biobank, and secondary researchers – a biobank research system. As noted, collection of data and samples from contributors may occur at Stage 1 research and collection sites, or at the biobank itself.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Roles and responsibilities for return of IFs and IRRs in a generic biobank research system (contributors not depicted).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, et al. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med & Ethics. 2008;36(2):219–248. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dept. of Health and Human Services (DHHS) [Accessed December 6, 2011];Human subjects research protections: enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. 76 Federal Register 44,512-31. 2011 Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR–2011-07-26/html/2011--18792.htm.
    1. Johnson G, Lawrenz F, Thao M. An empirical examination of the management of return of individual research results and incidental findings in genomic biobanks. Genet Med. 2012 In press. - PubMed
    1. Cambon-Thomsen A, Rial-Sebbag E, Knoppers BM. Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks. Eur Respir J. 2007;30(2):373–382. - PubMed
    1. Johnston C, Kaye J. Does the UK Biobank have a legal obligation to feedback individual findings to participants? Med Law Rev. 2004;12(3):239–267.

Publication types

MeSH terms