6 research outputs found

    Building the Partners HealthCare Biobank at Partners Personalized Medicine: Informed Consent, Return of Research Results, Recruitment Lessons and Operational Considerations

    No full text
    The Partners HealthCare Biobank is a Partners HealthCare enterprise-wide initiative whose goal is to provide a foundation for the next generation of translational research studies of genotype, environment, gene-environment interaction, biomarker and family history associations with disease phenotypes. The Biobank has leveraged in-person and electronic recruitment methods to enroll >30,000 subjects as of October 2015 at two academic medical centers in Partners HealthCare since launching in 2010. Through a close collaboration with the Partners Human Research Committee, the Biobank has developed a comprehensive informed consent process that addresses key patient concerns, including privacy and the return of research results. Lessons learned include the need for careful consideration of ethical issues, attention to the educational content of electronic media, the importance of patient authentication in electronic informed consent, the need for highly secure IT infrastructure and management of communications and the importance of flexible recruitment modalities and processes dependent on the clinical setting for recruitment

    Implementation of Electronic Consent at a Biobank: An Opportunity for Precision Medicine Research

    No full text
    The purpose of this study is to characterize the potential benefits and challenges of electronic informed consent (eIC) as a strategy for rapidly expanding the reach of large biobanks while reducing costs and potentially enhancing participant engagement. The Partners HealthCare Biobank (Partners Biobank) implemented eIC tools and processes to complement traditional recruitment strategies in June 2014. Since then, the Partners Biobank has rigorously collected and tracked a variety of metrics relating to this novel recruitment method. From June 2014 through January 2016, the Partners Biobank sent email invitations to 184,387 patients at Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital. During the same time period, 7078 patients provided their consent via eIC. The rate of consent of emailed patients was 3.5%, and the rate of consent of patients who log into the eIC website at Partners Biobank was 30%. Banking of biospecimens linked to electronic health records has become a critical element of genomic research and a foundation for the NIH’s Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI). eIC is a feasible and potentially game-changing strategy for these large research studies that depend on patient recruitment

    Validation of Electronic Health Record Phenotyping of Bipolar Disorder Cases and Controls

    No full text
    Objective: The study was designed to validate use of elec-tronic health records (EHRs) for diagnosing bipolar disorder and classifying control subjects. Method: EHR data were obtained from a health care system of more than 4.6 million patients spanning more than 20 years. Experienced clinicians reviewed charts to identify text features and coded data consistent or inconsistent with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Natural language processing was used to train a diagnostic algorithm with 95% specificity for classifying bipolar disorder. Filtered coded data were used to derive three additional classification rules for case subjects and one for control subjects. The positive predictive value (PPV) of EHR-based bipolar disorder and subphenotype di- agnoses was calculated against diagnoses from direct semi- structured interviews of 190 patients by trained clinicians blind to EHR diagnosis. Results: The PPV of bipolar disorder defined by natural language processing was 0.85. Coded classification based on strict filtering achieved a value of 0.79, but classifications based on less stringent criteria performed less well. No EHR- classified control subject received a diagnosis of bipolar dis- order on the basis of direct interview (PPV=1.0). For most subphenotypes, values exceeded 0.80. The EHR-based clas- sifications were used to accrue 4,500 bipolar disorder cases and 5,000 controls for genetic analyses. Conclusions: Semiautomated mining of EHRs can be used to ascertain bipolar disorder patients and control subjects with high specificity and predictive value compared with diagnostic interviews. EHRs provide a powerful resource for high-throughput phenotyping for genetic and clinical research

    Genome-wide Association Study Identifies SESTD1 as a Novel Risk Gene for Lithium Responsive Bipolar Disorder

    Get PDF
    Lithium is the mainstay prophylactic treatment for bipolar disorder (BD), but treatment response varies considerably across individuals. Patients who respond well to lithium treatment might represent a relatively homogeneous subtype of this genetically and phenotypically diverse disorder. Here, we performed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to identify (i) specific genetic variations influencing lithium response and (ii) genetic variants associated with risk for lithium-responsive BD. Patients with BD and controls were recruited from Sweden and the United Kingdom. GWAS were performed on 2698 patients with subjectively defined (self-reported) lithium response and 1176 patients with objectively defined (clinically documented) lithium response. We next conducted GWAS comparing lithium responders with healthy controls (1639 subjective responders and 8899 controls; 323 objective responders and 6684 controls). Meta-analyses of Swedish and UK results revealed no significant associations with lithium response within the bipolar subjects. However, when comparing lithium-responsive patients with controls, two imputed markers attained genome-wide significant associations, among which one was validated in confirmatory genotyping (rs116323614, P=2.74 × 10-8). It is an intronic single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) on chromosome 2q31.2 in the gene SEC14 and spectrin domains 1 (SESTD1), which encodes a protein involved in regulation of phospholipids. Phospholipids have been strongly implicated as lithium treatment targets. Furthermore, we estimated the proportion of variance for lithium-responsive BD explained by common variants ('SNP heritability') as 0.25 and 0.29 using two definitions of lithium response. Our results revealed a genetic variant in SESTD1 associated with risk for lithium-responsive BD, suggesting that the understanding of BD etiology could be furthered by focusing on this subtype of BD
    corecore