Best ethical practices for clinicians and laboratories in the provision of noninvasive prenatal testing.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to provide an ethical framework for clinicians and companies providing noninvasive prenatal testing using cell-free fetal DNA or whole fetal cells. METHOD: In collaboration with a National Institutes of Health-supported research ethics consultation committee together with feedback from an interdisciplinary group of clinicians, members of industry, legal experts, and genetic counselors, we developed a set of best practices for the provision of noninvasive prenatal genetic testing. RESULTS: Principal recommendations include the amendment of current informed consent procedures to include attention to the noninvasive nature of new testing and the potential for a broader range of results earlier in the pregnancy. We strongly recommend that tests should only be provided through licensed medical providers and not directly to consumers. CONCLUSION: Prenatal tests, including new methods using cell-free fetal DNA, are not currently regulated by government agencies, and limited professional guidance is available. In the absence of regulation, companies and clinicians should cooperate to adopt responsible best ethical practices in the provision of these tests.

Unintended changes in cognition, mood, and behavior arising from cell-based interventions for neurological conditions: ethical challenges.

The prospect of using cell-based interventions (CBIs) to treat neurological conditions raises several important ethical and policy questions. In this target article, we focus on issues related to the unique constellation of traits that characterize CBIs targeted at the central nervous system. In particular, there is at least a theoretical prospect that these cells will alter the recipients' cognition, mood, and behavior-brain functions that are central to our concept of the self. The potential for such changes, although perhaps remote, is cause for concern and careful ethical analysis. Both to enable better informed consent in the future and as an end in itself, we argue that early human trials of CBIs for neurological conditions must monitor subjects for changes in cognition, mood, and behavior; further, we recommend concrete steps for that monitoring. Such steps will help better characterize the potential risks and benefits of CBIs as they are tested and potentially used for treatment.

Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: challenges for creators of practice guidelines.

The science of cancer is being revolutionized by the collaboration of cancer-afflicted families and determined scientists. The result has been an explosion of knowledge about inherited susceptibilities to particular types of cancer and the possibilities of testing for those susceptibilities. Susceptibility tests are becoming available for breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer, retinoblastoma, and hereditary medullary thyroid cancer--cancers both common and rare. Now, cancer patients, cancer families, and cancer physicians face the challenge of determining how--and whether--such tests can be put to good use.

Special issues in genetic testing for Alzheimer disease.

Genetic testing for Alzheimer disease (AD) raises two issues that are, thus far, unusual. First, genetic testing of dementia patients for diagnostic purposes necessarily leads to information of some predictive significance for the patient's family members. What information about the test results should be disclosed to whom needs careful consideration. Testing for a patient's apolipoprotein E (APOE) allele status was used, both in research and clinically, as a predictor of cardiovascular risk long before it was known to be associated with AD risk. Whether and how information about the newly understood AD implications of the test should be provided to those who were tested for cardiovascular risk needs attention, as does the general problem of new, and possibly less benign, meanings for old genetic test results.

Genetic testing and Alzheimer disease: recommendations of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society.

Several genes associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) have been localized and cloned; two genetic tests are already commercially available, and new tests are being developed. Genetic testing for AD--either for disease prediction or for diagnosis--raises critical ethical concerns. The multidisciplinary Alzheimer Disease Working Group of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society (PGES) presents comprehensive recommendations on genetic testing for AD. The Group concludes that under current conditions, genetic testing for AD prediction or diagnosis is only rarely appropriate. Criteria for judging the readiness of a test for introduction into routine clinical practice typically rely heavily on evaluation of technical efficacy. PGES recommends a broader and more comprehensive approach, considering: 1) the unique social and historical meanings of AD; 2) the availability of procedures to promote good surrogate decision making for incompetent patients and to safeguard confidentiality; 3) access to sophisticated genetic counselors able to communicate complex risk information and effectively convey the social costs and psychological burdens of testing, such as unintentional disclosure of predictive genetic information to family members; 4) protection from inappropriate advertising and marketing of genetic tests; and 5) recognition of the need for public education about the meaning and usefulness of predictive and diagnostic tests for AD. In this special issue of Genetic Testing, the PGES recommendations are published along with comprehensive background papers authored by Working Group members.

Direct brain interventions to "treat" disfavored human behaviors: ethical and social issues.

As neuroscience learns more about the causes of human behaviors, it will give us new ways to change those behaviors. When behaviors are caused by "brain diseases," effective actions that intervene directly in the brain will be readily accepted, but what about direct brain interventions that treat brain-based causes of socially disfavored behaviors that are not generally viewed as diseases?

Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: ethical challenges for early human trials.

BACKGROUND: Attempts to translate basic stem cell research into treatments for neurologic diseases and injury are well under way. With a clinical trial for one such treatment approved and in progress in the United States, and additional proposals under review, we must begin to address the ethical issues raised by such early forays into human clinical trials for cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions. METHODS: An interdisciplinary working group composed of experts in neuroscience, cell biology, bioethics, law, and transplantation, along with leading disease researchers, was convened twice over 2 years to identify and deliberate on the scientific and ethical issues raised by the transition from preclinical to clinical research of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions. RESULTS: While the relevant ethical issues are in many respects standard challenges of human subjects research, they are heightened in complexity by the novelty of the science, the focus on the CNS, and the political climate in which the science is proceeding. CONCLUSIONS: Distinctive challenges confronting US scientists, administrators, institutional review boards, stem cell research oversight committees, and others who will need to make decisions about work involving stem cells and their derivatives and evaluate the ethics of early human trials include evaluating the risks, safety, and benefits of these trials, determining and evaluating cell line provenance, and determining inclusion criteria, informed consent, and the ethics of conducting early human trials in the public spotlight. Further study and deliberation by stakeholders is required to move toward professional and institutional policies and practices governing this research.

Informed consent and other ethical issues in human population genetics.

Human population genetics has entered a new era of public interest, of controversy, and of ethical problems. Population genetics raises novel ethical problems because both the individuals and the populations being studied are, in effect, "subjects" of the research. Those populations are collectively subject to possible benefits and harms from the research and have interests, somewhat different from those of the individuals, that must be considered from both ethical and practical standpoints. The chapter first describes the new setting for research in human population genetics. It then examines the most controversial ethical issue in population genetics-whether researchers must obtain the informed consent of both the individual subjects and the group as a collectivity. Other vexing issues, including special problems caused by researchers' commercial interests, confidentiality, control over research uses and materials, and return of information to the population are also considered.

Iceland's plan for genomics research: facts and implications.

The government of Iceland has authorized a private, for-profit firm, deCODE Genetics, to construct a database of the population's medical records as part of a larger plan by deCODE for human genetics research. This article presents the background for genetics research in Iceland, the history of deCODE, and the terms of the law authorizing the database. It then examines five objections to the law, based on commercialization, lack of informed consent, risks to privacy, the effects of other research, and financial unfairness. It concludes that the Icelandic model is not a good precedent for similar research elsewhere.

Human genome diversity: what about the other human genome project?

Although the Human Genome Project has been successful, the Human Genome Diversity Project, proposed in 1991, has so far failed to thrive. One of the main values in studying the human genome, however, will come from examining its variations and their effects. To do that in a systematic way, an active Human Genome Diversity Project, or something very similar, will ultimately prove vital. Such an effort will confront difficult ethical and political issues; this article reviews those issues and tries to show how they might be overcome.

Legal, ethical, and social issues in human genome research.

In the past several decades, biological sciences have been revolutionized by their increased understanding of how life works at the molecular level. In what ways, and to what extent, will this scientific revolution affect the human societies within which the science is situated? The legal, ethical, and social implications of research in human genetics have been discussed in depth, particularly in the context of the Human Genome Project and, to a lesser extent, the proposed Human Genome Diversity Project. Both projects could have significant effects on society, the former largely at the level of individuals or families and the latter primarily at the level of ethnic groups or nations. These effects can be grouped in six broad categories: identity, prediction, history, manipulation, ownership and control, and destiny.

Breaking the stalemate: a prospective regulatory framework for unforseen research uses of human tissue samples and health information.

The legal and ethical issues raised by new research uses of previously collected human tissues and health information are increasingly important to genetics research. This Article discusses and criticizes current positions on such uses, including the recent report of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Research Involving Human Biological Materials. It then proposes a new regulatory framework for tissue and information collected in the future that would better protect the interests of the people who provide them. It ends by suggesting a resolution for the problems of previously collected tissue and information.