Implementation of Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing in Peru: Implications for researchers

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

The Peruvian Amazon holds more than 1000 plant species with commercial potential and the national sales of natural products derived from medicinal and aromatic plants have exceeded $ 400 million per year. Research and development activities carried out on the genetic and biochemical composition of Peruvian flora have to abide by national and international regulations, such as the Nagoya Protocol (NP).

AIM OF THE STUDY

The aim of this paper is to describe the implications of the current implementation of the NP in Peru for performing research on national genetic resources.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the current legal framework and status of the NP in Peru was performed accompanied by first-hand experience undertaken by submitting a request for access to genetic resources related to wild continental species.

RESULTS

So far, Peru has issued 16 Internationally Recognized Certificates of Compliance (IRCCs) through 2 of the identified National Authorities. Some of the difficulties and challenges observed have to do with the degree of effective implementation of the Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) system, the fact that the application process is not sufficiently clear, and the wide gap between this formal system and what occurs informally outside of it. In response to this, training and implementation projects have been launched and a new law on the access to genetic resources has been proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

The difficulties observed still represent an obstacle to scientific research and the development of new commercial products based on Peruvian traditional knowledge and genetic resources. Although improvements have been made to the ABS framework, there remain major challenges to encouraging and ascertaining the equitable and sustainable use of Peru's biodiversity.

Genetic research and consent: On the crossroads of human and data research

This paper explores the legal and ethical concept of human subject research in order to determine whether genetic research with already available biosamples and data falls within this concept. Although the ethical concept seems to have evolved to recognize research based on data as human research, from a supranational legal perspective this form of research is not considered human subject research. Thus human subject research regulations do not apply and therefore do not invoke the requirement of obtaining consent prior to using an individual's biosample or genetic data in research. Furthermore, it remains ambiguous in both the legal and ethical realm whether the use of biosamples or genetic data without additional links to the individual would invoke the same safeguards as research involving additional or specific identifiers. Seeing that research based on already available biosamples and genetic data is not governed by rules concerning human subject research, the second part of the paper analyses whether any consent requirements apply for the further use of already available bio-samples or genetic data in research. Whereas further use of biosamples is subject to considerably lax consent requirements under Article 22 of the Oviedo Convention, under the General Data Protection Regulation further use of genetic data might not be subject to a prior consent requirement at all, unless it is stipulated in national laws. When it comes to clinical trials, however, sponsors will have the possibility under Article 28(2) of Regulation 536/2014 to obtain open consent for further use of data in any kind of future research.

Patenting Foundational Technologies: Lessons From CRISPR and Other Core Biotechnologies

In 2012, a new and promising gene manipulation technique, CRISPR-Cas9, was announced that seems likely to be a foundational technique in health care and agriculture. However, patents have been granted. As with other technological developments, there are concerns of social justice regarding inequalities in access. Given the technologies' "foundational" nature and societal impact, it is vital for such concerns to be translated into workable recommendations for policymakers and legislators. Colin Farrelly has proposed a moral justification for the use of patents to speed up the arrival of technology by encouraging innovation and investment. While sympathetic to his argument, this article highlights a number of problems. By examining the role of patents in CRISPR and in two previous foundational technologies, we make some recommendations for realistic and workable guidelines for patenting and licensing.

Strategies to Guide the Return of Genomic Research Findings: An Australian Perspective

In Australia, along with many other countries, limited guidance or other support strategies are currently available to researchers, institutional research ethics committees, and others responsible for making decisions about whether to return genomic findings with potential value to participants or their blood relatives. This lack of guidance results in onerous decision-making burdens-traversing technical, interpretative, and ethical dimensions-as well as uncertainty and inconsistencies for research participants. This article draws on a recent targeted consultation conducted by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council to put forward strategies for supporting return of finding decision-making. In particular, we propose a pyramid of decision-making support: decision-making guidelines, technical and interpretative assistance, and ethical assistance for intractable "tough" cases. Each step of the pyramid involves an increasing level of regulatory involvement and applies to a smaller subsection of genomic research findings. Implementation of such strategies would facilitate a growing evidence base for return of finding decisions, thereby easing the financial, time, and moral burdens currently placed on researchers and other relevant decision-makers while also improving the quality of such decisions and, consequently, participant outcomes.

United Kingdom: transfers of genomic data to third countries

In the United Kingdom (UK), transfer of genomic data to third countries is regulated by data protection legislation. This is a composite of domestic and European Union (EU) law, with EU law to be adopted as domestic law when Brexit takes place. In this paper we consider the content of data protection legislation and the likely impact of Brexit on transfers of genomic data from the UK to other countries. We examine the advice by regulators not to rely upon consent as a lawful basis for processing under data protection law, at least not when personal data are used for research purposes, and consider some of the other ways in which the research context can qualify an individual's ability to exercise control over processing operations. We explain how the process of pseudonymization is to be understood in the context of transfer of genomic data to third parties, as well as how adequacy of data protection in a third country is to be determined in general terms. We conclude with reflections on the future direction of UK data protection law post Brexit with the reclassification of the UK itself as a third country.

United States: law and policy concerning transfer of genomic data to third countries

This paper provides an overview of US laws and related guidance documents affecting transfer of genomic data to third countries, addressing the domains of consent, privacy, security, compatible processing/adequacy, and oversight. In general, US laws governing research and disclosure and use of data generated within the health care system do not impose different requirements on transfers to researchers and service providers based in third countries compared with US-based researchers or service providers. Of note, the US lacks a comprehensive data protection regime. Data protections are piecemeal, spread across bodies of law that target specific kinds of research or data generated or held by specific kinds of actors involved in the delivery of health care. Oversight is also distributed across a range of bodies, including institutional review boards and data access committees. The conclusion to this paper examines future directions in US law and policy, including proposals for more comprehensive protections for personal data.

Returning Results to Family Members: Professional Duties in Genomics Research in the United States

 This article critically appraises the ethical and legal duties to disclose findings to the family members of research participants. These family members stand to benefit in important ways from discoveries that can inform their own health and reproductive risks. However, careful appreciation of how medical research differs from clinical practice and of the uncertainties at stake in genomic research complicates any warning to relatives. Research laboratories should generally be immune from liability for failing to diagnose or disclose a genetic disorder in time to prevent adverse outcomes for a participant's family members or to return properly interpreted test results for even direct findings under investigation, let alone incidental ones. The only exception is where warning relatives of medical risks is very likely to prevent imminent harm and would not override known participant wishes. Genomic autopsy studies for sudden death satisfy these conditions of life-saving potential for relatives without disrespect to subjects. These are among the rare instances in which we conclude that offering results to family members is not just permissible but obligatory, not just as a moral matter but as a legal one.

Pathogenic variants in the healthy elderly: unique ethical and practical challenges

: Genetic research into ageing, longevity and late-onset disease is becoming increasingly common. Yet, there is a paucity of knowledge related to clinical actionability and the return of pathogenic variants to otherwise healthy elderly individuals. Whether or not genetic research in the elderly should be managed differently from standard practices adapted for younger populations has not yet been defined. In this article, we provide an overview of ethical and practical challenges in preparing for a genetic study of over 14 000 healthy Australians aged 70 years or older enrolled in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) Healthy Ageing Biobank. At the time of consent, all participants in this study were free of life-threatening illness, cardiovascular disease or cognitive impairment. ASPREE is thus a cohort of healthy elderly individuals with seemingly minimal burden of genetic disease recruited without ascertainment bias. The cohort presents a unique opportunity to address the penetrance of known pathogenic variants in a population without disease symptoms; however, it also raises a number of ethical concerns regarding the interpretation and disclosure of variants with known clinical actionability. Some of the challenges include (a) how to manage the interpretation, disclosure and actioning of pathogenic variants found in otherwise healthy elderly adults without disease symptoms, (b) whether or not to disclose findings for the benefit of family members rather than elderly consented donors themselves, (c) how to manage the return of genetic findings to the elderly individuals who are now in severe cognitive decline or terminal illness, (d) how to ensure quality of information and clinical service upon disclosure of results to this demographic and (e) how to prepare for the insurance implications of disclosing genetic information under Australian law. We discuss these and other dilemmas and propose a defensible plan of management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN83772183.

Analysis of the concept of informed consent concerning the use of genetic material according to the European Convention on Bioethics and in other solutionsm - Propositions for broad consent for future genetic research from the point of view of the activity of the Biobank

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the article is a critical presentation of the typology of consents included in the European Convention on Bioethics and in other formal solutions concerning the gathering of genetic material in institutions called Biobanks.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Existing types of Acts of Consent are inaccurate in their scope and possess insufficient information regarding the gathering of genetic material (application, usage, processing) and their final (future and diverse) use.

RESULTS

Lack of precise legal regulations on the broad future use of genetic material may result in various formal problems relating both to research participants as well as those commissioning the research. Ultimately, it may lead to various complications with the appropriate legal interpretation of consent and possible claims on behalf of the donors.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented proposition of consent with a terminal premise is to be applied eventually to legal and formal aspects of the collecting of genetic material. It is a possible solution which would clarify the issue of informed consent, and may be implemented in the regulations of the Convention as well as constitute a self-contained legislative solution to this matter. For example, Polish law in its current form, without the ratification of the Bioethical Convention, allows the collecting of material for genetic testing for determination of the risk of genetic defects in common genetic material from people who are planning to have a child.

Comparative Approaches to Genetic Discrimination: Chasing Shadows?

Genetic discrimination (GD) is one of the most pervasive issues associated with genetic research and its large-scale implementation. An increasing number of countries have adopted public policies to address this issue. Our research presents a worldwide comparative review and typology of these approaches. We conclude with suggestions for public policy development.

Explanation of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing and its implication for microbiology

Working with genetic resources and associated data requires greater attention since the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) came into force in October 2014. Biologists must ensure that they have legal clarity in how they can and cannot use the genetic resources on which they carry out research. Not only must they work within the spirit in the Convention on Biological Diversity (https://www.cbd.int/convention/articles/default.shtml?a=cbd-02) but also they may have regulatory requirements to meet. Although the Nagoya Protocol was negotiated and agreed globally, it is the responsibility of each country that ratifies it to introduce their individual implementing procedures and practices. Many countries in Europe, such as the UK, have chosen not to put access controls in place at this time, but others already have laws enacted providing ABS measures under the Convention on Biological Diversity or specifically to implement the Nagoya Protocol. Access legislation is in place in many countries and information on this can be found at the ABS Clearing House (https://absch.cbd.int/). For example, Brazil, although not a Party to the Nagoya Protocol at the time of writing, has Law 13.123 which entered into force on 17 November 2015, regulated by Decree 8.772 which was published on 11 May 2016. In this case, export of Brazilian genetic resources is not allowed unless the collector is registered in the National System for Genetic Heritage and Associated Traditional Knowledge Management (SisGen). The process entails that a foreign scientist must first of all be registered working with someone in Brazil and have authorization to collect. The enactment of European Union Regulation po. 511/2014 implements Nagoya Protocol elements that govern compliance measures for users and offers the opportunity to demonstrate due diligence in sourcing their organisms by selecting from holdings of 'registered collections'. The UK has introduced a Statutory Instrument that puts in place enforcement measures within the UK to implement this European Union Regulation; this is regulated by Regulatory Delivery, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategies. Scientific communities, including the private sector, individual institutions and organizations, have begun to design policy and best practices for compliance. Microbiologists and culture collections alike need to be aware of the legislation of the source country of the materials they use and put in place best practices for compliance; such best practice has been drafted by the Microbial Resource Research Infrastructure, and other research communities such as the Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities, the Global Genome Biodiversity Network and the International Organisation for Biological Control have published best practice and/or codes of conduct to ensure legitimate exchange and use of genetic resources.

Potential International Approaches to Ownership/Control of Human Genetic Resources

In its governance activities for genetic resources, the international community has adopted various approaches to their ownership, including: free access; common heritage of mankind; intellectual property rights; and state sovereign rights. They have also created systems which combine elements of these approaches. While governance of plant and animal genetic resources is well-established internationally, there has not yet been a clear approach selected for human genetic resources. Based on assessment of the goals which international governance of human genetic resources ought to serve, and the implications for how they will be accessed and utilised, it is argued that common heritage of mankind will be the most appropriate approach to adopt to their ownership/control. It does this with the aim of stimulating discussion in this area and providing a starting point for deeper consideration of how a common heritage of mankind, or similar, regime for human genetic resources would function and be implemented.

Feedback of Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants: Is It Feasible in Europe?

BACKGROUND

There is growing consensus that individual genetic research results that are scientifically robust, analytically valid, and clinically actionable should be offered to research participants. However, the general practice in European research projects is that results are usually not provided to research participants for many reasons. This article reports on the views of European experts and scholars who are members of the European COST Action CHIP ME IS1303 (Citizen's Health through public-private Initiatives: Public health, Market and Ethical perspectives) regarding challenges to the feedback of individual genetic results to research participants in Europe and potential strategies to address these challenges.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consultation of the COST Action members was conducted through an email survey and a workshop. The results from the consultation were analyzed following a conventional content analysis approach.

RESULTS

Legal frameworks, professional guidelines, and financial, organizational, and human resources to support the feedback of results are largely missing in Europe. Necessary steps to facilitate the feedback process include clarifying legal requirements to the feedback of results, developing harmonized European best practices, promoting interdisciplinary and cross-institutional collaboration, designing educational programs and cost-efficient IT-based platforms, involving research ethics committees, and documenting the health benefits and risks of the feedback process.

CONCLUSIONS

Coordinated efforts at pan-European level are needed to enable equitable, scientifically sound, and socially robust feedback of results to research participants.

Obtaining informed consent for genomics research in Africa: analysis of H3Africa consent documents

BACKGROUND

The rise in genomic and biobanking research worldwide has led to the development of different informed consent models for use in such research. This study analyses consent documents used by investigators in the H3Africa (Human Heredity and Health in Africa) Consortium.

METHODS

A qualitative method for text analysis was used to analyse consent documents used in the collection of samples and data in H3Africa projects. Thematic domains included type of consent model, explanations of genetics/genomics, data sharing and feedback of test results.

RESULTS

Informed consent documents for 13 of the 19 H3Africa projects were analysed. Seven projects used broad consent, five projects used tiered consent and one used specific consent. Genetics was mostly explained in terms of inherited characteristics, heredity and health, genes and disease causation, or disease susceptibility. Only one project made provisions for the feedback of individual genetic results.

CONCLUSION

H3Africa research makes use of three consent models-specific, tiered and broad consent. We outlined different strategies used by H3Africa investigators to explain concepts in genomics to potential research participants. To further ensure that the decision to participate in genomic research is informed and meaningful, we recommend that innovative approaches to the informed consent process be developed, preferably in consultation with research participants, research ethics committees and researchers in Africa.

The Legal Vacuum Surrounding Access to Gene-based Research Materials and Data

Tangible research materials and data sets are integral to biomedical research and diagnostic genetic testing. Patents over genes and other research tools have been blamed for restricting access to these tools, potentially slowing the pace of biomedical research and reducing availability of diagnostic genetic testing options. Given that many of these patents are expiring or being invalidated by the courts, this article suggests that attention should now be focused on how the materials and data themselves might be used where access is blocked. Access is critical to the effective conduct of future biomedical research and clinical practice, yet the availability of legal causes of action to facilitate this has not previously been analysed. This article explores possible legal mechanisms and concludes that the outlook for compelling access in the absence of patents is pessimistic. Paradoxically, patents may actually provide a mechanism to gain access to these critical tools, rather than constituting a hindrance.

Seeding Australian Regulation of Genomics in the Cloud – Elizabeth Abbott and Thomas Faunce

Cloud computing has facilitated a revolution in genome sequencing. As big data and personalised medicine increase in popularity in Australia, are the legal and regulatory regimes surrounding this nascent area of scientific research and clinical practice able to protect this private information? An examination of the current regulatory regime in Australia, including the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and medical research laws that govern cloud-based genomics research highlights that the key challenge of such research is to protect the interests of participants while also promoting collaborative research processes. This examination also highlights the potential effect that the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement’s Electronic Commerce Chapter may have had on using the cloud for genomics and what the consequences may have been for researchers, clinicians and individuals. Lessons learnt here will be relevant to studying similar impacts from other trade and investment agreements such as the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA).

Open consent, biobanking and data protection law: can open consent be 'informed' under the forthcoming data protection regulation?

This article focuses on whether a certain form of consent used by biobanks--open consent--is compatible with the Proposed Data Protection Regulation. In an open consent procedure, the biobank requests consent once from the data subject for all future research uses of genetic material and data. However, as biobanks process personal data, they must comply with data protection law. Data protection law is currently undergoing reform. The Proposed Data Protection Regulation is the culmination of this reform and, if voted into law, will constitute a new legal framework for biobanking. The Regulation puts strict conditions on consent--in particular relating to information which must be given to the data subject. It seems clear that open consent cannot meet these requirements. 4 categories of information cannot be provided with adequate specificity: purpose, recipient, possible third country transfers, data collected. However, whilst open consent cannot meet the formal requirements laid out by the Regulation, this is not to say that these requirements are substantially undebateable. Two arguments could be put forward suggesting the applicable consent requirements should be rethought. First, from policy documents regarding the drafting process, it seems that the informational requirements in the Regulation are so strict in order to protect the data subject from risks inherent in the use of the consent mechanism in a certain context--exemplified by the online context. There are substantial differences between this context and the biobanking context. Arguably, a consent transaction in the biobanking does not present the same type of risk to the data subject. If the risks are different, then perhaps there are also grounds for a reconsideration of consent requirements? Second, an argument can be made that the legislator drafted the Regulation based on certain assumptions as to the nature of 'data'. The authors argue that these assumptions are difficult to apply to genetic data and accordingly a different approach to consent might be preferable. Such an approach might be more open consent friendly.

Clinical genetic research 3: Genetics ELSI (Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues) research

ELSI (Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues) is a widely used acronym in the bioethics literature that encompasses a broad range of research areas involved in examining the various impacts of science and technology on society. In Canada, GE3LS (Genetics, Ethical, Economic, Environmental, Legal, Social issues) is the term used to describe ELSI studies. It is intentionally more expansive in that GE3LS explicitly brings economic and environmental issues under its purview. ELSI/GE3LS research has become increasingly important in recent years as there has been a greater emphasis on "translational research" that moves genomics from the bench to the clinic. The purpose of this chapter is to outline a range of ELSI-related work that might be conducted as part of a large scale genetics or genomics research project, and to provide some practical insights on how a scientific research team might incorporate a strong and effective ELSI program within its broader research mandate. We begin by describing the historical context of ELSI research and the development of GE3LS research in the Canadian context. We then illustrate how some ELSI research might unfold by outlining a variety of research questions and the various methodologies that might be employed in addressing them in an area of ELSI research that is encompassed under the term "public engagement." We conclude with some practical pointers about how to build an effective ELSI/GE3LS team and focus within a broader scientific research program.

Genomic Databases and Biobanks in Israel

Large-scale biobanks represents an important scientific and medical as well as a commercial opportunity. However, realizing these and other prospects requires social, legal, and regulatory conducive climate, as well as a capable scientific community and adequate infrastructure. Israel has been grappling with the appropriate approach to establishing such a repository, and debates over the governance, structure, finance, and mode of operation shed a bright light on the underlying social norms, civic engagement and scientific clout in steering a governmental response to pressing medical needs. The article presents the backdrop of the Israeli scene, and explores the reasons and forces at work behind the current formulation of the Israeli National Biobank, MIDGAM.

International Policies on Sharing Genomic Research Results with Relatives: Approaches to Balancing Privacy with Access

Returning genetic research results to relatives raises complex issues. In order to inform the U.S. debate, this paper analyzes international law and policies governing the sharing of genetic research results with relatives and identifies key themes and lessons. The laws and policies from other countries demonstrate a range of approaches to balancing individual privacy and autonomy with family access for health benefit, offering important lessons for further development of approaches in the United States.

Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds

Two genetic technologies capable of making heritable changes to the human genome have revived interest in, and in some quarters a very familiar panic concerning, so-called germline interventions. These technologies are: most recently the use of CRISPR/Cas9 to edit genes in non-viable IVF zygotes and Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT) the use of which was approved in principle in a landmark vote earlier this year by the United Kingdom Parliament. The possibility of using either of these techniques in humans has encountered the most violent hostility and suspicion. However it is important to be aware that much of this hostility dates back to the fears associated with In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and other reproductive technologies and by cloning; fears which were baseless at the time concerning both IVF and cloning the use of both of which have proved to be highly beneficial to humanity and which have been effectively regulated and controlled. This paper argues that CRISPR should by pursued through researh until it is safe enough for use in humans but there is no reason to suppose at this stage that such use will be unsafe or unethical (Collins 2015).

Human Germline CRISPR-Cas Modification: Toward a Regulatory Framework

CRISPR germline editing therapies (CGETs) hold unprecedented potential to eradicate hereditary disorders. However, the prospect of altering the human germline has sparked a debate over the safety, efficacy, and morality of CGETs, triggering a funding moratorium by the NIH. There is an urgent need for practical paths for the evaluation of these capabilities. We propose a model regulatory framework for CGET research, clinical development, and distribution. Our model takes advantage of existing legal and regulatory institutions but adds elevated scrutiny at each stage of CGET development to accommodate the unique technical and ethical challenges posed by germline editing.

Privacy and Biobanking in China: A Case of Policy in Transition

Disease-based biobanks have operated in hospitals and research institutes in China for decades, and China has recently embarked on a plan to establish further biobank networks with the aim of promoting data sharing among the existing biobanks. Although the Chinese Constitution has only recently begun to recognize individual privacy as a distinct and independent constitutional right, biobanking in China has been loosely regulated under a patchwork of sometimes overlapping laws (such as the Interim Measures for the Administration of Human Genetic Resources) and regulatory instruments, as well as and the policies of individual biobanks and networks of biobanks (such as the Shanghai Biobank Network Guidelines). A Draft Ordinance on Human Genetics Resources is currently being developed that will deal in more detail than previous laws with issues such as management measures, legal liability, and punishment for violations. International data sharing will be tightly regulated under this new law, and individual biobanks' policies such as the Shanghai Guidelines may choose to regulate such sharing even more. In contrast with national regulatory instruments, the Shanghai Guidelines also contain detailed de-identification policies, and explicitly endorse broad consent.

Biobanking and Privacy Law in Brazil

This article analyzes the current regulatory framework for biobanking, genomic research, and protection of privacy in Brazil. It is divided in four parts. The first describes the biobanking context in Brazil and its evolution in recent years. In the second, the entire regulatory framework on biobanking and genomic research is analyzed. The third part focuses on the critical evaluation of this regulatory framework, specifically on some major ethical dilemmas in biobanking. The fourth part describes the characteristics of the Brazilian biobanking and human research governance system, known as the CEP/CONEP system. Finally, the conclusion summarizes the information in the article and its contribution to the study of the biobanking ethical challenges, especially the protection of privacy. It is highlighted that biobanking regulatory harmonization among countries is necessary, since it increases scientific possibilities that can come from broader cooperation among biobanks and several research centers on the national and international levels.

Biobanking and Privacy Laws in Australia

Australian biobanks are largely autonomous and funded by local health care institutions, although some biobanks also receive funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). There is no formal biobank legislation, but the NHMRC has developed biobanking guidelines. The regulation of biobanks is mainly through privacy laws and human research ethics committees. Australia is moving toward the use of broad consent for biobanking. International data sharing is permitted.

Preferences Regarding Return of Genomic Results to Relatives of Research Participants, Including after Participant Death: Empirical Results from a Cancer Biobank

Data are lacking with regard to participants' perspectives on return of genetic research results to relatives, including after the participant's death. This paper reports descriptive results from 3,630 survey respondents: 464 participants in a pancreatic cancer biobank, 1,439 family registry participants, and 1,727 healthy individuals. Our findings indicate that most participants would feel obligated to share their results with blood relatives while alive and would want results to be shared with relatives after their death.

Regulation of Biobanks in France

The privacy of biobank research participants in France is protected by a combination of bioethics laws, research laws, and data protection laws. Although the law has attempted to facilitate research by creating an opt-out regime for research with pre-existing samples, other aspects of the law hinder research. The requirement for multiple consents throughout the process of biobank sample collection and use, the lack of acceptance of a broad consent for biobanking, and genetic exceptionalism in the law all complicate biobank research. With IRB approval, opt-out consent may be used for genetic research using human tissue collected for other purposes, but express consent is still required for research with the associated genetic data. Among the important issues remaining to be addressed are harmonizing and simplifying the various informed consent processes.

CRISPR Critters and CRISPR Cracks

This essay focuses on possible nonhuman applications of CRISPR/Cas9 that are likely to be widely overlooked because they are unexpected and, in some cases, perhaps even "frivolous." We look at five uses for "CRISPR Critters": wild de-extinction, domestic de-extinction, personal whim, art, and novel forms of disease prevention. We then discuss the current regulatory framework and its possible limitations in those contexts. We end with questions about some deeper issues raised by the increased human control over life on earth offered by genome editing.

Genomic Databases and Biobanks in Denmark

Biobanking in Denmark is regulated via patients' rights laws, data protection laws, and research ethics reviews. Danish law recognizes tissue samples as personal data for purposes of the data protection laws, meaning research with tissue samples may be subject to research ethics review, data protection laws, and patients' rights requirements depending on the circumstances of collection. However, research on information gained through whole genome sequencing is subject only to data protection laws, despite the similarity in the nature of the information. The regulatory framework treats biobank samples collected from patients differently than samples collected from research participants, particularly with respect to autonomy. Importantly, biobanks established for future unspecified research are not subject to research ethics review. Biobank-based research has gained more prominence on the national level recently, and the potential for a less fragmented and more consistent regulatory approach may emerge from this attention.

INTEGRATING NEXT-GENERATION SEQUENCING INTO MEDICAL DIAGNOSTICS--A SNAPSHOT OF NORMATIVE CHALLENGES

Next-Generation Sequencing has been used as a diagnostic tool in an increasing manner. Compared to conventional medical interventions, NGS, as a medical intervention, has its own special characteristics. NGS allows us to obtain a multitude of additional findings. However, their correct interpretation requires molecular biological expertise and is still unknown at the time of the sampling. These factors, when applying NGS, lead to a dynamic process of informational interference with the patients' rights. The physician-patient relationship that becomes successive, is loosened by involving non-physician researchers in the validation of the findings and by the fact that genetic data also gives information about the relatives of the patient. Moreover, dealing with risk information lays the burden on the patients and strengthens their responsibility. These challenges increase in international translational medicine and they demand solutions for the protection of the patients' rights.

Patient privacy in the genomic era

According to many scientists and clinicians, genomics is taking on a key role in the field of medicine. Impressive advances in genome sequencing have opened the way to a variety of revolutionary applications in modern healthcare. In particular, the increasing understanding of the human genome, and of its relation to diseases and response to treatments brings promise of improvements in better preventive and personalized medicine. However, this progress raises important privacy and ethical concerns that need to be addressed. Indeed, each genome is the ultimate identifier of its owner and, due to its nature, it contains highly personal and privacy-sensitive data. In this article, after summarizing recent advances in genomics, we discuss some important privacy issues associated with human genomic information and methods put in place to address them.

Genomic research with the newly dead: a crossroads for ethics and policy

Recent advances in next generation sequencing along with high hopes for genomic medicine have inspired interest in genomic research with the newly dead. However, applicable law does not adequately determine ethical or policy responses to such research. In this paper we propose that such research stands at a crossroads between other more established biomedical clinical and research practices. In addressing the ethical and policy issues raised by a particular research project within our institution comparatively with these other practices, we illustrate the moral significance of paying careful heed to where one looks for guidance in responding to ethical questions raised by a novel endeavor.

Body ownership and research

This article questions whether recognition of property rights in human tissue .would enhance protection of the interests of donors of tissue used for research purposes. Best practice already obliges researchers to comply with a range of legal and ethical obligations, with particular focus on informed consent and research transparency. A number of lawsuits relating to research use of human tissue emphasise the central importance of informed consent to donors. Informed consent of communities, as well as individuals, becomes essential when engaging in research with indigenous peoples. Increasingly genetic researchers are adopting participatory governance as a model for working with communities to develop culturally appropriate genetic studies that address health problems that are priorities for the communities involved. The transparency of the participatory governance model means that participants feel that their autonomy is respected and that their interests are being represented throughout the research process. The question of ownership of samples becomes irrelevant as control is codified through alternative mechanisms.

Can I access my personal genome? The current legal position in the UK

This paper discusses the nature of genomic information, and the moral arguments in support of an individual's right to access it. It analyses the legal avenues an individual might take to access their sequence information. The authors describe the policy implications in this area and conclude that, for now, the law appears to strike an appropriate balance, but new policy will need to be developed to address this issue.

Challenges in biobank governance in Sub-Saharan Africa

BACKGROUND

Biological sample and data transfer within and out of Africa is steeped in controversy With the H3Africa project now aiming to establish biobanks in Africa, it is essential that there are ethical and legal governance structures in place to oversee the operation of these biobanks. Such governance is essential to ensuring that donors are protected, that cultural perspectives are respected and that researchers have a ready availability of ethically sourced biological samples.

METHODS

A literature review of all legislation, regulations, guidelines and standard operating procedures on informed consent, confidentiality and the transfer of biological samples amongst countries in Sub-Saharan Africa was conducted. In addition, an examination of the websites of departments of health and national ethics committees was performed. Researchers and research ethics scholars in the field in various African countries were contacted for assistance. A literature review of all studies examining participants views on issues related to biobanking in Africa was carried out and five separate studies were found.

RESULTS

It was found that biobanking guidelines differ substantially across Sub-Saharan Africa regarding biobanking and often conflicted across borders. This has the potential to negatively impact collaboration. Furthermore, the guidelines in place often do not recognise the ethical difficulties arising from the transfer of biological samples and are unsuitable to regulate biobanks. Additionally, there is insufficient research into the views of research participants and stakeholders on the use of biological /samples.

CONCLUSION

Collaboration is necessary to ensure the success of biobanking projects in Africa. To achieve this, there should be some harmonization of guidelines across Africa which would aid in transferring biological samples across borders. These guidelines should reflect the unique ethical issues arising out of the storage and secondary uses of biological samples. Finally, further research into the views of research participants is necessary. Such studies should aid in the drafting of any new harmonization guidelines.

Ethical and legal implications of whole genome and whole exome sequencing in African populations

BACKGROUND

Rapid advances in high throughput genomic technologies and next generation sequencing are making medical genomic research more readily accessible and affordable, including the sequencing of patient and control whole genomes and exomes in order to elucidate genetic factors underlying disease. Over the next five years, the Human Heredity and Health in Africa (H3Africa) Initiative, funded by the Wellcome Trust (United Kingdom) and the National Institutes of Health (United States of America), will contribute greatly towards sequencing of numerous African samples for biomedical research.

DISCUSSION

Funding agencies and journals often require submission of genomic data from research participants to databases that allow open or controlled data access for all investigators. Access to such genotype-phenotype and pedigree data, however, needs careful control in order to prevent identification of individuals or families. This is particularly the case in Africa, where many researchers and their patients are inexperienced in the ethical issues accompanying whole genome and exome research; and where an historical unidirectional flow of samples and data out of Africa has created a sense of exploitation and distrust. In the current study, we analysed the implications of the anticipated surge of next generation sequencing data in Africa and the subsequent data sharing concepts on the protection of privacy of research subjects. We performed a retrospective analysis of the informed consent process for the continent and the rest-of-the-world and examined relevant legislation, both current and proposed. We investigated the following issues: (i) informed consent, including guidelines for performing culturally-sensitive next generation sequencing research in Africa and availability of suitable informed consent documents; (ii) data security and subject privacy whilst practicing data sharing; (iii) conveying the implications of such concepts to research participants in resource limited settings.

SUMMARY

We conclude that, in order to meet the unique requirements of performing next generation sequencing-related research in African populations, novel approaches to the informed consent process are required. This will help to avoid infringement of privacy of individual subjects as well as to ensure that informed consent adheres to acceptable data protection levels with regard to use and transfer of such information.

Laboratory specimens and genetic privacy: evolution of legal theory

Although laboratory specimens are an important resource for biomedical research, controversy has arisen when research has been conducted without the knowledge or consent of the individuals who were the source of the specimens. This paper summarizes the most important litigation regarding the research use of laboratory specimens and traces the evolution of legal theory from property claims to claims related to genetic privacy interests.

Privacy protection and public goods: building a genetic database for health research in Newfoundland and Labrador

Objective

To provide a legal and ethical analysis of some of the implementation challenges faced by the Population Therapeutics Research Group (PTRG) at Memorial University (Canada), in using genealogical information offered by individuals for its genetics research database.

Materials and methods

This paper describes the unique historical and genetic characteristics of the Newfoundland and Labrador founder population, which gave rise to the opportunity for PTRG to build the Newfoundland Genealogy Database containing digitized records of all pre-confederation (1949) census records of the Newfoundland founder population. In addition to building the database, PTRG has developed the Heritability Analytics Infrastructure, a data management structure that stores genotype, phenotype, and pedigree information in a single database, and custom linkage software (KINNECT) to perform pedigree linkages on the genealogy database.

Discussion

A newly adopted legal regimen in Newfoundland and Labrador is discussed. It incorporates health privacy legislation with a unique research ethics statute governing the composition and activities of research ethics boards and, for the first time in Canada, elevating the status of national research ethics guidelines into law. The discussion looks at this integration of legal and ethical principles which provides a flexible and seamless framework for balancing the privacy rights and welfare interests of individuals, families, and larger societies in the creation and use of research data infrastructures as public goods.

Conclusion

The complementary legal and ethical frameworks that now coexist in Newfoundland and Labrador provide the legislative authority, ethical legitimacy, and practical flexibility needed to find a workable balance between privacy interests and public goods. Such an approach may also be instructive for other jurisdictions as they seek to construct and use biobanks and related research platforms for genetic research.

Genomic sovereignty and the African promise: mining the African genome for the benefit of Africa

Scientific interest in genomics in Africa is on the rise with a number of funding initiatives aimed specifically at supporting research in this area. Genomics research on material of African origin raises a number of important ethical issues. A prominent concern relates to sample export, which is increasingly seen by researchers and ethics committees across the continent as being problematic. The concept of genomic sovereignty proposes that unique patterns of genomic variation can be found in human populations, and that these are commercially, scientifically or symbolically valuable and in need of protection against exploitation. Although it is appealing as a response to increasing concerns regarding sample export, there are a number of important conceptual problems relating to the term. It is not clear, for instance, whether it is appropriate that ownership over human genomic samples should rest with national governments. Furthermore, ethnic groups in Africa are frequently spread across multiple nation states, and protection offered in one state may not prevent researchers from accessing the same group elsewhere. Lastly, scientific evidence suggests that the assumption that genomic data is unique for population groups is false. Although the frequency with which particular variants are found can differ between groups, such genes or variants per se are not unique to any population group. In this paper, the authors describe these concerns in detail and argue that the concept of genomic sovereignty alone may not be adequate to protect the genetic resources of people of African descent.

Legal aspects of genetic databases for international biomedical research: the example of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC)

There is a noticeable lack of international regulation on personal data exchange and management in research. This article sheds light in this area by describing how the International Cancer Genome Consortium is developing policies and procedures to address the ethical and legal issues raised by the international transfer of data and results. These policies and procedures aim, first and most importantly, to safeguard the interests of the research participants and other involved stakeholders and, secondly, to facilitate the sharing of data and results to realize greater benefits from this kind of internationally collaborative genetic research.

The law of genomic sovereignty and the protection of "Mexican genetic patrimony"

We present a socio-legal analysis of the policy agenda known as genomic sovereignty in Mexico--in which the notion was first coined--and its translation into a national law of health aimed at regulating population genomics research in the country. Based in more than 2 years of participant observation we sustain that the notion of genomic sovereignty, aimed at protecting the "unique" genetic patterns of populations needs to be critically reassessed. The main problem with such notion is that there are no scientifically sound ways to delimit the genetic "uniqueness" of any population in the world. Arising from this dilemma it becomes increasingly clear that the patrimonial doctrines that have been used to regulate population genomics in Mexico are inoperative, and rather than creating a legal environment in which medical genomics can become a national public good, it has created a law that has been used to monopolise human genomic research in the country; making blood samples and data tool for dispute amongst scientific elites.