Managing re-identification risks while providing access to the All of Us research program

Can Open Science Advance Health Justice? Genomic Research Dissemination in the Evolving Data-Sharing Landscape

Scientific data-sharing and open science initiatives are increasingly important mechanisms for advancing the impact of genomic research. These mechanisms are being implemented as growing attention is paid to the need to improve the inclusion of research participants from marginalized and underrepresented groups. Together, these efforts aim to promote equitable advancements in genomic medicine. However, if not guided by community-informed protections, these efforts may harm the very participants and communities they aim to benefit. This essay examines potential benefits and harms of open science and explores how to advance a more just vision of open science in genomics. Drawing on relational ethics frameworks, we argue that researchers should consider their obligations to participants as well as the broader communities that are impacted by their research. We propose eight strategies to provide a foundation of practical steps for researchers to reduce the possibility of harms stemming from open science and to work toward genomic justice.

Evaluating site-of-care-related racial disparities in kidney graft failure using a novel federated learning framework

OBJECTIVES

Racial disparities in kidney transplant access and posttransplant outcomes exist between non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients in the United States, with the site of care being a key contributor. Using multi-site data to examine the effect of site of care on racial disparities, the key challenge is the dilemma in sharing patient-level data due to regulations for protecting patients' privacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed a federated learning framework, named dGEM-disparity (decentralized algorithm for Generalized linear mixed Effect Model for disparity quantification). Consisting of 2 modules, dGEM-disparity first provides accurately estimated common effects and calibrated hospital-specific effects by requiring only aggregated data from each center and then adopts a counterfactual modeling approach to assess whether the graft failure rates differ if NHB patients had been admitted at transplant centers in the same distribution as NHW patients were admitted.

RESULTS

Utilizing United States Renal Data System data from 39 043 adult patients across 73 transplant centers over 10 years, we found that if NHB patients had followed the distribution of NHW patients in admissions, there would be 38 fewer deaths or graft failures per 10 000 NHB patients (95% CI, 35-40) within 1 year of receiving a kidney transplant on average.

DISCUSSION

The proposed framework facilitates efficient collaborations in clinical research networks. Additionally, the framework, by using counterfactual modeling to calculate the event rate, allows us to investigate contributions to racial disparities that may occur at the level of site of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our framework is broadly applicable to other decentralized datasets and disparities research related to differential access to care. Ultimately, our proposed framework will advance equity in human health by identifying and addressing hospital-level racial disparities.

Protecting Privacy of Pregnant and LGBTQ+ Research Participants

This Viewpoint summarizes existing federal regulations aimed at protecting research data, describes the challenges of enforcing these regulations, and discusses how evolving privacy technologies could be used to reduce health disparities and advance health equity among pregnant and LGBTQ+ research participants.

The Costs of Anonymization: Case Study Using Clinical Data

BACKGROUND

Sharing data from clinical studies can accelerate scientific progress, improve transparency, and increase the potential for innovation and collaboration. However, privacy concerns remain a barrier to data sharing. Certain concerns, such as reidentification risk, can be addressed through the application of anonymization algorithms, whereby data are altered so that it is no longer reasonably related to a person. Yet, such alterations have the potential to influence the data set's statistical properties, such that the privacy-utility trade-off must be considered. This has been studied in theory, but evidence based on real-world individual-level clinical data is rare, and anonymization has not broadly been adopted in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of anonymization in the real world by comprehensively evaluating the privacy-utility trade-off of differently anonymized data using data and scientific results from the German Chronic Kidney Disease (GCKD) study.

METHODS

The GCKD data set extracted for this study consists of 5217 records and 70 variables. A 2-step procedure was followed to determine which variables constituted reidentification risks. To capture a large portion of the risk-utility space, we decided on risk thresholds ranging from 0.02 to 1. The data were then transformed via generalization and suppression, and the anonymization process was varied using a generic and a use case-specific configuration. To assess the utility of the anonymized GCKD data, general-purpose metrics (ie, data granularity and entropy), as well as use case-specific metrics (ie, reproducibility), were applied. Reproducibility was assessed by measuring the overlap of the 95% CI lengths between anonymized and original results.

RESULTS

Reproducibility measured by 95% CI overlap was higher than utility obtained from general-purpose metrics. For example, granularity varied between 68.2% and 87.6%, and entropy varied between 25.5% and 46.2%, whereas the average 95% CI overlap was above 90% for all risk thresholds applied. A nonoverlapping 95% CI was detected in 6 estimates across all analyses, but the overwhelming majority of estimates exhibited an overlap over 50%. The use case-specific configuration outperformed the generic one in terms of actual utility (ie, reproducibility) at the same level of privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results illustrate the challenges that anonymization faces when aiming to support multiple likely and possibly competing uses, while use case-specific anonymization can provide greater utility. This aspect should be taken into account when evaluating the associated costs of anonymized data and attempting to maintain sufficiently high levels of privacy for anonymized data.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00003971; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00003971.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1093/ndt/gfr456.