Search

Objectives: Retaining residual newborn screening (NBS) bloodspots for medical research remains contentious. To inform this debate, we sought to understand public preferences for, and reasons for preferring, alternative policy options., Methods: We assessed preferences among 4 policy options for research use of residual bloodspots through a bilingual national Internet survey of a representative sample of Canadians. Fifty percent of respondents were randomly assigned to select reasons supporting these preferences. Understanding of and attitudes toward screening and research concepts, and demographics were assessed., Results: Of 1102 respondents (94% participation rate; 47% completion rate), the overall preference among policy options was ask permission (67%); this option was also the most acceptable choice (80%). Assume permission was acceptable to 46%, no permission required was acceptable to 29%, and no research allowed was acceptable to 26%. The acceptability of the ask permission option was reduced among participants assigned to the reasoning exercise (84% vs 76%; P = .004). Compared with assume/no permission required, ordered logistic regression showed a significant reduction in preference for the ask permission option with greater understanding of concepts (odds ratio, 0.87; P < .001), greater confidence in science (odds ratio, 0.16; P < .001), and a perceived responsibility to contribute to research (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .001)., Conclusions: Surveyed Canadians prefer that explicit permission is sought for storage and research use of NBS bloodspots. This preference was diminished when reasons supporting and opposing routine storage, and other policy options, were presented. Findings warrant consideration as NBS communities strategize to respond to shifting legislative contexts., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

This paper proposes a set of recommendations for the return of research results and incidental findings in paediatrics. The Network of Applied Genetic Medicine of Quebec spearheaded the initiative to develop the Statement of Principles on the Return of Research Results and Incidental Findings, which was the result of a consultation process with clinical and research experts in the field. To formulate the Statement of Principles, the authors (i) reviewed empirical and grey literature on the return of research results and incidental findings in Europe and Canada, (ii) conducted a qualitative study of stakeholder groups, (iii) developed, and (iv) validated the recommendations through consultations with the stakeholder groups. The Statement of Principles provides a useful disclosure tool for deciding when, and under what circumstances to return research results and incidental findings. It addresses the issue of return of results in genetic research generally, and has also specific principles for various research contexts, including paediatric research. It delineates ethical issues unique to paediatric research, and provides a framework to guide research ethics committees as well as the research community in addressing these issues.

Objectives: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) panels have expanded to include conditions for which treatment effects are less certain, creating debate about population-based screening criteria. We investigated Canadian public expectations and values regarding the types of conditions that should be included in NBS and whether parents should provide consent., Methods: Eight focus groups (FG; n = 60) included education, deliberative discussion and pre-/post-questionnaires. Data were analysed quantitatively and qualitatively., Results: Quantitatively, the majority supported NBS for serious disorders for which treatment is not available (95-98, 82%). A majority endorsed screening without explicit consent (77-88%) for treatable disorders, but 62% supported unpressured choice for screening for untreatable disorders. Qualitatively, participants valued treatment-related benefits for infants and informational benefits for families. Concern for anxiety, stigma and unwanted knowledge depended upon disease context and strength of countervailing benefits., Conclusions: Anticipated benefits of expanded infant screening were prioritized over harms, with information provision perceived as a mechanism for mitigating harms and enabling choice. However, we urge caution around the potential for public enthusiasm to foster unlimited uptake of infant screening technologies., (© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Recently, public concerns have been expressed regarding the non-consented storage and secondary research uses of residual newborn bloodspot (RBS) samples. The purpose of this paper is to examine public responses to the storage and secondary uses of RBS that can be identified through analysis of media, legal cases, and documented public engagement activities. Coverage in the examined print media confirmed the importance of RBS to journalists and those people who expressed their concerns to these journalists. Several lawsuits, brought by parents concerned about the storage of newborn bloodspots, placed the practice of storing NBS into the spotlight. This resulted in controversial debates and the mandatory destruction of millions of samples. Analysis of public engagement activities across several jurisdictions indicated that across (inter)national boundaries there are common elements to what is perceived as inappropriate governance of RBS. Public concerns were grouped into five main themes: trust, transparency, confidentiality, ownership, and stigmatization/discrimination. The results of our analysis help to make a compelling case for placing citizens at the center of the debate and developing policy about the storage and secondary uses of newborn bloodspots.

Progress in understanding childhood disease using next-generation sequencing (NGS) portends vast improvements in the nature and quality of patient care. However, ethical questions surrounding the disclosure of incidental findings (IFs) persist, as NGS and other novel genomic technologies become the preferred tool for clinical genetic testing. Thus, the need for comprehensive management plans and multidisciplinary discussion on the return of IFs in pediatric research has never been more immediate. The aim of this study is to explore the views of investigators concerning the return of IFs in the pediatric oncology research context. Our findings reveal at least four contextual themes underlying the ethics of when, and how, IFs could be disclosed to participants and their families: clinical significance of the result, respect for individual, scope of professional responsibilities, and implications for the healthcare/research system. Moreover, the study proposes two action items toward anticipatory governance of IF in genetic research with children. The need to recognize the multiplicity of contextual factors in determining IF disclosure practices, particularly as NGS increasingly becomes a centerpiece in genetic research broadly, is heightened when children are involved. Sober thought should be given to the possibility of discovering IF, and to proactive discussions about disclosure considering the realities of young participants, their families, and the investigators who recruit them.

Objectives: There have been multiple calls for explicit integration of ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) in health technology assessment (HTA) and addressing ELSI has been highlighted as key in optimizing benefits in the Omics/Personalized Medicine field. This study examines HTAs of an early clinical example of Personalized Medicine (gene expression profile tests [GEP] for breast cancer prognosis) aiming to: (i) identify ELSI; (ii) assess whether ELSIs are implicitly or explicitly addressed; and (iii) report methodology used for ELSI integration., Methods: A systematic search for HTAs (January 2004 to September 2012), followed by descriptive and qualitative content analysis., Results: Seventeen HTAs for GEP were retrieved. Only three (18%) explicitly presented ELSI, and only one reported methodology. However, all of the HTAs included implicit ELSI. Eight themes of implicit and explicit ELSI were identified. "Classical" ELSI including privacy, informed consent, and concerns about limited patient/clinician genetic literacy were always presented explicitly. Some ELSI, including the need to understand how individual patients' risk tolerances affect clinical decision-making after reception of GEP results, were presented both explicitly and implicitly in HTAs. Others, such as concern about evidentiary deficiencies for clinical utility of GEP tests, occurred only implicitly., Conclusions: Despite a wide variety of important ELSI raised, these were rarely explicitly addressed in HTAs. Explicit treatment would increase their accessibility to decision-makers, and may augment HTA efficiency maximizing their utility. This is particularly important where complex Personalized Medicine applications are rapidly expanding choices for patients, clinicians and healthcare systems.

Advancements in genomic technology and genetic research have uncovered new and unforeseen ethical and legal issues that must now be faced by clinician-researchers. However, lack of adequate ethical training places clinician-researchers in a position where they might be unable to effectively assess and resolve the issues presented to them. The literature demonstrates that ethics education is relevant and engaging where it is targeted to the level and context of the learners, and it includes real-world based cases approached in innovative ways. In order to test the feasibility of a combined approach to ethics education, a conference was held in 2012 to raise awareness and familiarize participants with the ethical and legal issues surrounding medical technology in genetics and then to have them apply this to reality-based case studies. The conference included participants from a variety of backgrounds and was divided into three sections: (i) informative presentations by experts in the field; (ii) mock REB deliberations; and (iii) a second mock-REB, conducted by a panel of experts. Feedback from participants was positive and indicated that they felt the learning objectives had been met and that the material was presented in a clear and organized fashion. Although only an example of the combined approach in a particular setting, the success of this conference suggests that combining small group learning, practical cases, role-play and interdisciplinary learning provides a positive experience and is an effective approach to ethics education.

Growing discussion on the use of whole-genome or exome sequencing (WG/ES) in newborn screening (NBS) has raised concerns regarding the generation of incidental information on millions of infants annually. It is unknown whether integrating WG/ES would alter public expectations regarding participation in universal NBS. We assessed public willingness to participate in NBS using WG/ES compared with current NBS. Our secondary objective was to assess the public's beliefs regarding a parental responsibility to participate in WG/ES-based NBS compared with current NBS. We examined self-reported attitudes regarding willingness to participate in NBS using a cross-sectional national survey of Canadian residents recruited through an internet panel, reflective of the Canadian population by age, gender and region. Our results showed that fewer respondents would be willing to participate in NBS using WG/ES compared with NBS using current technologies (80 vs 94%, P<0.001), or perceived a parental responsibility to participate in WG/ES-based NBS vs current NBS (30 vs 48%, P<0.001). Our findings suggest that integrating WG/ES into NBS might reduce participation, and challenge the moral authority that NBS programmes rely upon to ensure population benefits. These findings point to the need for caution in the untargeted use of WG/ES in public health contexts.

Purpose: To explore parental perceptions and experiences regarding the return of genomic incidental research findings in children with rare diseases., Methods: Parents of children affected by various rare diseases were invited to participate in focus groups or individual telephone interviews in Montreal and Ottawa. Fifteen participants were interviewed and transcriptions were analysed using thematic analysis., Results: Four emergent themes underscored parental enthusiasm for receiving incidental findings concerning their child's health: (1) right to information; (2) perceived benefits and risks; (3) communication practicalities: who, when, and how; and (4) service needs to promote the communication of incidental findings. Parents believed they should be made aware of all results pertaining to their child's health status, and that they are responsible for transmitting this information to their child, irrespective of disease severity. Despite potential negative consequences, respondents generally perceived a favourable risk-benefit ratio in receiving all incidental findings., Conclusions: Understanding how parents assess the risks and benefits of returning incidental findings is essential to genomic research applications in paediatric medicine. The authors believe the study findings will contribute to establishing future best practices, although further research is needed to evaluate the impact of parental decisions on themselves and their child., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Purpose: We describe parental attitudes toward the return of targeted and incidental genomic research results in the setting of high-risk pediatric cancer and inherited childhood diseases., Methods: A validated 36-item questionnaire was mailed to participants in three large-scale genome research consortia examining attitudes toward receipt of genomic research results and the influence of certainty, severity, and onset of the condition, in addition to responsibilities to extended family and provision of results even after death of the proband., Results: Of the 563 participants who were sent questionnaires, 362 (64%) responded. Most of them stated a positive right to receive results related to the target condition (97%) or to incidental findings (86%); no difference was found in results between participants with cancer and those with orphan diseases. Furthermore, 92% indicated that genomic research for childhood-onset conditions should occur. The majority wanted incidental results predicting susceptibility even to untreatable fatal conditions (83%), to multiple conditions (87%), or to those with uncertain impact (70%). Most felt sibling genomic results showing serious conditions, whether treatable (93%) or not (88%), and/or results discovered after death of the proband should be shared with family (74%)., Conclusion: Many parents of children in pediatric genomic research indicated a strong desire to receive a broader range of results than is described in consensus recommendations. Clear delineation of what will be offered should be established at the time of consent.

Inherited monogenic disease has an enormous impact on the well-being of children and their families. Over half of the children living with one of these conditions are without a molecular diagnosis because of the rarity of the disease, the marked clinical heterogeneity, and the reality that there are thousands of rare diseases for which causative mutations have yet to be identified. It is in this context that in 2010 a Canadian consortium was formed to rapidly identify mutations causing a wide spectrum of pediatric-onset rare diseases by using whole-exome sequencing. The FORGE (Finding of Rare Disease Genes) Canada Consortium brought together clinicians and scientists from 21 genetics centers and three science and technology innovation centers from across Canada. From nation-wide requests for proposals, 264 disorders were selected for study from the 371 submitted; disease-causing variants (including in 67 genes not previously associated with human disease; 41 of these have been genetically or functionally validated, and 26 are currently under study) were identified for 146 disorders over a 2-year period. Here, we present our experience with four strategies employed for gene discovery and discuss FORGE's impact in a number of realms, from clinical diagnostics to the broadening of the phenotypic spectrum of many diseases to the biological insight gained into both disease states and normal human development. Lastly, on the basis of this experience, we discuss the way forward for rare-disease genetic discovery both in Canada and internationally., (Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The availability of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is likely to change the practice of population screening programs such as newborn screening (NBS). This Commentary raises key ethical, legal, and social issues surrounding WGS in NBS and suggests a need for deliberation regarding the policy challenges of introducing sequencing in such programs. Any change in the goals of NBS programs should be discussed carefully and should represent the best interests of the child.

In this article, we explore the concept of a "right not to know" on a population rather than individual level. We argue that a population level "right not to know" is a useful concept for helping to define the appropriate boundaries of public engagement initiatives in the emerging public health genomics context., (© 2014 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.)

With the costs of genomic and genetic testing rapidly decreasing, private companies have begun to offer consumers, including minors, the opportunity to receive a genetic analysis of their DNA. The availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) will inevitably result in patients approaching their healthcare providers for interpretation of results, referrals for follow-up tests or provision of personalized medicine. As most healthcare systems require a referral for access to a specialist, the patients are likely to approach primary care providers. The issue of what the professional obligations are for the primary care physician in the case where they did not order the test is not new. The growing DTC-GT movement will add a 'new twist to an old problem.' Best practice recommendations regarding the value of DTC-GT, as well as the identification of current ethical, legal and social implications are urgently needed.

While the importance of intrafamilial communication of hereditary cancer risk has been acknowledged, the factors that promote and act as barriers to patients disclosing their information to their families are complex and emerging. This raises the question: How are patients guided in practice to contemplate intrafamilial communication? Focusing on breast cancer, we conducted an exploratory study examining current resources supporting patients and health-care professionals, and isolated the messages surrounding intrafamilial communication of cancer risk. We find the duty for health-care professionals to counsel patients regarding intrafamilial communication is acknowledged to varying degrees by multiple actors in the cancer care delivery landscape, including health-care professional associations, health service organizations, and patient groups. A range of medical, psychosocial, and other factors underlying intrafamilial communication are acknowledged in messages to patients. Patients, however, are often referred to a single group of health-care professionals to discuss their diverse and complex needs. At the same time, messages aimed at patients appear to place the emphasis on barriers that could exist for patients contemplating intrafamilial communication, while highlighting the benefits families derive from such communication. Taken together, this points to a lack of coherence within materials directed to patients and suggests the need to do coordinated research among stakeholders to address two related issues: (1) determining who are the actors best positioned to send messages surrounding intrafamilial communication to patients and (2) addressing the content of messages conveyed in patient materials.

Background: The Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) Study was established to obtain Canadian biomonitoring data for pregnant women and their infants, and to examine potential adverse health effects of prenatal exposure to priority environmental chemicals on pregnancy and infant health., Methods: Women were recruited during the first trimester from 10 sites across Canada and were followed through delivery. Questionnaires were administered during pregnancy and post-delivery to collect information on demographics, occupation, life style, medical history, environmental exposures and diet. Information on the pregnancy and the infant was abstracted from medical charts. Maternal blood, urine, hair and breast milk, as well as cord blood and infant meconium, were collected and analysed for an extensive list of environmental biomarkers and nutrients. Additional biospecimens were stored in the study's Biobank. The MIREC Research Platform encompasses the main cohort study, the Biobank and follow-up studies., Results: Of the 8716 women approached at early prenatal clinics, 5108 were eligible and 2001 agreed to participate (39%). MIREC participants tended to smoke less (5.9% vs. 10.5%), be older (mean 32.2 vs. 29.4 years) and have a higher education (62.3% vs. 35.1% with a university degree) than women giving birth in Canada., Conclusions: The MIREC Study, while smaller in number of participants than several of the international cohort studies, has one of the most comprehensive datasets on prenatal exposure to multiple environmental chemicals. The biomonitoring data and biological specimen bank will make this research platform a significant resource for examining potential adverse health effects of prenatal exposure to environmental chemicals., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Health.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the attitudes of genomics researchers in a pediatric setting in the context of regulatory guidance recommending the disclosure of clinically significant research findings., Methods: A validated 32-item questionnaire was sent to 107 researchers with two large-scale projects (the Canadian Pediatric Cancer Genome Consortium and the Finding of Rare Genes Canada Consortium). We examined researchers' attitudes toward obligations to offer genomic research results (including if the participant was deceased, a relative, or a child), influence of the certainty/severity of the condition on this obligation, and personal experiences., Results: Of the 107 researchers, 74 (69%) responded. Researchers did not feel a strong responsibility to look for meaningful incidental results in the research genomic data set (n = 27, 37%). However, once identified, they felt participants had a strong right to receive them, irrespective of being incidental (n = 50, 68%) or primary targets (n = 64, 87%). There was a high degree of support for informing siblings of genomic results (n = 46, 62%), especially for treatable conditions (n = 56, 76%). Less than half of the participants indicated that their research ethics board required an offer of results (n = 34, 46%) or provided a detailed process (n = 16, 22%)., Conclusion: Researchers strongly support the offer of targeted and incidental genomic research results to participants. Greater regulatory guidance is needed for a consistent approach.

The primary goal of breast and ovarian cancer screening is to minimize the cases of advanced disease and therefore its mortality rate. For hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, one method to reach this goal is to disseminate genetic risk information among family members. However, experience tells us that this information does not always reach family members in a timely manner, if at all. There are many moving parts to a decision to disclose genetic risk information within a family, and the lack of detail and cohesion in current guidelines do a disservice to hereditary breast cancer prevention. Utilizing legal, medical, and policy databases for literature, case law and policy documents relating to communication of genetic test results within families, as well as a consultative process with representative stakeholders, a points to consider has been developed to address a number of issues that might impact the ability and willingness of patients to inform family members of genetic risk. These include: what is "genetic information"; who is the "family"; why should patients inform their family members; and how should health professionals be involved in this process? This represents only an initial step towards fostering better communication within families. Additional research is needed to determine the best methods for encouraging this communication and motivations for disclosing or not and to promote the development of a solution, considering the complexity of human relationships and the probabilistic nature of genetic information.

Tailoring medical treatment to individual patients requires a strong foundation in research to provide the data necessary to understand the relationship between the disease, the patient, and the type of treatment advocated for. Non-therapeutic oncology clinical trials studying therapeutic resistance require the participation of patients, yet only a small percentage enroll. Treating physicians are often relied on to recruit patients, but they have a number of ethical obligations that might be perceived as barriers to recruiting. Concepts such as voluntariness of consent and conflicts of interest can have an impact on whether physicians will discuss clinical trials with their patients and how patients perceive the information. However, these ethical obligations should not be prohibitive to physician recruitment of patients - precautions can be taken to ensure that patients' consent to research participation is fully voluntary and devoid of conflict, such as the use of other members of the research team than the treating physician to discuss the trial and obtain consent, and better communication between researchers, clinicians, and patients. These can ensure that research benefits are maximized for the good of patients and society.

Personalized medicine promises that an individual's genetic information will be increasingly used to prioritize access to health care. Use of genetic information to inform medical decision making, however, raises questions as to whether such use could be inequitable. Using breast cancer genetic risk prediction models as an example, on the surface clinical use of genetic information is consistent with the tools provided by evidence-based medicine, representing a means to equitably distribute limited health-care resources. However, at present, given limitations inherent to the tools themselves, and the mechanisms surrounding their implementation, it becomes clear that reliance on an individual's genetic information as part of medical decision making could serve as a vehicle through which disparities are perpetuated under public and private health-care delivery models. The potential for inequities arising from using genetic information to determine access to health care has been rarely discussed. Yet, it raises legal and ethical questions distinct from those raised surrounding genetic discrimination in employment or access to private insurance. Given the increasing role personalized medicine is forecast to play in the provision of health care, addressing a broader view of what constitutes genetic discrimination, one that occurs along a continuum and includes inequitable access, will be needed during the implementation of new applications based on individual genetic profiles. Only by anticipating and addressing the potential for inequitable access to health care occurring from using genetic information will we move closer to realizing the goal of personalized medicine: to improve the health of individuals.

Background: Obtaining a research participant's voluntary and informed consent is the bedrock of sound ethics practice. Greater inclusion of children in research has led to questions about how paediatric consent operates in practice to accord with current and emerging legal and socio-ethical issues, norms, and requirements., Methods: Employing a qualitative thematic content analysis, we examined paediatric consent forms from major academic centres and public organisations across Canada dated from 2008-2011, which were purposively selected to reflect different types of research ethics boards, participants, and studies. The studies included biobanking, longitudinal studies, and gene-environment studies. Our purpose was to explore the following six emerging issues: (1) whether the scope of parental consent allows for a child's assent, dissent, or future consent; (2) whether the concepts of risk and benefit incorporate the child's psychological and social perspective; (3) whether a child's ability to withdraw is respected and to what extent withdrawal is permitted; (4) whether the return of research results includes individual results and/or incidental findings and the processes involved therein; (5) whether privacy and confidentiality concerns adequately address the child's perspective and whether standard data and/or sample identifiability nomenclature is used; and (6) whether retention of and access to paediatric biological samples and associated medical data are addressed., Results: The review suggests gaps and variability in the consent forms with respect to addressing each of the six issues. Many forms did not discuss the possibility of returning research results, be they individual or general/aggregate results. Forms were also divided in terms of the scope of parental consent (specific versus broad), and none discussed a process for resolving disputes that can arise when either the parents or the child wishes to withdraw from the study., Conclusions: The analysis provides valuable insight and evidence into how consent forms address current ethical issues. While we do not thoroughly explore the contexts and reasons behind consent form gaps and variability, we do advocate and formulate the development of best practices for drafting paediatric health research consent forms. This can greatly ameliorate current gaps and facilitate harmonised and yet contextualised approaches to paediatric health research ethics.

Background: Non-therapeutic trials in which terminally ill cancer patients are asked to undergo procedures such as biopsies or venipunctures for research purposes, have become increasingly important to learn more about how cancer cells work and to realize the full potential of clinical research. Considering that implementing non-therapeutic studies is not likely to result in direct benefits for the patient, some authors are concerned that involving patients in such research may be exploitive of vulnerable patients and should not occur at all, or should be greatly restricted, while some proponents doubt whether such restrictions are appropriate. Our objective was to explore clinician-researcher attitudes and concerns when recruiting patients who are in advanced stages of cancer into non-therapeutic research., Methods: We conducted a qualitative exploratory study by carrying out open-ended interviews with health professionals, including physicians, research nurses, and study coordinators. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Analysis was carried out using grounded theory., Results: The analysis of the interviews unveiled three prominent themes: 1) ethical considerations; 2) patient-centered issues; 3) health professional issues. Respondents identified ethical issues surrounding autonomy, respect for persons, beneficence, non-maleficence, discrimination, and confidentiality; bringing to light that patients contribute to science because of a sense of altruism and that they want reassurance before consenting. Several patient-centered and health professional issues are having an impact on the recruitment of patients for non-therapeutic research. Facilitators were most commonly associated with patient-centered issues enhancing communication, whereas barriers in non-therapeutic research were most often professionally based, including the doctor-patient relationship, time constraints, and a lack of education and training in research., Conclusions: This paper aims to contribute to debates on the overall challenges of recruiting patients to non-therapeutic research. This exploratory study identified general awareness of key ethical issues, as well as key facilitators and barriers to the recruitment of patients to non-therapeutic studies. Due to the important role played by clinicians and clinician-researchers in the recruitment of patients, it is essential to facilitate a greater understanding of the challenges faced; to promote effective communication; and to encourage educational research training programs.

There have been an increasing number of clinical studies investigating the relationship between interindividual genetic variability and the safety and efficacy of opioid analgesics. Despite the widespread use of opioids in pregnant and lactating women for the treatment of acute pain, few studies have investigated the interplay of genetic factors and pregnancy-related physiological alterations in relation to opioid metabolism and response. Some interesting avenues of research require further pursuit- including evidence of cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) induction during pregnancy and its effect on the generation of the active opioid metabolites morphine, oxymorphone, O-desmethyltramadol, and hydromorphone following the administration of codeine, oxycodone, tramadol, and hydrocodone respectively. Studies investigating the duration of maternal CYP2D6 induction after delivery are also needed to shed light on genotype to phenotype correlations in breastfeeding mothers using opioid analgesics in the postpartum period.

There are mounting expectations that health care will be rapidly transformed by developments in genetics. While genetic technologies bring hope for effective diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of medical conditions, challenges have also emerged as to its application. Simply put, how do we ensure that knowledge gleaned from diverse sources will be collected, consulted, analyzed appropriately, and turned into informed policy? This question is particularly relevant for a broad community of stakeholders including pediatric health care professionals and policy makers, because as stakeholders they have a voice in how the information is ultimately used. New strategies are needed to involve all users of the knowledge particularly early on in the process. A team funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research is currently focusing on this issue and is proposing a knowledge translation strategy relating genetics to pediatric health. An interdisciplinary approach characterized by consultation and collective engagement with stakeholders from an early stage and throughout the research process is essential to promote potential use and ownership of the results. Comments from users on the areas of research, sources of data, the evidence and drafts of the work in progress would increase the possibility of formulating recommendations better suited to inform decision making process in public health policy orientation. As a result, we can expect greater integration and acceptance of the recommendations, more pertinent guidelines for the physician, and maximal benefit for the patient, the ultimate consumer.

Paediatric biobanks store and organise the biological material of children. They are an invaluable resource for the study of the development, health and behaviour of children. International norms for the management of adult biobanks exist, but paediatric biobanks require distinct policies to account for the needs of children, their general incapacity, and their intellectual development throughout the life of the biobank. Because of their particular nature we revisit the issues of consent, the return of research results, and privacy, and discuss how each could be modulated in the paediatric context. We recognize that such modifications entail further financial and logistical complications but maintain that it is essential that paediatric biobanks consider these issues and adapt their biobanks management policies accordingly, rather than extrapolate the current adult-based norms and jeopardise the rights of child participants., (© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2011 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)

Objectives: Newborn screening (NBS) programs may store bloodspot samples and use them for secondary purposes. Recent public controversies and lawsuits over storage and secondary uses underscore the need to engage the public on these issues. We explored Canadian values regarding storage and use of NBS samples for various purposes and the forms of parental choice for anonymous research with NBS samples., Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods, public engagement study comprising 8 focus groups (n = 60), an educational component, deliberative discussion, and pre- and post-questionnaires assessing knowledge and values toward storage and parental choice., Results: Canadian citizens supported the storage of NBS samples for quality control, confirmatory diagnosis, and future anonymous research (>90%). There was broad support for use of NBS samples for anonymous research; however, opinions were split about the extent of parental decision-making. Support for a "routinized" approach rested on trust in authorities, lack of concern for harms, and an assertion that the population's interest took priority over the interests of individuals. Discomfort stemmed from distrust in authorities, concern for harms, and prioritizing individual interests, which supported more substantive parental choice. Consensus emerged regarding the need for greater transparency about the storage and secondary use of samples., Conclusions: Our study provides novel insights into the values that underpin citizens' acceptance and discomfort with routine storage of NBS samples for research, and supports the need to develop well-designed methods of public education and civic discourse on the risks and benefits of the retention and secondary use of NBS samples.

The return of individual research results to participants raises many socio-ethical issues and is even more challenging when the participant is a child. The objective of this article is to present an overview of the few ethical guidelines and relevant literature addressing the return of individual results in pediatric research. By reviewing policies and the literature, we present some overarching considerations and delineate contextual issues in order to propose a framework., (© 2011 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.)

The genetic testing of minors within the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing (GT) context has been given relatively little attention. The issue of testing healthy children for diseases that would only develop in adulthood raises many important ethical, legal and social issues. As genetic testing is now available outside of the traditional health care system, often without even the intermediate of a health care professional, we surveyed 37 DTC GT companies regarding their policies for testing in children. Although the response rate is relatively low (35%, 13/37), our findings reveal that a clear majority of companies do perform genetic testing in minors. As such, companies testing for adult onset diseases are acting in contradiction of established professional guidelines, which state, among others, that, for predictive genetic testing, the availability of therapeutic or preventive measures is necessary for testing to be performed in asymptomatic minors. The community of stakeholders in children's health care and genetic testing should, therefore, decide which standards need to be upheld by DTC GT companies and ensure that these are met.

Pharmacogenomics is the study of how genetic variants affect the way in which an individual or subgroup responds to drugs. This developing field aims to inform individual drug therapy and to minimize adverse drug reactions (ADRs). It also promises great benefits in the drug development process. Innovation in pharmacogenomics and its translation into clinical practice is desirable, but appropriate regulation of the safety and effectiveness of pharmacogenomics testing is necessary. This article will describe the current regulatory framework applicable to pharmacogenomic tests in Canada, the United States and Europe. In particular, it will examine the different regulatory pathways for pharmacogenomic tests marketed as test kits and for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). Recent and upcoming changes to the regulation of pharmacogenomic tests will also be discussed. For example, FDA's proposal to regulate LDTs could have a major impact on the development and availability of pharmacogenomic tests. This review will lead to an evaluation of the issues raised by the regulatory framework and the impact of regulatory changes in relation to meeting the goals of ensuring public safety and promoting the advancement of pharmacogenomics. Regulatory policies which successfully achieve the dual objectives of ensuring public safety and promoting innovation in health technology are imperative in order to reap the benefits of this emerging field.

In this brief investigation, the informational needs of research participants [n = 62; mothers who had breastfed, taken codeine, and participated in a pharmacogenetic study] were probed during a counselling session in which they received their CYP2D6 pharmacogenetic research results and overall study results. In addition to the standard information, developed by a multidisciplinary team and provided to the participants, 38% of individuals had further questions related to potential adverse effects in babies, future codeine or medication use, heredity, and consequences for policies and programmes. The diversity and complexity of the questions raised support the need to communicate the results in the context of personalized genetic counselling information sessions.

The expansion of newborn screening (NBS) has been accompanied by debate about what benefits should be achieved and the role of parental discretion in their pursuit. The opportunity to inform parents of reproductive risks is among the most valued additional benefits gained through NBS, and assumes prominence where the primary goal of identifying a treatable condition is not assured. We reviewed 53 unique guidelines addressing prenatal, preconception and newborn screening to examine: (1) how generating reproductive risk information is construed as a benefit of screening; and (2) what conditions support the realization of this benefit. Most preconception and prenatal guidelines - where generating reproductive risk information is described as a primary benefit - required that individuals be given a 'cascade of choices', ensuring that each step in the decision-making process was well informed, from deciding to pursue information about reproductive risks to deciding how to manage them. With the exception of three guidelines, NBS policy infrequently attended to the potential for reproductive benefits; further, most guidelines that acknowledged such benefits construed voluntarism narrowly, without attention to the choices attendant on receiving reproductive risk information. This review suggests that prenatal and preconception guidance identifies a coherent framework to support the pursuit of reproductive benefits through population screening programmes. Interestingly, attention to reproductive benefits is increasing among NBS guidance, yet reflection on how such benefits ought to be pursued remains limited. Traditional norms for NBS may require reconsideration where the remit of screening exceeds the primary goal of clinical benefits for infants.

More and more companies are advertising and selling genetic tests directly to consumers. Considering the ethical, legal, and psychological concerns surrounding genetic testing in minors, a study of companies' websites was performed in order to describe and analyze their policies with respect to this issue. Of the 29 companies analyzed, 13 did not provide any information about this matter, eight companies allowed genetic testing upon parental request, four companies stated that their website is not directed to children under 18 years, and four companies suggested that in order to be tested, applicants should have reached the age of legal majority. If private companies offer genetic tests which are also offered in a clinical setting, can they be expected to adhere to the existing clinical guidelines with regard to these tests? If so, a certain ambiguity exists. Many companies are emphasizing in their disclaimers that their services are not medical services and should not be used as a basis for making medical decisions. Nonetheless, it remains debatable whether genetic testing in minors would be appropriate in this context. In line with the Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, the Human Genetics Commission addressed the problem of non-consensual testing and recommended not to supply genetic testing services directly to those under the age of 16 or to those not able to make a competent decision regarding testing.

The advent of both population genomic studies and direct-to-consumer personal genetic testing raises ethical challenges for researchers and physicians alike. Quality and solidarity can now be added to traditional ethical principles, such as autonomy and privacy. There is no doubt that genetic information is going 'public'. Informatic technologies allow for greater accessibility and integration, but can researchers and physicians handle the challenges? Are ethics committees equipped to handle this shift towards greater openness and towards a conflation of research and traditional medical ethics?

What factors influence intrafamilial communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) genetic risk information? Such information can have health implications for individuals who undergo genetic testing, but it can also have implications for their blood relatives. This literature review adopts an ecological model to summarize factors at the individual, familial, and community levels, as well as cross cutting factors relating to the complexity of HBOC genetic information and responsibilities that this information can give rise to. These factors are complex and may result in conflicting senses of responsibility. Faced with the task of communicating HBOC genetic information, the response may be to attempt to balance the potential negative impact of the information on the well-being of the informee (eg, can s/he handle this information?) against the potential health benefit that the knowledge could result in. This balancing represents an effort to reconcile conflicting approaches to protecting family members, and is a moral dilemma. This review sheds light on the factors that contribute to resolve this dilemma.

Advances in human genomics are ushering in a new era of predictive, preventative and personalized approaches to medicine. However, as the integration of genomic medicine progresses, the health community has a responsibility to communicate to the public the risks and challenges of genetic information. A possible knowledge transfer framework is outlined as a means to bridge the practical uses of genetics within various ethical, social and economic contexts. Tools and resources are needed to help clinicians understand genetic risks and help them inform the public appropriately and effectively.

Pharmacogenomics, a field of study at the interface of the disciplines of genomics and pharmacology, strives to understand the interaction between genes and the response to therapeutics. Its introduction into clinical research trials and medical practice promises to optimize the effectiveness of medications, reduce the adverse effects experienced by patients, and improve the research and development of new therapeutics. However, while pharmacogenomics promises tremendous health benefits it is still crucial to critically analyze the ethical, social and legal issues surrounding these developments. First, we present the numerous potential benefits ofpharmacogenomics. Then, using a thorough review of relevant jurisprudence, policies and literature, the main ethical, social and legal issues associated with pharmacogenomics will be identified. The likely new responsibilities for health care professionals and pharmaceutical companies as a result of pharmacogenomic development will also be discussed.

Objectives and Methods: Many authors have argued that ethical, legal, and social issues ("ELSIs") should be explicitly integrated into health technology assessment (HTA), yet doing so poses challenges. This discussion may be particularly salient for technologies viewed as ethically complex, such as genetic screening. Here we provide a brief overview of contemporary discussions of the issues from the HTA literature. We then describe key existing policy evaluation frameworks in the fields of disease screening and public health genomics. Finally, we map the insights from the HTA literature to the policy evaluation frameworks, with discussion of the implications for HTA in genetic screening., Results and Conclusions: A critical discussion in the HTA literature considers the definition of ELSIs in HTA, highlighting the importance of thinking beyond ELSIs as impacts of technology. Existing HTA guidance on integrating ELSIs relates to three broad approaches: literature synthesis, involvement of experts, and consideration of stakeholder values. The thirteen key policy evaluation frameworks relating to disease screening and public health genomics identified a range of ELSIs relevant to genetic screening. Beyond straightforward impacts of screening, these ELSIs require consideration of factors such as the social and political context surrounding policy decisions. The three broad approaches to addressing ELSIs described above are apparent in the screening/genomics literatures. In integrating these findings we suggest that the method chosen for addressing ELSIs in HTA for genetic screening may determine which ELSIs are prioritized; and that an important challenge is the lack of guidance for evaluating such methods.

While newborn blood spot screening has historically been viewed as a public health success, the potential harms and benefits are more finely balanced for new conditions being considered for program expansion. We highlight complex issues that must be addressed in policy decisions, which in turn requires a consideration of many stakeholder perspectives. Using national policy documents from the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and Canada, we describe the participation of stakeholder organizations in the newborn screening policy process, how such organizations have incorporated stakeholder views into their own policy writing, and their recommendations for inclusiveness. Stakeholder participation in newborn screening decision-making is widely acknowledged as important, and many methods have been endorsed - consultation as well as direct or indirect input into policy development. Differences across organizations and jurisdictions raise questions about the most effective approaches for facilitating inclusiveness, suggesting a need for formal evaluative research.

Emerging technologies like Tandem Mass Spectrometry (TMS) enable multiple tests on a single blood sample and allow the expansion of Newborn Screening (NBS) to include various metabolic diseases. Introducing TMS for NBS raises important social and ethical questions: what are the criteria for adding disorders to screening panels? What evidence justifies expansion of screening? How can equity in NBS access and standards be ensured? How can policy standards be set, given the multiplicity of stakeholders? To address emerging issues, policy-makers, patient advocates, clinicians and researchers had a workshop during the 2005 Garrod Symposium. The participants received a summary of the discussion and understood the workshop's goal was to provide a basis for further discussion. This article contributes to this ongoing discussion. Several proposed recommendations assert the centrality of including social and ethical issues in the assessment of whether or not to introduce TMS. The article outlines five key recommendations for advancing the NBS agenda: national public health leadership; transparency; increased national consistency in NBS strategy, including minimum standards; collaboration between the federal and provincial/territorial governments and diverse stakeholders; and supporting research and/or programs based on effectiveness, which integrate ethical and social issues into assessment.

Background and Objective: In clinical settings with fixed resources allocated to predictive genetic testing for high-risk cancer predisposition genes, optimal strategies for mutation screening programmes are critically important. These depend on the mutation spectrum found in the population under consideration and the frequency of mutations detected as a function of the personal and family history of cancer, which are both affected by the presence of founder mutations and demographic characteristics of the underlying population. The results of multistep genetic testing for mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 in a large series of families with breast cancer in the French-Canadian population of Quebec, Canada are reported., Methods: A total of 256 high-risk families were ascertained from regional familial cancer clinics throughout the province of Quebec. Initially, families were tested for a panel of specific mutations known to occur in this population. Families in which no mutation was identified were then comprehensively tested. Three algorithms to predict the presence of mutations were evaluated, including the prevalence tables provided by Myriad Genetics Laboratories, the Manchester Scoring System and a logistic regression approach based on the data from this study., Results: 8 of the 15 distinct mutations found in 62 BRCA1/BRCA2-positive families had never been previously reported in this population, whereas 82% carried 1 of the 4 mutations currently observed in > or =2 families. In the subset of 191 families in which at least 1 affected individual was tested, 29% carried a mutation. Of these 27 BRCA1-positive and 29 BRCA2-positive families, 48 (86%) were found to harbour a mutation detected by the initial test. Among the remaining 143 inconclusive families, all 8 families found to have a mutation after complete sequencing had Manchester Scores > or =18. The logistic regression and Manchester Scores provided equal predictive power, and both were significantly better than the Myriad Genetics Laboratories prevalence tables (p<0.001). A threshold of Manchester Score > or =18 provided an overall sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 82%, with a positive predictive value of 66% in this population., Conclusion: In this population, a testing strategy with an initial test using a panel of reported recurrent mutations, followed by full sequencing in families with Manchester Scores > or =18, represents an efficient test in terms of overall cost and sensitivity.

Background: In Canada, there are wide variations in services for patients at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), and clinical interventions and recommendations differ between regions and/or provinces. National strategies for the clinical management of HBOC exist in the United Kingdom, France, and Australia, and clinical programs in Canada would benefit from similar national recommendations and a consistent approach to clinical management. The National Hereditary Cancer Task Force developed recommendations to address the clinical management of patients at high risk of HBOC and related cancers. These recommendations are based on current practice in high-risk cancer clinics that provide care for individuals with known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations., Methods: Canadian consensus recommendations were generated by the National Hereditary Cancer Task Force and compared mainly with two recently published guidance documents on the clinical management of women with increased risk of HBOC, one from the United Kingdom and the other from France. After review of these documents and the associated supporting scientific evidence, the Canadian consensus recommendations were modified and rated using predefined criteria., Conclusions: These recommendations pertain to (1) surveillance options including breast self-examination, clinical breast examination, breast surveillance by imaging, ovarian cancer surveillance, and surveillance for men; (2) risk-reduction strategies including prophylactic mastectomy, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy, and pharmacoprevention; and (3) the use of exogenous hormones. Regular updates should occur as new evidence becomes available.