Controversies among Cancer Registry Participants, Genomic Researchers, and Institutional Review Boards about Returning Participants' Genomic Results
- PMID: 30227419
- PMCID: PMC7833045
- DOI: 10.1159/000490235
Controversies among Cancer Registry Participants, Genomic Researchers, and Institutional Review Boards about Returning Participants' Genomic Results
Abstract
Objectives: Genomic information will increasingly be used to aid in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of disease. Several national initiatives are paving the way for this new reality, while also promoting new models of participant-engaged research. We compare the opinions of research participants in a cancer registry, human genetic researchers, and institutional review board (IRB) professionals about the return of individual-level genetic results (ROR).
Methods: Online surveys were administered to participants in a cancer registry (n = 450) and overlapping questions were compared to our previous online national surveys of human genetic researchers (n = 351) and IRB professionals (n = 208).
Results: The majority of respondents agreed that researchers have an obligation to return individual results when they would affect a participant's health. While 77% of registry participants favored ROR if the researcher feels the participant might be interested in the results, only 30% of the IRB professionals and 25% of the genetic researchers agreed with this statement.
Conclusions: Significant differences emerged between the stakeholder groups in several ROR scenarios. Policies that are acceptable to participants, researchers and IRBs, and that ensure human subject protections and facilitate research are needed.
Keywords: Cancer; Genomics; Precision medicine; Research participant perspective; Return of results.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosure Statement
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Genetics researchers' and IRB professionals' attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis.Genet Med. 2012 Feb;14(2):236-42. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.57. Epub 2012 Jan 12. Genet Med. 2012. PMID: 22241102 Free PMC article.
-
IRB perspectives on the return of individual results from genomic research.Genet Med. 2012 Feb;14(2):215-22. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.10. Epub 2012 Jan 5. Genet Med. 2012. PMID: 22241094 Free PMC article.
-
Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers.Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(6):337-45. doi: 10.1159/000324931. Epub 2011 Apr 11. Public Health Genomics. 2011. PMID: 21487211 Free PMC article.
-
Navigating the Intersection between Genomic Research and Clinical Practice.Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2020 Mar;13(3):219-222. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-19-0267. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2020. PMID: 32132115 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Australia: regulating genomic data sharing to promote public trust.Hum Genet. 2018 Aug;137(8):583-591. doi: 10.1007/s00439-018-1914-z. Epub 2018 Aug 16. Hum Genet. 2018. PMID: 30116956 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Perspectives and ethical considerations for return of genetics and genomics research results: a qualitative study of genomics researchers in Uganda.BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Nov 19;22(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00724-1. BMC Med Ethics. 2021. PMID: 34798900 Free PMC article.
-
Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.PLoS One. 2021 Nov 8;16(11):e0258646. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258646. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34748551 Free PMC article.
-
'It is a complex process, but it's very important to return these results to participants'. Stakeholders' perspectives on the ethical considerations for returning individual pharmacogenomics research results to people living with HIV.Res Ethics. 2024 Apr;20(2):363-387. doi: 10.1177/17470161231207739. Epub 2023 Oct 31. Res Ethics. 2024. PMID: 40370487 Free PMC article.
-
Views on genomic research result delivery methods and informed consent: a review.Per Med. 2021 May;18(3):295-310. doi: 10.2217/pme-2020-0139. Epub 2021 Apr 6. Per Med. 2021. PMID: 33822658 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The research participant perspective related to the conduct of genomic cohort studies: A systematic review of the quantitative literature.Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):119-129. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx056. Transl Behav Med. 2018. PMID: 29385589 Free PMC article.
References
-
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of-fice/2016/02/01/fact-sheet-inves... (accessed August 2, 2016).
-
- Baker R, Boerwinkle E, Burke G, Collins R, Gaziano M, Lauer M, Manolio T: Building a Consortium of Cohorts – Cohort Identification and Participant Recruitment. https://www.nih.gov/sites/default/files/research-training/initiatives/pm....
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources