Appropriate Safeguards and Article 89 of the GDPR: Considerations for Biobank, Databank and Genetic Research

The collection and use of biological samples and data for genetic research, or for storage in a biobank or databank for future research, impacts upon many fundamental rights, including the right to dignity, the right to private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to freedom of arts and sciences, and the right to non-discrimination. The use of genetic data and other health-related data in this context must be used in a manner that is rooted in human rights. Owing in part to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) coming into force, the right to the protection of personal data in the context of scientific research has been afforded increasing attention. The GDPR gives effect to the right to data protection, but states that this right must be balanced against other rights and interests. The GDPR applies to all personal data, with specific attention to special categories of data, that includes health and genetic data. The collection, access to, and sharing of such data must comply with the GDPR, and therefore directly impacts the use of such data in research. The GDPR does provide for several derogations and exemptions for research from many of the strict processing requirements. Such derogations are permitted only if there are appropriate safeguards in place. Article 89 states that to be appropriate, safeguards must be “in accordance” with the GDPR “for the rights and freedoms of the data subject”. In particular, those safeguards must ensure “respect for the principle of data minimisation”. Despite the importance of safeguards, the GDPR is silent as to the specific measures that may be adopted to meet these requirements. This paper considers Article 89 and explores safeguards that may be deemed appropriate in the context of biobanks, databanks, and genetic research.

Governance of Access in Biobanking: The Case of Telethon Network of Genetic Biobanks

The discussion concerning the measure of the quality of a biobank should focus not only on the number of stored samples and their quality but also on the assessment of their access arrangements and governance. This article aims at contributing to the ongoing debate on samples and data access governance in biobanking by presenting the case of the Telethon Network of Genetic Biobanks (TNGB). We attempt to contribute to the need for clear and available access criteria and harmonization in access arrangements to maximize the influence of biobanks in the progress of biomedical research. We reviewed all the sample requests submitted to the TNGB from 2008 to 2020, focusing on those rejected by the Access Committee and the reasons behind the rejections. The analysis of the reasons behind the rejected requests allowed us to analyze how those relate to the issues of scientific misconduct, prioritization, and noncompliance with the biobank's mission. We discuss those issues in light of the actions and motivations used by TNGB in the access decision-making process. Based on this analysis, we suggest that a cross-implementation of a checklist for access assessment would improve the whole access process, ensuring a more transparent and smoother governance. Finally, we conclude that the TNGB's Charter and approach toward access governance could contribute as an important reference point to deal with the issues that have emerged in the international discussion on the topic.

Building Research Support Capacity across Human Health Biobanks during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Human health biobanks are forms of research infrastructure that supply biospecimens and associated data to researchers, and therefore juxtapose the activities of clinical care and biomedical research. The discipline of biobanking has existed for over 20 years and is supported by several international professional societies and dedicated academic journals. However, despite both rising research demand for human biospecimens, and the growth of biobanking as an academic discipline, many individual biobanks continue to experience sustainability challenges. This commentary will summarize how the COVID-19 pandemic is creating new challenges and opportunities for both the health biobanking sector and the supporting discipline of biobanking. While the challenges for biobanks may be numerous and acute, there are opportunities for both individual biobanks and the discipline of biobanking to embrace change such that biobanks can continue to support and drive biomedical research. We will therefore describe numerous practical steps that individual biobanks and/or the discipline of biobanking can take to survive and possibly thrive in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pediatric biobanks and parents of disabled children associations opinions on establishing children repositories in developing countries

Pediatric biobanks are an indispensable resource for the research needed to bring advances in personalized medicine into pediatric medical care. It is unclear how or when these advances in medical care may reach children, but it is unlikely that research in adults will be adequate. We conducted the screening for a hypothetic problem in various European and American pediatric biobanks based on online surveys through e-mail distribution based on the Biobank Economic Modeling Tool (BEMT) questionnaire model. Participants in the survey had work experience in biobanking for at least 3 years or more. Contact information about the survey participants was confirmed on the social networks profiles (LinkedIn), as well as on generally available websites. First, we tried creating a model which can show the pediatric preclinical and basic clinical phase relationship and demonstrate how pediatric biobanking is linked to this process. Furthermore, we tried to look for new trends, and the final goal is to put the acquired knowledge into practice, so medical experts and patients could gain usable benefit from it. We concluded that leading positions must take into account ethical and legal aspects when considering the decision to include children in the biobank collection. However, communication with parents and children is essential. The biobank characteristics influence the biobank's motives to include children in the consent procedure. Moreover, the motives to include children influence how the children are involved in the consent procedure and the extent to which children are able to make voluntary decisions as part of the consent procedure.

Practice evaluation of biobank ethics and governance: current needs and future perspectives

BACKGROUND

Biobank research faces many ethical challenges. Ethics research aims to develop standards for governance to meet these challenges by elaborating overarching normative principles of medical ethics in the context of biobanking. Most ethical standards are widely agreed on among biobank stakeholders and entail specific governance solutions, for example, adoption of consent procedures. In order to fully meet its goal, every governance solution needs to be implemented, evaluated and, if necessary, adapted and improved in practice. This study reviews the scientific literature on biobank ethics and governance in order to identify studies that specifically focus on practice evaluation of biobank governance.

METHODS

A PubMed search was carried out. Retrieved literature was categorised and thematically clustered. All studies that focus on practice evaluation were reviewed and their objectives, results, and recommendations for practice summarised.

RESULTS

The findings show that the majority of studies on biobank ethics and governance are theoretical; only 25 out of 922 studies empirically evaluate biobank governance in practice. The majority of these (14; 59%) focused on informed consent. Six studies (24%) addressed practice evaluation of sample and data access; the rest focused on public involvement, ethics reporting and incidental findings. Other relevant governance areas such as ethics review, priority setting and sample ownership were not addressed.

CONCLUSION

In order to fulfil the ethical goals, more empirical research is needed that provides information on how governance mechanisms perform in practice and what improvements are needed.

Current practices for access, compensation, and prioritization in biobanks. Results from an interview study

Human biological materials and related data stored in biobanks are valuable resources for biomedical research. Transparent, effective, and efficient governance structures and procedures for access, compensation, and priority setting are needed, but recent debates indicate challenges in the practical application of such governance processes. This study aimed to assess the practical experiences and attitudes of biobank experts regarding the governance of biosample access, prioritization, and compensation. Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 20 biobank directors from eight countries. Respondents highlighted the need for sound governance structures in order to ensure acceptance by all stakeholders (patients/donors, researchers, research funders, public, and others). They stressed practical difficulties in trying to make best use of biomaterials. As biobanks often form part of larger academic and clinical settings, the different and sometimes conflicting interests of researchers, clinicians, patients, funders, and biobank staff currently affect the governance of access decisions. Investments such as intellectual input, financial, and human resources need to be compensated adequately. Biobanks thereby have a dual role stewarding the hosted biosamples and acting as a service provider for local researchers from universities or hospitals. In order to facilitate efficient use of human biological materials, greater harmonization of at least minimum standards for access and compensation are required at both a national and an international level.

Balancing the local and the universal in maintaining ethical access to a genomics biobank

Background

Issues of balancing data accessibility with ethical considerations and governance of a genomics research biobank, Generation Scotland, are explored within the evolving policy landscape of the past ten years. During this time data sharing and open data access have become increasingly important topics in biomedical research. Decisions around data access are influenced by local arrangements for governance and practices such as linkage to health records, and the global through policies for biobanking and the sharing of data with large-scale biomedical research data resources and consortia.

Methods

We use a literature review of policy relevant documents which apply to the conduct of biobanks in two areas: support for open access and the protection of data subjects and researchers managing a bioresource. We present examples of decision making within a biobank based upon observations of the Generation Scotland Access Committee. We reflect upon how the drive towards open access raises ethical dilemmas for established biorepositories containing data and samples from human subjects.

Results

Despite much discussion in science policy literature about standardisation, the contextual aspects of biobanking are often overlooked. Using our engagement with GS we demonstrate the importance of local arrangements in the creation of a responsive ethical approach to biorepository governance. We argue that governance decisions regarding access to the biobank are intertwined with considerations about maintenance and viability at the local level. We show that in addition to the focus upon ever more universal and standardised practices, the local expertise gained in the management of such repositories must be supported.

Conclusions

A commitment to open access in genomics research has found almost universal backing in science and health policy circles, but repositories of data and samples from human subjects may have to operate under managed access, to protect privacy, align with participant consent and ensure that the resource can be managed in a sustainable way. Data access committees need to be reflexive and flexible, to cope with changing technology and opportunities and threats from the wider data sharing environment. To understand these interactions also involves nurturing what is particular about the biobank in its local context.

Transparency of Biobank Access in Canada: An Assessment of Industry Access and the Availability of Information on Access Policies and Resulting Research

A key issue impacting public trust in biobanks is how these resources are utilized, including who is given access to biobank data and samples. To assess the conditions under which researchers are given access to Canadian biobanks, we reviewed websites and contacted Canadian biobanks to determine the availability of information on access policies and procedures; research resulting from access biobank data and samples; and conditions on private industry access to biobanks. We also conducted expert interviews with key Canadian stakeholders ( n = 11) to obtain their perspectives on biobank transparency and access policies. Among 21 Canadian biobanks, there was wide variation in the access information made publicly available, and the majority of these allowed access by industry applicants. Biobanks should be governed by the principles of transparency, accountability, and accessibility, and attention must be given to the conditions around the commercialization of biobank-based research.

Access policies in biobank research: what criteria do they include and how publicly available are they? A cross-sectional study

Access policies of biobanks specify the governance of sample and data sharing. Basic guidance on relevant access criteria exists, but so far little is known about their public availability and what criteria for access and prioritization they actually include. Access policies were gathered by hand searching the websites of biobanks identified via registries (eg, BBMRI and P3G), and by additional search strategies. Criteria for access and prioritization were synthesized by thematic analysis. Of 523 biobank websites screened, 9% included a publicly available access policy. With all applied search strategies, we finally retrieved 74 access policies. Thematic analysis resulted in 62 different access criteria in three main categories: (a) scientific quality, (b) value and (c) ethical soundness. 'Scientific quality' criteria were mentioned in 70% of all policies, 'value' criteria in 33% and 'ethical soundness' criteria in 73%. Criteria for prioritization were specified in 27% of all policies. Access policies differed broadly in number, specification and operationalization of the included access criteria. In order to make biobank research more effective, efficient and trustworthy, access policies should be more available to the public. Furthermore, access policies should aim for precise and more harmonized wording of access criteria. From a public and governance perspective, the issue of how to prioritize access to scarce samples should form part of access policies.

Sustainability in a Hospital-Based Biobank and University-Based DNA Biorepository: Strategic Roadmaps

Sustainability in the biobanking community has recently become an important and oft-discussed issue as biorepositories struggle to balance limited external funding and complex cost recovery models with high operating costs and the desire to provide the highest quality materials and services to the research community. A multi-faceted view of biobanking sustainability requires consideration of operational and social sustainability in addition to the historical focus exclusively on financial sustainability. Planning and implementing this three pillar model creates a well-rounded biorepository that meets the needs of all the major stakeholders: the funders, the patients/depositors, and the researcher recipients. Often the creation of a detailed business plan is the first step to develop goals and objectives that lead down a path towards sustainability. The definition of sustainability and the complexity of a sustainable business plan may differ for each biorepository. The DNASU Plasmid Repository at Arizona State University stores and distributes DNA plasmids to researchers worldwide, and the Biobank Core Facility at St. Joseph's Hospital and Barrow Neurological Institute consents patients and collects, stores, and distributes human tissue and blood samples. We will discuss these two biorepositories, their similar and different approaches to sustainability and business planning, their challenges in creating and implementing their sustainability plan, and their responses to some of these challenges. From these experiences, the biobanks share lessons learned about planning for sustainability that are applicable to all biorepositories.

Qualitative study on custodianship of human biological material and data stored in biobanks

BACKGROUND

Balancing the rights and obligations of custodians and applicants in relation to access to biobanks is of utmost importance to guarantee trust and confidence. This study aimed to reveal which issues divide different stakeholders in an attempt to determine the rights and/or obligations held on human biological materials (HBM) and data.

METHODS

Twenty-eight informants in the Benelux and Scandinavia were interviewed in order to capture the perspectives of experts and stakeholders in relation to the rights and obligations held by custodians and applicants with respect to access to HBM and data.

RESULTS

There was no consensus among the informants on whether the custodian of a biobank should decide upon the scientific merits and the utility of an access request. Nearly all informants agreed that a new request or an amendment to the initial request has to be submitted when an applicant wants to use leftover HBM in a new or follow-up project. Several informants felt that it might be justified to charge higher access fees to external or industrial applicants that did not contribute (directly or indirectly) to the collection of HBM and data. Most informants agreed that a custodian of a biobank could request the sharing and return of research results. It was furthermore argued that some of the benefits of research projects should be fed back into biobanks.

CONCLUSIONS

The interviews revealed a rather complex web of rights and obligations allocated to the custodian and the applicant in relation to access to HBM and data stored in biobanks. Some rights and obligations are negotiated on a case-by-case basis, while others are stipulated in access arrangements. We did find a consensus on the attribution of certain general rights to the custodians and the applicant.

Biobank Report: United Kingdom

The United Kingdom is a leader in genomics research, and the presence of numerous types of biobanks and the linking of health data and research within the UK evidences the importance of biobank-based research in the UK. There is no biobank-specific law in the UK and research on biobank materials is governed by a confusing set of statutory law, common law, regulations, and guidance documents. Several layers of applicable law, from European to local, further complicate an understanding of privacy protections. Finally, biobanks frequently contain data in addition to the samples; the legal framework in the UK generally differentiates between data and samples and the form of the data affects the applicability of legal provisions. Biobanks must be licensed by the Human Tissue Authority; certain projects must be reviewed by Research Ethics Committees, and all projects are encouraged to be reviewed by them. Data Access Committees in biobanks are also common in the UK. While this confusing array of legal provisions leaves privacy protections in biobanking somewhat unclear, changes at the EU level may contribute to harmonization of approaches to privacy.

From the principles of genomic data sharing to the practices of data access committees

Sharing genomic research data through controlled-access databases has increased in recent years. Policymakers and funding organizations endorse genomic data sharing in order to optimize the use of public funds and to increase the statistical power of databases. Well-established data access arrangements and data access committees (DACs)-responsible for reviewing and managing requests for access to genomic databases-are therefore central for implementing the policies and principles of data sharing. This article aims to investigate the functionality of DACs through the perspective of existing practices.

Biobanks in Oral Health: Promises and Implications of Post-Neoliberal Science and Innovation

While biobanks are established explicitly as scientific infrastructures, they are de facto political-economic ones too. Many biobanks, particularly population-based biobanks, are framed under the rubric of the bio-economy as national political-economic assets that benefit domestic business, while national populations are framed as a natural resource whose genomics, proteomics, and related biological material and national health data can be exploited. We outline how many biobanks epitomize this 'neoliberal' form of science and innovation in which research is driven by market priorities (e.g., profit, shareholder value) underpinned by state or government policies. As both scientific and political-economic infrastructures, biobanks end up entangled in an array of problems associated with market-driven science and innovation. These include: profit trumping other considerations; rentiership trumping entrepreneurship; and applied research trumping basic research. As a result, there has been a push behind new forms of 'post-neoliberal' science and innovation strategies based on principles of openness and collaboration, especially in relation to biobanks. The proliferation of biobanks and the putative transition in both scientific practice and political economy from neoliberalism to post-neoliberalism demands fresh social scientific analyses, particularly as biobanks become further established in fields such as oral health and personalized dentistry. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first analysis of biobanks with a view to what we can anticipate from biobanks and distributed post-genomics global science in the current era of oral health biomarkers.

Access to biobanks: harmonization across biobank initiatives

PURPOSE

The current study investigates whether access arrangements relevant for biobanking contain clear information on key access conditions. It furthermore assesses the extent to which these access conditions are harmonized across biobank initiatives.

METHODS

A comparative analysis was conducted of access arrangements developed by 26 organizations, 36 biobank networks, and 20 biobanks worldwide.

RESULTS

The study demonstrates a lack of clear information on 21 key access conditions relevant for biobanking. Furthermore, it confirms that the harmonization across biobank initiatives is limited.

CONCLUSION

Many biobank initiatives need to be more transparent on how they apply the studied access conditions.

‘Biohoarding’: treasures not seen, stories not told

This article raises the concern that biobanks are failing to realize the expected research and health service outcomes. Rather than biobanking, we have been engaging in ‘biohoarding’, where building a quantifiable collection of tissue samples is the primary basis of the bio-resource. The root cause of ‘biohoarding’ is an ideological and motivational confusion as to the purpose for collecting the tissue in the first place. We have lost sight of the knowledge gain that biobanks should generate. The obligation to prevent ‘biohoarding’ lies not with researchers, funders or managers but with policy makers.

A human rights approach to an international code of conduct for genomic and clinical data sharing

Fostering data sharing is a scientific and ethical imperative. Health gains can be achieved more comprehensively and quickly by combining large, information-rich datasets from across conventionally siloed disciplines and geographic areas. While collaboration for data sharing is increasingly embraced by policymakers and the international biomedical community, we lack a common ethical and legal framework to connect regulators, funders, consortia, and research projects so as to facilitate genomic and clinical data linkage, global science collaboration, and responsible research conduct. Governance tools can be used to responsibly steer the sharing of data for proper stewardship of research discovery, genomics research resources, and their clinical applications. In this article, we propose that an international code of conduct be designed to enable global genomic and clinical data sharing for biomedical research. To give this proposed code universal application and accountability, however, we propose to position it within a human rights framework. This proposition is not without precedent: international treaties have long recognized that everyone has a right to the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, and a right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from scientific productions. It is time to apply these twin rights to internationally collaborative genomic and clinical data sharing.

P(3)G - 10 years of toolbuilding: From the population biobank to the clinic

Over the past ten years, the Public Population Project in Genomics and Society ("P(3)G") has grown as a consortium. It has expanded its range of services and resources to adapt to the ever-evolving needs of the research community. From its outset - when P(3)G first tackled the building of biobanks as resources as well as data cataloguing and harmonization for data integration - to its new mission and vision, it has continually developed the tools for the conceptualization and design of population biobanks from their inception to their use to their closure. In so doing, P(3)G has become key in fostering research infrastructures to facilitate transition to the clinic. The consortium has become a crucial stakeholder in the international scientific, ethical, legal, and social research communities.

Data sharing policy design for consortia: challenges for sustainability

The field of human genomics has led advances in the sharing of data with a view to facilitating translation of research into innovations for human health. This change in scientific practice has been implemented through new policy developed by many principal investigators, project managers and funders, which has ultimately led to new forms of practice and innovative governance models for data sharing. Here, we examine the development of the governance of data sharing in genomics, and explore some of the key challenges associated with the design and implementation of these policies. We examine how the incremental nature of policy design, the perennial problem of consent, the gridlock caused by multiple and overlapping access systems, the administrative burden and the problems with incentives and acknowledgment all have an impact on the potential for data sharing to be maximized. We conclude by proposing ways in which the scientific community can address these problems, to improve the sustainability of data sharing into the future.

Cohort profile of the CARTaGENE study: Quebec's population-based biobank for public health and personalized genomics

The CARTaGENE (CaG) study is both a population-based biobank and the largest ongoing prospective health study of men and women in Quebec. In population-based cohorts, participants are not recruited for a particular disease but represent a random selection among the population, minimizing the need to correct for bias in measured phenotypes. CaG targeted the segment of the population that is most at risk of developing chronic disorders, that is 40-69 years of age, from four metropolitan areas in Quebec. Over 20,000 participants consented to visiting 1 of 12 assessment sites where detailed health and socio-demographic information, physiological measures and biological samples (blood, serum and urine) were captured for a total of 650 variables. Significant correlations of diseases and chronic conditions are observed across these regions, implicating complex interactions, some of which we describe for major chronic conditions. The CaG study is one of the few population-based cohorts in the world where blood is stored not only for DNA and protein based science but also for gene expression analyses, opening the door for multiple systems genomics approaches that identify genetic and environmental factors associated with disease-related quantitative traits. Interested researchers are encouraged to submit project proposals on the study website (www.cartagene.qc.ca).

From banking to international governance: fostering innovation in stem cell research

Stem cell banks are increasingly recognized as an essential resource of biological materials for both basic and translational stem cell research. By providing transnational access to quality controlled and ethically sourced stem cell lines, stem cell banks seek to foster international collaboration and innovation. However, given that national stem cell banks operate under different policy, regulatory and commercial frameworks, the transnational sharing of stem cell materials and data can be complicating. This paper will provide an overview of the most pressing challenges regarding the governance of stem cell banks, and the difficulties in designing regulatory and commercial frameworks that foster stem cell research. Moreover, the paper will shed light on the numerous international initiatives that have arisen to help harmonize and standardize stem cell banking and research processes to overcome such challenges.

Genomic databases access agreements: legal validity and possible sanctions

Large-scale, public genomic databases have greatly improved the capacity of researchers to do genomic research. In order to ensure that the scientific community uses data from these public resources properly, data access agreements have been developed to complement already existing legal and ethical norms. Sanctions to address cases of data misuse constitute an essential part of this compliance framework meant to protect stakeholders in genomic research. Yet very little research and community debate has been done on this most important topic. This paper presents a review of different sanctions that could be invoked in cases of non-compliance from data users. They have been identified through comprehensive research and analysis of over 450 documents (journal articles, policy, guidelines, access policies, etc.) related to this topic. Given the considerable impact on users of even the milder sanctions considered in our paper, it is essential that stakeholders strive to achieve the highest degree of standardization and transparency when designing controlled-access agreements. It is only fair, after all, that users be able to expect that the border between acceptable and unacceptable conduct is clearly delineated and predictable in controlled-access policies. This suggests the importance for researchers to undertake additional empirical studies on the clarity and accessibility of existing database access agreements and related policies in the near future.