Samples and data accessibility in research biobanks: an explorative survey

Multiomics and tumor banking: comprehensive plaforms- integrating cancer diversity, biomarker discovery and personalised cancer care in India

Biobanks are innovative biomedical research infrastructures that play a crucial role in advancing cancer research by supporting investigations into the etiology, progression, and therapeutic interventions of the disease. Biobanks have significantly contributed to personalized medicine by providing high-quality bio specimen resources and expertise in tissue handling, essential for understanding the interplay of genetic, ecological, and lifestyle factors on cancer biology, human health, and mortality. By linking bio specimens with clinical, pathological, and epidemiological data, biobanks are central in the discovery and development of cancer therapeutics through biomarkers. In this review, the importance of managing biobanks as integral parts of data generation and analytics continuum driving precision medicine is pointed out. The advent of multi-OMICS analytics, combined with artificial intelligence, systems biology, and deep machine learning, has elevated the importance of bio banking human bio specimens as not only a biological resource but also an informatics asset. Here, we examine the impact of bio banking in facilitating translational, bench-to-bedside cancer research, with a focus on multi-OMICS data-driven biomarker discovery and precision oncology. In addition, we discuss one of the major innovations in biobank management: the hub-and-spoke model. This centralized system leverages core expertise and resources while collecting bio specimens from diverse geographic regions, thereby capturing the heterogeneity of cancer biology. The hub-and-spoke approach is particularly advantageous for countries like India, characterized by vast geographic and demographic diversity. It ensures complete coverage of the different types of cancers, disease stages, and population groups in addressing the complexity and diversity of cancer biology.

Biobank Digitalization: From Data Acquisition to Efficient Use

Biobanks are involved in a broad range of studies, including both basic and clinical research, so their functions and roles are evolving. Digital biobanks have emerged due to digitalization in this field; however, it also entails an increasing number of ethical and legal issues, in particular those related to the protection of donor data and potential commercial applications. The development of biobanks and the size of stored datasets lay the groundwork for proceeding to digital biobanks that intensely employ artificial intelligence tools. Digital biobanks can simplify the search for and access to biological specimens, thus contributing to the conduction of research and creating new collaborations. They are becoming an increasingly important tool for personalized medicine and an individualized approach to disease treatment, contributing to the elaboration of more accurate diagnostic methods and the development of innovative therapeutic strategies.

Imaging biobanks: operational limits, medical-legal and ethical reflections

The extraordinary growth of health technologies has determined an increasing interest in biobanks that represent a unique wealth for research, experimentation, and validation of new therapies. "Human" biobanks are repositories of various types of human biological samples. Through years the paradigm has shifted from spontaneous collections of biological material all over the world to institutional, organized, and well-structured forms. Imaging biobanks represent a novel field and are defined by European Society of Radiology as: "organized databases of medical images, and associated imaging biomarkers shared among multiple researchers, linked to other biorepositories". Modern radiology and nuclear medicine can provide multiple imaging biomarkers, that express the phenotype related to certain diseases, especially in oncology. Imaging biobanks, not a mere catalogue of bioimages associated to clinical data, involve advanced computer technologies to implement the emergent field of radiomics and radiogenomics. Since Europe hosts most of the biobanks, juridical and ethical framework, with a specific referral to Italy, is analyzed. Linking imaging biobanks to traditional ones appears to be a crucial step that needs to be driven by medical imaging community under clear juridical and ethical guidelines.

Scar Management and Dyschromia: A Summary Report from the 2021 American Burn Association State of the Science Meeting

Burn scars, and in particular, hypertrophic scars, are a challenging yet common outcome for survivors of burn injuries. In 2021, the American Burn Association brought together experts in burn care and research to discuss critical topics related to burns, including burn scars, at its State of the Science conference. Clinicians and researchers with burn scar expertise, as well as burn patients, industry representatives, and other interested stakeholders met to discuss issues related to burn scars and discuss priorities for future burn scar research. The various preventative strategies and treatment modalities currently utilized for burn scars were discussed, including relatively noninvasive therapies such as massage, compression, and silicone sheeting, as well as medical interventions such as corticosteroid injection and laser therapies. A common theme that emerged is that the efficacy of current therapies for specific patient populations is not clear, and further research is needed to improve upon these treatments and develop more effective strategies to suppress scar formation. This will necessitate quantitative analyses of outcomes and would benefit from creation of scar biobanks and shared data resources. In addition, outcomes of importance to patients, such as scar dyschromia, must be given greater attention by clinicians and researchers to improve overall quality of life in burn survivors. Herein we summarize the main topics of discussion from this meeting and offer recommendations for areas where further research and development are needed.

Biobank Personnel - The Key to its Success

Resources from biobanks and biorepositories, such as human samples, are of increasing interest to specialists in various fields. However, whilst biobanks provide a crucial service, their efficient and effective management can prove challenging. When establishing a biobank many factors should be considered, such as the need for appropriate infrastructure, equipment, financial support, and highly specialised and suitably qualified personnel. The number and qualifications of the necessary personnel depend both on the biobank's size and type - i.e. a biobank that is large and diversified in terms of the stored material should be organised differently to a small biorepository. The core of the biobank should be composed of highly trained personnel that closely co-operate with the general and quality control manager. Due to the large amount of data related to the samples, an IT specialist might be needed. In the case of large population biobanks, personnel responsible for patient recruitment, documentation handling, sample collection and distribution to the biobank would be necessary. Furthermore, staff responsible for the infrastructure are also highly important, as they are the first responders to failures that may be critical for the biobank functioning. Depending on the type and size of the biobank/biorepository, some responsibilities and tasks could potentially be combined. Nevertheless, highly trained personnel with clear and precisely defined duties are the key to the proper functioning of a biobank.

Sharing, reuse, and storage of biosamples among biomedical researchers in Jordan: Practice and concerns

BACKGROUND

Sharing and reuse biosamples can facilitate biomedical research. Little is known about researchers' perception and practice about sharing, reusing, and storing biosamples in Jordan. Therefore, the current study aimed to evaluate the practices of biomedical researchers in Jordan regarding biosamples management.

METHODS

The study was cross-sectional and involved biomedical researchers from different parts of Jordan. A questionnaire was designed to achieve the aim of this study. The questionnaire was web-based and distributed via e-mails using Google forms.

RESULTS

Opinions of Jordanian biomedical researchers from different academic ranks and institutional backgrounds were measured and recorded anonymously. The majority of the sample was males (57.9%), from public universities (64.3%), and (64.6%) were from health-related fields. About 82.9% of participants stored biosamples using codes, whereas the rest used the subject's name. Sharing of biosamples was commonly practiced by 61.7% of Jordanian researchers locally, while 47.2% of the Jordanian researchers shared biosamples overseas. The reuse of biosamples in other projects was reported to be 55.4%. The majority explained the possibility of reusing and sharing biosamples in the consent form (range: 53-58%). Sharing and reusing biosamples were associated with gender, the number of publications in peer-reviewed international journals, and academic rank (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Sharing and reusing biosamples are common among Jordanian biomedical researchers. Therefore, ethically grounded biosamples sharing and reuse standards are essential for protecting human subjects' rights and privacy in Jordan.

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.

Biobank as a key component of supporting research in phthisiology and infectious diseases

Conducting fundamental and clinical research in the field of tuberculosis is an important step towards reducing related morbidity and mortality, but access to a sufficient number of high-quality samples required for research is an unsolved problem in Russia. This review is devoted to biobanking as a key component of modern research in personalized medicine, as well as to the status and prospects for developing this area in phthisiology and infectious diseases combined with tuberculosis.

What Do Biomedical Researchers Want from Biobanks? Results of an Online Survey

Aims: The purpose of biobanking is to provide biospecimens and associated data to researchers, yet the perspectives of biobank research users have been under-investigated. This study aimed to ascertain biobank research users' needs and opinions about biobanking services. Methods: An online survey was developed, which requested information about researcher demographics, localities of biobanks accessed, methods of sourcing biospecimens, and opinions on topics including but not limited to, application processes, data availability, access fees, and return of research results. There were 27 multiple choice/check box questions, 4 questions with a 10-point Likert scale, and 8 questions with provision for further comment. A web link for the survey was distributed to researchers in late 2019/early 2020 in four Australian states: New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia. Results: Respondents were generally satisfied with biobank application processes and the fit for purpose of received biospecimens/data. Nonetheless, most researchers (n = 61/99, 62%) reported creating their own collections owing to gaps in sample availability and a perceived increase in efficiency. Most accessed biobanks (n = 58/74, 78%) were in close proximity (local or intrastate) to the researcher. Most researchers had limited the scope of their research owing to difficulty of obtaining biospecimens (n = 55/86, 64%) and/or data (n = 52/85, 60%), with the top three responses for additional types of data required being "more long term follow up data," "more clinical data," and "more linked government data." The top influence to use a particular biobank was cost, and the most frequently suggested improvement was reduced direct "cost of obtaining biospecimens." Conclusion: Biobanks that do not meet the needs of their end-users are unlikely to be optimally utilized or sustainable. This survey provides valuable insights to guide biobanks and other stakeholders, such as developing marketing and client engagement plans to encourage local research users and discouraging the creation of unnecessary new collections.

Recommendations for a Dutch Sustainable Biobanking Environment

Biobanks and their collections are considered essential for contemporary biomedical research and a critical resource toward personalized medicine. However, they need to operate in a sustainable manner to prevent research waste and maximize impact. Sustainability is the capacity of a biobank to remain operative, effective, and competitive over its expected lifetime. This remains a challenge given a biobank's position at the interplay of ethical, societal, scientific, and commercial values and the difficulties in finding continuous funding. In the end, biobanks are responsible for their own sustainability. Still, biobanks also depend on their surrounding environment, which contains overarching legislative, policy, financial, and other factors that can either impede or promote sustainability. The Biobanking and Biomolecular Research Infrastructure for The Netherlands (BBMRI.nl) has worked on improving the national environment for sustainable biobanking. In this article, we present the final outcomes of this BBMRI.nl project. First, we summarize the current overarching challenges of the Dutch biobanking landscape. These challenges were gathered during workshops and focus groups with Dutch biobanks and their users, for which the full results are described in separate reports. The main overarching challenges relate to sample and data quality, funding, use and reuse, findability and accessibility, and the general image of biobanks. Second, we propose a package of recommendations—across nine themes—toward creating overarching conditions that stimulate and enable sustainable biobanking. These recommendations serve as a guideline for the Dutch biobanking community and their stakeholders to jointly work toward practical implementation and a better biobanking environment. There are undoubtedly parallels between the Dutch situation and the challenges found in other countries. We hope that sharing our project's approach, outcomes, and recommendations will support other countries in their efforts toward sustainable biobanking.

Biobanks-A Platform for Scientific and Biomedical Research

The development of biomedical science requires the creation of biological material collections that allow for the search and discovery of biomarkers for pathological conditions, the identification of new therapeutic targets, and the validation of these findings in samples from patients and healthy people. Over the past decades, the importance and need for biobanks have increased considerably. Large national and international biorepositories have replaced small collections of biological samples. The aim of this work is to provide a basic understanding of biobanks and an overview of how biobanks have become essential structures in modern biomedical research.

Biobanking in Molecular Biomarker Research for the Early Detection of Cancer

Although population-wide screening programs for several cancer types have been implemented in multiple countries, screening procedures are invasive, time-consuming and often perceived as a burden for patients. Molecular biomarkers measurable in non-invasively collected samples (liquid biopsies) could facilitate screening, as they could have incremental value on early diagnosis of cancer, but could also predict prognosis or monitor treatment response. Although the shift towards biomarkers from liquid biopsies for early cancer detection was initiated some time ago, there are many challenges that hamper the development of such biomarkers. One of these challenges is large-scale validation that requires large prospectively collected biobanks with liquid biopsies. Establishing those biobanks involves several considerations, such as standardization of sample collection, processing and storage within and between biobanks. In this perspective, we will elaborate on several issues that need to be contemplated in biobanking, both in general and for certain specimen types specifically, to be able to facilitate biomarker validation for early detection of cancer.

Legal and ethical framework for global health information and biospecimen exchange - an international perspective

Background

The progress of electronic health technologies and biobanks holds enormous promise for efficient research. Evidence shows that studies based on sharing and secondary use of data/samples have the potential to significantly advance medical knowledge. However, sharing of such resources for international collaboration is hampered by the lack of clarity about ethical and legal requirements for transfer of data and samples across international borders.

Main text

Here, the International Clinical Trial Center Network (ICN) reports the legal and ethical requirements governing data and sample exchange (DSE) across four continents. The most recurring requirement is ethical approval, whereas only in specific conditions approval of national health authorities is required. Informed consent is not required in all sharing situations. However, waiver of informed consent is only allowed in certain countries/regions and under certain circumstances. The current legal and ethical landscape appears to be very complex and under constant evolution. Regulations differ between countries/regions and are often incomplete, leading to uncertainty.

Conclusion

With this work, ICN illuminates the unmet need for a single international collaborative framework to facilitate DSE. Harmonising requirements for global DSE will reduce inefficiency and waste in research. There are many challenges to realising this ambitious vision, including inconsistent terminology and definitions, and heterogeneous and dynamic legal constraints. Here, we identify areas of agreement and significant difference as a necessary first step towards facilitating international collaboration. We propose the establishment of a working group to continue the comparison across jurisdictions, create a standardised glossary and define a set of basic principles and fundamental requirements for DSE.

Enriching Personalized Endometrial Cancer Research with the Harmonization of Biobanking Standards

Endometrial cancer is the commonest gynecological cancer, with an incidence predicted to escalate by a further 50-100% before 2025, due to the rapid rise in risk factors such as obesity and increased life expectancy. Endometrial cancer associated mortality is also rising, depicting the need for translatable research to improve our understanding of the disease. Rapid translation of scientific discoveries will facilitate the development of new diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic strategies. Biobanks play a vital role in providing biospecimens with accompanying clinical data for personalized translational research. Wide variation in collection, and pre-analytic variations in processing and storage of bio-specimens result in divergent and irreproducible data from multiple studies that are unsuitable for collation to formulate robust conclusions. Harmonization of biobanking standards is thus vital, in facilitating international multi-center collaborative studies with valuable outcomes to improve personalized treatments. This review will detail the pitfalls in the biobanking of biosamples from women with cancer in general, and describe the recent international harmonization project that developed standardized research tools to overcome these challenges and to enhance endometrial cancer research, which will facilitate future development of personalized novel diagnostic strategies and treatments.

Biobanking in health care: evolution and future directions

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present review is to discuss how the promising field of biobanking can support health care research strategies. As the concept has evolved over time, biobanks have grown from simple biological sample repositories to complex and dynamic units belonging to large infrastructure networks, such as the Pan-European Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI). Biobanks were established to support scientific knowledge. Different professional figures with varied expertise collaborate to obtain and collect biological and clinical data from human subjects. At same time biobanks preserve the human and legal rights of each person that offers biomaterial for research.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in April 2019 from the online database PubMed, accessed through the Bibliosan platform. Four primary topics related to biobanking will be discussed: (i) evolution, (ii) bioethical issues, (iii) organization, and (iv) imaging.

RESULTS

Most biobanks were founded as local units to support specific research projects, so they evolved in a decentralized manner. The consequence is an urgent needing for procedure harmonization regarding sample collection, processing, and storage. Considering the involvement of biomaterials obtained from human beings, different ethical issues such as the informed consent model, sample ownership, veto rights, and biobank sustainability are debated. In the face of these methodological and ethical challenges, international organizations such as BBMRI play a key role in supporting biobanking activities. Finally, a unique development is the creation of imaging biobanks that support the translation of imaging biomarkers (identified using a radiomic approach) into clinical practice by ensuring standardization of data acquisition and analysis, accredited technical validation, and transparent sharing of biological and clinical data.

CONCLUSION

Modern biobanks permit large-scale analysis for individuation of specific diseases biomarkers starting from biological or digital material (i.e., bioimages) with well-annotated clinical and biological data. These features are essential for improving personalized medical approaches, where effective biomarker identification is a critical step for disease diagnosis and prognosis.

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.

Cancer oriented biobanks: A comprehensive review

Biobanks provide a platform for innovative biomedical research and has improvised translational and personalized medicine to a great extent. Time 2009 published 10 ideas changing the world right now with biobanks on the list emphasizing its role in discovery and development of new therapeutic drugs. They form the cornerstone, providing resources for future investigations and biomarker discovery to understand the effects of genetic, environmental and lifestyle factors on human morbidity, mortality and health. The aim of this review paper is to understand the role of biobanking in cancer research, the challenges faced and strategies to overcome these, for long term and sustainable research in the field of oncology.

How to responsibly acknowledge research work in the era of big data and biobanks: ethical aspects of the Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF)

Currently, a great deal of biomedical research in fields such as epidemiology, clinical trials and genetics is reliant on vast amounts of biological and phenotypic information collected and assembled in biobanks. While many resources are being invested to ensure that comprehensive and well-organised biobanks are able to provide increased access to, and sharing of biomedical samples and information, many barriers and challenges remain to such responsible and extensive sharing. Germane to the discussion herein is the barrier to collecting and sharing bioresources related to the lack of proper recognition of researchers and clinicians who developed the bioresource. Indeed, the efforts and resources invested to set up and sustain a bioresource can be enormous and such work should be easily traced and properly recognised. However, there is currently no such system that systematically and accurately traces and attributes recognition to those doing this work or the bioresource institution itself. As a beginning of a solution to the "recognition problem", the Bioresource Research Impact Factor/Framework (BRIF) initiative was proposed almost a decade and a half ago and is currently under further development. With the ultimate aim of increasing awareness and understanding of the BRIF, in this article, we contribute the following: (1) a review of the objectives and functions of the BRIF including the description of two tools that will help in the deployment of the BRIF, the CoBRA (Citation of BioResources in journal Articles) guideline, and the Open Journal of Bioresources (OJB); (2) the results of a small empirical study on stakeholder awareness of the BRIF and (3) a brief analysis of the ethical dimensions of the BRIF which allow it to be a positive contribution to responsible biobanking.

The author who wasn't there? Fairness and attribution in publications following access to population biobanks

We conducted a document analysis that explored publication ethics and authorship in the context of population biobanks from both a theoretical (e.g. normative documents) and practical (e.g. biobank-specific documentation) perspective. The aim was to provide an overview of the state of authorship attribution in population biobanks and attempt to fill the gap in discussions around the issue. Our findings demonstrate that the most common approach adopted in both the normative and biobank-specific documentation is acknowledgment. A co-authorship approach was second and highlighted concerns surrounding the fairness of imposing authorship of the scientific leadership as a condition to access data and biosamples, as well as the alignment with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' criteria such as what is deemed a significant contribution and how to ensure accountability. Based on these findings, we propose a three-prong approach, that may be cumulative, to address the issue of authorship attribution in the context of population biobanks, namely 1) the biobank should be appropriately acknowledged; 2) an invitation for co-authorship should be made based on the spirit of collaboration and provided a substantial contribution has been made; and 3) a citation/referencing option should be available.

The Role of Solidarity(-ies) in Rare Diseases Research

Solidarity plays a relevant role in rare diseases (RDs) research to create and enable research in the field. In Europe RDs are estimated to affect between 27 and 36 million people even though single RDs can count very few patients, making the contribution of everyone essential to reach solid results. Often RD research is initiated by patient groups devoting substantial time and resources to the scientific enterprise. In RD research solidarity is often evocated and expressed, in different ways and on different levels, so that it is possible to talk about "solidarities" played by different stakeholders and sometimes conflicting with each other. In this paper we describe different contexts in which solidarity is expressed and embedded in RD research, in particular the context of tight relationships between individuals and their families or in small communities/ethnic groups; among individuals suffering from different RDs and researchers working on a specific RD or a group of RDs, and within society at large. In all these cases the different types of solidarity should be balanced against each other and also against conflicting values. The request to a patient to share data and samples to increase scientific knowledge on the basis of solidarity values needs to be balanced against the need to protect her privacy and autonomy; the duty for a researcher to allow fair access to RD sample and data collections which were donated in a spirit of solidarity is balanced against the need to be competitive in the research world. In the Report "Solidarity. Reflections on an emerging concept in bioethics", the Nuffield Council of Bioethics defines solidarity as "shared practices reflecting a collective commitment to carry 'costs' (financial, social, emotional or otherwise) to assist others". Therefore, if a solidarity framework has to be solid and ethically sound it needs to be framed as a shared value, reflected in the different practices by all the stakeholders and be based on reciprocity (not one sided). The context of solidarity(ies) provides a solid base for framing the research endeavor as collectively valuable, not only for possible results of the research, but as intrinsic valid societal practice. This paper tries to draw the lessons on solidarity that we can derive from the RD world where "solidarities" have been part of the game for long time and are declined on many different levels.