RESUMEN
Several genetic variants linked to COVID-19 have been identified by host genomics researchers. Further advances in this research will likely play a role in the clinical management and public health control of future infectious disease outbreaks. The implementation of genetic testing to identify host genomic risk factors associated with infectious diseases raises several ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSIs). As an important stakeholder group, health professionals can provide key insights into these ELSI issues. In 2021, a cross-sectional online survey was fielded to US health professionals. The survey explored how they view the value and ethical acceptability of using COVID-19 host genomic information in three main decision-making settings: (1) clinical, (2) public health, and (3) workforce. The survey also assessed participants' personal and professional experience with genomics and infectious diseases and collected key demographic data. A total of 603 participants completed the survey. A majority (84%) of participants agreed that it is ethically acceptable to use host genomics to make decisions about clinical care and 73% agreed that genetic screening has an important role to play in the public health control of COVID-19. However, more than 90% disagreed that it is ethically acceptable to use host genomics to deny resources or admission to individuals when hospital resources are scarce. Understanding stakeholder perspectives and anticipating ELSI issues will help inform policies for hospitals and public health departments to evaluate and perhaps adopt host genomic technologies in an ethically and socially responsible manner during future infectious disease outbreaks.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Enfermedades Transmisibles , Humanos , Salud Pública , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , GenómicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Workplace genetic and/or genomic testing (wGT) is one of many options that employers can offer within the scope of voluntary workplace wellness programs, though we know little about how many employers are offering this benefit, or what kinds of testing are included. METHODS: Our landscaping review sought to discover the prevalence and distribution of wGT within voluntary wellness programs among U.S. companies using three approaches: (1) analysis of publicly available information; (2) national surveys; and (3) interviews with company representatives. RESULTS: In total, 50/420 (11.9%) companies we investigated had publicly available data suggesting that they offer wGT to their employees. Survey data weighted to be representative of the type and distribution of U.S. companies suggest that ~1% of U.S. companies offer wGT to their employees. CONCLUSION: Our research found little evidence of broad uptake of wGT among U.S. companies, though information gathering was challenging.
Asunto(s)
Promoción de la Salud , Lugar de Trabajo , Humanos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Pruebas GenéticasRESUMEN
This article describes key challenges in creating an ethics "for" robots. Robot ethics is not only a matter of the effects caused by robotic systems or the uses to which they may be put, but also the ethical rules and principles that these systems ought to follow-what we call "Ethics for Robots." We suggest that the Principle of Nonmaleficence, or "do no harm," is one of the basic elements of an ethics for robots-especially robots that will be used in a healthcare setting. We argue, however, that the implementation of even this basic principle will raise significant challenges for robot designers. In addition to technical challenges, such as ensuring that robots are able to detect salient harms and dangers in the environment, designers will need to determine an appropriate sphere of responsibility for robots and to specify which of various types of harms must be avoided or prevented. These challenges are amplified by the fact that the robots we are currently able to design possess a form of semi-autonomy that differs from other more familiar semi-autonomous agents such as animals or young children. In short, robot designers must identify and overcome the key challenges of an ethics for robots before they may ethically utilize robots in practice.
RESUMEN
Use of D NA markers in research that are used in law enforcement risks undermining public trust and participation.
Asunto(s)
Autenticación de Línea Celular , Genética Forense , Aplicación de la Ley , Análisis de Secuencia de ADN , Manejo de Especímenes , Confianza , Autenticación de Línea Celular/ética , Autenticación de Línea Celular/normas , Participación de la Comunidad , Genética Forense/ética , Marcadores Genéticos , Humanos , Aplicación de la Ley/ética , Análisis de Secuencia de ADN/ética , Manejo de Especímenes/éticaAsunto(s)
Biotecnología , Atención a la Salud , Medicina , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Biotecnología/legislación & jurisprudencia , Biotecnología/tendencias , Gestión Clínica/legislación & jurisprudencia , Atención a la Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Atención a la Salud/normas , Humanos , Legislación Médica/tendencias , Medicina/normas , Medicina/tendencias , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Responsabilidad SocialRESUMEN
Consumer interest in genetic and genomic testing is growing rapidly, with more than 26 million Americans having purchased direct-to-consumer genetic testing services. Capitalizing on the increasing comfort of consumers with genetic testing outside the clinical environment, commercial vendors are expanding their customer base by marketing genetic and genomic testing services, including testing for pharmacogenomic and pathogenic variants, to employers for inclusion in workplace wellness programs. We describe the appeal of voluntary workplace genomic testing (wGT) to employers and employees, how the ethical, legal, and social implications literature has approached the issue of genetic testing in the workplace in the past, and outline the relevant legal landscape. Given that we are in the early stages of development of the wGT market, now is the time to identify the critical interests and concerns of employees and employers, so that governance can develop and evolve along with the wGT market, rather than behind it, and be based on data, rather than speculative hopes and fears.
RESUMEN
The Earth BioGenome Project (EBP) is an audacious endeavor to obtain whole-genome sequences of representatives from all eukaryotic species on Earth. In addition to the project's technical and organizational challenges, it also faces complicated ethical, legal, and social issues. This paper, from members of the EBP's Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) Committee, catalogs these ELSI concerns arising from EBP. These include legal issues, such as sample collection and permitting; the applicability of international treaties, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol; intellectual property; sample accessioning; and biosecurity and ethical issues, such as sampling from the territories of Indigenous peoples and local communities, the protection of endangered species, and cross-border collections, among several others. We also comment on the intersection of digital sequence information and data rights. More broadly, this list of ethical, legal, and social issues for large-scale genomic sequencing projects may be useful in the consideration of ethical frameworks for future projects. While we do not-and cannot-provide simple, overarching solutions for all the issues raised here, we conclude our perspective by beginning to chart a path forward for EBP's work.
Asunto(s)
Especies en Peligro de Extinción/legislación & jurisprudencia , Ética en Investigación , Genómica , Animales , Bioaseguramiento/ética , Bioaseguramiento/legislación & jurisprudencia , Genómica/ética , Genómica/legislación & jurisprudencia , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Collateral findings in pragmatic clinical trials are findings that may have implications for patients' health but were not generated to address a trial's primary research questions. It is uncertain how best to communicate these collateral findings to patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine how reactions to a letter communicating collateral findings relate to who signed the letter, the type of finding, or whether the letter specified that the finding arose from a pragmatic clinical trial. RESEARCH DESIGN: Web-based survey experiment using a between-subjects design in which respondents were randomly assigned within education strata to view and respond to 1 of 16 hypothetical scenarios. SUBJECTS: Adults recruited from an online panel constructed from a probability sample of US-based postal addresses. MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the action the respondent would take next (i.e., contact a doctor immediately or something else) and the respondent's emotional reactions (i.e., all positive, all negative, mixed, or none). RESULTS: A total of 4080 respondents had analyzable data. Although some effects were statistically significant (P < .05), none exceeded a prespecified threshold for policy relevance (15 or more percentage points). Ratings of letter clarity and level of understanding were lower for letters that included a description of the clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: Signatory and level of detail about collateral findings did not substantially affect people's intentions to take the recommended action of contacting their doctor. Deciding whether to include a description of the pragmatic clinical trial requires a trade-off between transparency and more difficulty understanding the contents of the letter.
Asunto(s)
Intención , Internet , Adulto , Humanos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs), which are becoming widespread since they are relatively inexpensive and offer important benefits for healthcare decision-making, can also present practical, ethical, and legal challenges. One such challenge involves managing "pragmatic clinical trial collateral findings" (PCT-CFs), or information emerging in a PCT that is unrelated to the primary research question(s), yet may have implications for individual patients, clinicians, or health care systems from whom or within which data were collected. The expansion of PCTs makes it likely healthcare systems will increasingly encounter PCT-CFs, yet little guidance exists regarding their appropriate management. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders experienced in the conduct or oversight of PCTs and those in health system leadership. Interviews explored respondents' experience with PCTs and PCT-CFs, and actual or hypothetical reactions to PCT-CF management. We used standard methods of qualitative analysis to identify key themes. FINDINGS: Forty-one stakeholders participated. Four key themes emerged. First, discussions of PCT-CFs are complicated by layers of ambiguity related to both the nature of PCTs themselves, and unanticipated results that emanate from them. Second, management of PCT-CFs is context-specific, and not amenable to a "one-size-fits-all" approach. Third, there was a wide diversity of attitudes regarding the scope of researcher responsibilities in PCTs. Fourth, PCT-CFs had generally not been previously considered by respondents, but there was widespread belief in the importance of prospective planning to anticipate such issues in future PCTs. CONCLUSIONS: PCT-CFs are likely to increase, yet those charged with PCT-CF decision-making and their disclosure are unlikely to have experience with these issues. Further deliberation about the ethical obligations and implementation processes regarding PCT-CFs is needed. To enhance the likelihood of developing sound policies and practices, such deliberations should include the input and perspectives of key stakeholders in PCTs, including professionals, policy makers, and patients.
RESUMEN
While the embedded nature of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) can improve the efficiency and relevance of research for multiple stakeholders, embedding research into ongoing clinical care can also involve ethical and regulatory challenges. An emergent challenge is the management of pragmatic clinical trial collateral findings (PCT-CFs). While PCT-CFs share some features with incidental or secondary findings that are encountered in conventional clinical trials and clinical care, the PCT context differs in ethically relevant ways that complicate PCT-CF identification and management. We report on the results of a two-year multi-method investigation of PCT-CFs. Overall, five core themes emerged: 1) the liminal nature of PCTs and the implications of this for PCT-CFs; 2) the context-specific nature of PCT-CF management; 3) the centrality of institutions; 4) the importance of prospective planning; and 5) patient expectations. Among the central lessons of this work are that prior ethics guidance from other settings cannot easily be adapted to address PCT-CFs, nor can a single approach readily accommodate all PCT-CFs. Moving forward, stakeholders, including researchers, institutions, ethics oversight bodies, and funders, should anticipate and plan for PCT-CFs in the design, conduct, and analysis of PCTs. Future scholarship is needed to examine experiences with PCT-CFs, and the practical and conceptual issues they raise for the future conduct of PCTs.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto , Proyectos de Investigación , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , InvestigadoresRESUMEN
Microsatellites, or MSATs, offer a fast and cost-effective way for biobanks to establish a biospecimen genetic profile. Importantly, this genetic profile can be used to authenticate multiple submissions derived from the same individual as well as biospecimens derived from the same original sample submission over time. While the Certificate of Confidentiality provided by the National Institutes of Health offers some meaningful protection to prevent the disclosure of potentially identifiable information to entities within the United States, we consider, in this study, the potential to offer additional protection to participants who choose to donate to biobanks by minimizing the use of forensic Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) MSAT markers in biobanking. To this end, we report the design and validation of a new multiplexed MSAT assay that does not include CODIS markers for use in biobanking operations and quality control management.
Asunto(s)
Bancos de Muestras Biológicas , Confidencialidad , Revelación , Humanos , Repeticiones de Microsatélite , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Organoid research is enhancing understanding of human development and diseases as well as aiding in medication development and selection, raising hopes for even more future therapeutic options. Nevertheless, this work raises important ethical issues and there is a paucity of data regarding patients' perspectives on them. We report on 60 interviews with adult patients or parents of pediatric patients from diverse disease populations who receive medical care at a major academic research institution in the United States. Interviewees expressed broad support for organoid development and use. However, patients viewed brain organoids, and sometimes gonadal organoids, as morally distinct; and some organoid research poses moral concerns. Nonetheless, patients generally understood the potential value of such research and approved of it, provided it was aimed at good intent and conducted with ethical oversight and a robust consent process. These data should help inform conceptual and policy deliberations about appropriate organoid use.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/métodos , Encéfalo/citología , Gónadas/citología , Organoides/citología , Pacientes/psicología , Adulto , Anciano , Investigación Biomédica/ética , Encéfalo/metabolismo , Femenino , Gónadas/metabolismo , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Organoides/metabolismo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Research in genetics and infectious diseases (ID) presents novel configurations of ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSIs) related to the intersection of genetics with public health regulations and the control of transmissible diseases. Such research includes work both in pathogen genetics and on the ways that human genetics affect responses to ID. This paper identifies and systematizes the unique issues at this intersection, based on an interdisciplinary expert review. BASIC PROCEDURES: This paper presents results of a formal issue-spotting exercise among twenty experts in public health, law and genomics, biobanking, genetic epidemiology, ID medicine and public health, philosophy, ethics and ID, ethics and genomics, and law and ID. The focus of the exercise was on the collection, storage, and sharing of genetic information relating to ID. MAIN FINDINGS: The issue-spotting exercise highlighted the following ELSIs: risks in reporting to government authorities, return of individual research results, and resource allocation - each taking on specific configurations based on the balance between public health and individual privacy/protection. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: The public health implications of interactions between genomics and ID frame considerations for equity and justice. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, these issues are especially pressing.
RESUMEN
There is a need for multimodal strategies to keep research participants informed about study results. Our aim was to characterize preferences of genomic research participants from two institutions along four dimensions of general research result updates: content, timing, mechanism, and frequency. METHODS: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey that was administered from 25 June 2018 to 5 December 2018. RESULTS: 397 participants completed the survey, most of whom (96%) expressed a desire to receive research updates. Preferences with high endorsement included: update content (brief descriptions of major findings, descriptions of purpose and goals, and educational material); update timing (when the research is completed, when findings are reviewed, when findings are published, and when the study status changes); update mechanism (email with updates, and email newsletter); and update frequency (every three months). Hierarchical cluster analyses based on the four update preferences identified four profiles of participants with similar preference patterns. Very few participants in the largest profile were comfortable with budgeting less money for research activities so that researchers have money to set up services to send research result updates to study participants. CONCLUSION: Future studies may benefit from exploring preferences for research result updates, as we have in our study. In addition, this work provides evidence of a need for funders to incentivize researchers to communicate results to participants.
RESUMEN
The ISSCR Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation were last revised in 2016. Since then, rapid progress has been made in research areas related to in vitro culture of human embryos, creation of stem cell-based embryo models, and in vitro gametogenesis. Therefore, a working group of international experts was convened to review the oversight process and provide an update to the guidelines. This report captures the discussion and summarizes the major recommendations made by this working group, with a specific emphasis on updating the categories of review and engagement with the specialized scientific and ethical oversight process.