Search

By disrupting normal gut microbiota, antibiotic therapies pose a major risk to the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), a debilitating and potentially fatal intestinal infection. Consequently, there is a pressing need for the development of an effective, novel, nonantibiotic treatment. One such treatment is fecal microbiota therapy (FMT), which restores gut microbiota in CDI patients and has gained popularity in recent years due to its high efficacy rate. Health Canada has recently proposed to regulate FMT as a 'biological drug' following the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approach. Moreover, as an interim policy, Health Canada proposed to exercise a risk-based interpretation regarding the clinical trial requirements for FMT used in treating CDI, limited to patients unresponsive to conventional therapies. This article first discusses important considerations for an alternative classification of FMT and stresses the need to develop a policy dependent upon scientific developments in the field, away from a one-size-fits-all approach. Second, it briefly explores some concerns related to the recourse to this provisional interpretation to guide the use of FMT in the treatment of patients with CDI unresponsive to conventional therapies subject to Health Canada's recent policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a right to privacy in relation to Canadian paediatric biobanks, and it mentions the legal efforts to control access to and the use of personal information. Privacy legislation and policies are addressed, along with legislative reform and the Supreme Court of Canada's definition of information privacy. Public trust and the legal aspects of third parties are examined, along with the use and transfer of a child's data and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers an overview on the regulatory framework for pharmacogenomic tests in Canada, the U.S., and Europe. It examines the different regulatory pathways for pharmacogenomic tests commercialized as test kits and laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). It evaluates the issues related to the regulatory framework and its impact in relation to meeting the goals of promoting the advancement of pharmacogenomics and ensuring public safety.

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.Journal of Public Health Policy (2008) 29, 121–142. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jphp.3200161 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights the role of the Canadian Institute of Child Health (CICH) in the promotion of family-centered care of Canadian children. Goals of CICH; Initiatives undertaken by CICH since its inception in 1977 to foster family centered care in both obstetric and pediatric settings.

Background: The objective of this national survey was to describe the routine use of procedures and technologies in Canadian hospitals providing maternity care, and to determine the extent to which current use was consistent with the existing evidence and recommended guidelines for maternal and newborn care. Methods: Representatives of 572 hospitals providing maternity care across Canada were sent questionnaires in the spring and summer of 1993; 523 (91.4%) responded. The primary outcome measures consisted of the self-reported use of obstetric procedures and technologies (perineal shaves, enemas/suppositories, intravenous infusions, initial and continuous electronic fetal heart monitoring, episiotomy rates). Hospitals were grouped according to location, size (number of live births per year), and university affiliation status. Results: The hospitals in the Prairie provinces, in Quebec, and in the Atlantic provinces were significantly less likely than those in Ontario to restrict their use of perineal shaves and enemas to women on admission in labor. Small hospitals were significantly more likely than large hospitals (> 1000 live births) to restrict their use of intravenous infusions, and initial and continuous electronic fetal monitoring. The university-affiliated and nonteaching hospitals were significantly less likely than the university teaching hospitals to have episiotomy rates of less than 40 percent for primiparous women. Small hospitals were more likely than large hospitals to report episiotomy rates of less than 20 percent for multiparous women. Conclusions: Considerable variations occur in the routine use of obstetric procedures and technologies in Canadian hospitals providing maternity care, according to hospital location, size, and university affiliation status. Despite the existing evidence suggesting that the routine use of these practices and procedures is both unnecessary and potentially harmful, a significant number of Canadian hospitals... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the expansion of newborn screening in pursuit of the reproductive benefits in the U.S., Denmark, and Canada. Reproductive benefit has been considered secondary to identifying treatable condition in newborn screening within the consent or mandatory systems to receive information. Moreover, the author argues that pursuing health benefit through newborn screening program is not appropriate and may be best achieved through traditional antenatal screening programs.

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 &y& Elsevier]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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: 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.

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.

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.

Today it is common to conduct research in collaboration with colleagues from different disciplines and institutions. The INterdisciplinary HEalth Research International Team on BReast CAncer susceptibility (INHERIT BRCAs), involves Canadian and international experts from diverse fields working with health service providers, patients and collaborators from the World Health Organization and other European networks. Evidence-based information and knowledge transfer drive our efforts to advance genomic research to understand the genetic basis of cancer susceptibility and treatment response. Several goals reveal the interdisciplinary team approach: (a) to estimate the prevalence and penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and their deleterious impact upon different populations; (b) to pinpoint novel breast cancer susceptibility loci; (c) to assess the efficacy of clinical interventions; (d) to address changes in quality of life and health-related behaviour from the decision to undergo genetics testing and during follow-up; (e) to evaluate legal, social and ethical implications; and, finally; (f) to promote professional and public education by facilitating the transfer of research findings to clinical practice and informing policy makers. The lessons learned by the INHERIT research team and future challenges are presented.

Recent changes to the legal and ethical criteria that govern the inclusion of children and incompetent adults in genetic research are likely to lead to advances in research, but might leave the rights of the participants in this research in need of additional safeguards. Here, we discuss why this might be and propose policy considerations that could help to protect the rights of these particularly vulnerable groups of research participants.

Health care providers and families with children who participate in genetic research or who need specialized genetic services, including genetic testing, will encounter not only medical but difficult social, ethical, and legal questions surrounding pediatric genetic neurology. Children are often at the center of much of the genetic revolution and their unique needs raise special concerns about the risks and benefits associated with genetic research, particularly the issues of consent, the use of genetic databases, and gene therapy. Moreover, genetic research and testing raise important psychosocial risks. In this article we discuss some of the benefits and consequences of genetic technologies for children in relation to national and international guidelines. In particular, physicians, policy-makers, and families should be knowledgeable about the guidelines and have a good understanding of the psychosocial and ethical issues associated with genetics in pediatric neurology.