Protecting Vulnerable Research Subjects in Critical Care Trials: Enhancing the Informed Consent Process and Recommendations for Safeguards

Although critically ill patients represent a vulnerable group of individuals, guidelines in research ethics assert that ethically acceptable research may proceed with such vulnerable subjects if additional safeguards are in place to minimize the risk of harm and exploitation. Such safeguards include the proper obtainment of informed consent that avoids the presence of the therapeutic misconception and the assessment of decisional capacity in critically ill patients recruited for research. Also discussed in this review are additional safeguards for such vulnerable subjects, as well as the issues involved with proxy consent. Heightened awareness to principles of ethics and provision of additional safeguards to enhance protections of vulnerable subjects would help to maintain the public trust in the research endeavor

Secondary uses and the governance of de-identified data: Lessons from the human genome diversity panel

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recent changes to regulatory guidance in the US and Europe have complicated oversight of secondary research by rendering most uses of de-identified data exempt from human subjects oversight. To identify the implications of such guidelines for harms to participants and communities, this paper explores the secondary uses of one de-identified DNA sample collection with limited oversight: the Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP)-Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain, Fondation Jean Dausset (CEPH) Human Genome Diversity Panel.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using a combination of keyword and cited reference search, we identified English-language scientific articles published between 2002 and 2009 that reported analysis of HGDP Diversity Panel samples and/or data. We then reviewed each article to identify the specific research use to which the samples and/or data was applied. Secondary uses were categorized according to the type and kind of research supported by the collection.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A wide variety of secondary uses were identified from 148 peer-reviewed articles. While the vast majority of these uses were consistent with the original intent of the collection, a minority of published reports described research whose primary findings could be regarded as controversial, objectionable, or potentially stigmatizing in their interpretation.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We conclude that potential risks to participants and communities cannot be wholly eliminated by anonymization of individual data and suggest that explicit review of proposed secondary uses, by a Data Access Committee or similar internal oversight body with suitable stakeholder representation, should be a required component of the trustworthy governance of any repository of data or specimens.</p

Biobanks containing clinical specimens: Defining characteristics, policies, and practices

Biobanks – collections of human biological specimens stored for future research use – are crucial for biomedical advancement. One of the most common ways that biobanks acquire specimens is to obtain residual or “leftover” samples originally collected for clinical care from hospitals, clinical laboratories and pathology departments. Little is known about the characteristics of biobanks that store specimens from clinical sources, or their policies and practices.In this paper, we present data from the subset of 261 biobanks in our 2012 national survey that stores specimens from clinical sources, focusing on a number of ethical issues that have been raised in the literature.Most biobanks are part of larger organizations, mainly academic medical centers, and most report standardized systems for managing acquisition, storage, and release to researchers. Yet, there is considerable diversity in policies and practices regarding informed consent, return of research results, ownership of specimens and technology developed, utilization, and disposition of remaining specimens after researchers have acquired, them. We document tremendous heterogeneity in the composition of these collections, the number and type of specimens stored, and number of requests for specimens per year.Responding to this variation presents significant challenges for those who manage the collections, demanding careful consideration and planning to maintain high quality practices in acquisition, storage, and release of specimens all the while striving to protect the rights of subjects