ABSTRACT
The premise of Open Science is that research and medical management will progress faster if data and knowledge are openly shared. The value of Open Science is nowhere more important and appreciated than in the rare disease (RD) community. Research into RDs has been limited by insufficient patient data and resources, a paucity of trained disease experts, and lack of therapeutics, leading to long delays in diagnosis and treatment. These issues can be ameliorated by following the principles and practices of sharing that are intrinsic to Open Science. Here, we describe how the RD community has adopted the core pillars of Open Science, adding new initiatives to promote care and research for RD patients and, ultimately, for all of medicine. We also present recommendations that can advance Open Science more globally.
ABSTRACT
Rare diseases (RD) patient registries are powerful instruments that help develop clinical research, facilitate the planning of appropriate clinical trials, improve patient care, and support healthcare management. They constitute a key information system that supports the activities of European Reference Networks (ERNs) on rare diseases. A rapid proliferation of RD registries has occurred during the last years and there is a need to develop guidance for the minimum requirements, recommendations and standards necessary to maintain a high-quality registry. In response to these heterogeneities, in the framework of RD-Connect, a European platform connecting databases, registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research, we report on a list of recommendations, developed by a group of experts, including members of patient organizations, to be used as a framework for improving the quality of RD registries. This list includes aspects of governance, Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR) data and information, infrastructure, documentation, training, and quality audit. The list is intended to be used by established as well as new RD registries. Further work includes the development of a toolkit to enable continuous assessment and improvement of their organizational and data quality.
Subject(s)
Quality Improvement , Rare Diseases , Registries/standards , Biomedical Research , Computational Biology , Data Accuracy , Europe , Humans , Information Storage and Retrieval/standardsABSTRACT
In rare disease (RD) research, there is a huge need to systematically collect biomaterials, phenotypic, and genomic data in a standardized way and to make them findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR). RD-Connect is a 6 years global infrastructure project initiated in November 2012 that links genomic data with patient registries, biobanks, and clinical bioinformatics tools to create a central research resource for RDs. Here, we present RD-Connect Registry & Biobank Finder, a tool that helps RD researchers to find RD biobanks and registries and provide information on the availability and accessibility of content in each database. The finder concentrates information that is currently sparse on different repositories (inventories, websites, scientific journals, technical reports, etc.), including aggregated data and metadata from participating databases. Aggregated data provided by the finder, if appropriately checked, can be used by researchers who are trying to estimate the prevalence of a RD, to organize a clinical trial on a RD, or to estimate the volume of patients seen by different clinical centers. The finder is also a portal to other RD-Connect tools, providing a link to the RD-Connect Sample Catalogue, a large inventory of RD biological samples available in participating biobanks for RD research. There are several kinds of users and potential uses for the RD-Connect Registry & Biobank Finder, including researchers collaborating with academia and the industry, dealing with the questions of basic, translational, and/or clinical research. As of November 2017, the finder is populated with aggregated data for 222 registries and 21 biobanks.
Subject(s)
Computational Biology , Genomics , Metadata , Rare Diseases/genetics , Biological Specimen Banks , Biomedical Research , Databases, Factual , Humans , Information Dissemination , Patients , Rare Diseases/blood , Rare Diseases/epidemiology , RegistriesABSTRACT
In the field of rare diseases, registries are considered power tool to develop clinical research, to facilitate the planning of appropriate clinical trials, to improve patient care and healthcare planning. Therefore high quality data of rare diseases registries is considered to be one of the most important element in the establishment and maintenance of a registry. Data quality can be defined as the totality of features and characteristics of data set that bear on its ability to satisfy the needs that result from the intended use of the data. In the context of registries, the 'product' is data, and quality refers to data quality, meaning that the data coming into the registry have been validated, and ready for use for analysis and research. Determining the quality of data is possible through data assessment against a number of dimensions: completeness, validity; coherence and comparability; accessibility; usefulness; timeliness; prevention of duplicate records. Many others factors may influence the quality of a registry: development of standardized Case Report Form and security/safety controls of informatics infrastructure. With the growing number of rare diseases registries being established, there is a need to develop a quality validation process to evaluate the quality of each registry. A clear description of the registry is the first step when assessing data quality or the registry evaluation system. Here we report a template as a guide for helping registry owners to describe their registry.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/methods , Data Accuracy , Databases, Factual , Health Information Interoperability , Rare Diseases , Registries , Research Design , Biomedical Research/standards , Databases, Factual/standards , Guidelines as Topic , Health Information Interoperability/standards , Humans , Quality Control , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Rare Diseases/epidemiology , Rare Diseases/therapy , Registries/standards , Research Design/standardsABSTRACT
Well-annotated and properly preserved specimens are crucial both for diagnostic purposes and for use in basic and pre-clinical research, and are especially important for rare disease (RD) studies. Several consortia have been established in the recent years in order to facilitate research and to maximise access to rare biological samples and data stored in rare disease biobanks and registries, among them the EuroBioBank network and the Spain National Rare Disease Registry (RDR) and Biobank (BioNER).EuroBioBank, established in 2001, was the first network of RD biobanks to operate in Europe as a service distributing human DNA, cells, and tissue to the scientific community conducting research on rare diseases.The Spanish RDR and BioNER were created for facilitating rare disease research and health-related matters. The coordination of these two bodies represents an example of great scientific value as biological samples donated by patients at BioNER are linked to clinical information collected in the RDR.Rare disease biobanks and registries will need for the future to increase their effort to improve interconnection so to enable investigators to better locate samples and associated data, while protecting security of the data and privacy of the participants and adhering to international ethical and legal requirements.
Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks , Biomedical Research/methods , International Cooperation , Rare Diseases , Registries , Research Design , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Information Dissemination , Program Development , Program Evaluation , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Rare Diseases/epidemiology , Rare Diseases/therapyABSTRACT
The use of Common Data Elements can facilitate cross-study comparisons, data aggregation, and meta-analyses; simplify training and operations; improve overall efficiency; promote interoperability between different systems; and improve the quality of data collection. A Common Data Element is a combination of a precisely defined question (variable) paired with a specified set of responses to the question that is common to multiple datasets or used across different studies. Common Data Elements, especially when they conform to accepted standards, are identified by research communities from variable sets currently in use or are newly developed to address a designated data need. There are no formal international specifications governing the construction or use of Common Data Elements. Consequently, Common Data Elements tend to be made available by research communities on an empiric basis. Some limitations of Common Data Elements are that there may still be differences across studies in the interpretation and implementation of the Common Data Elements, variable validity in different populations, and inhibition by some existing research practices and the use of legacy data systems. Current National Institutes of Health efforts to support Common Data Element use are linked to the strengthening of National Institutes of Health Data Sharing policies and the investments in data repositories. Initiatives include cross-domain and domain-specific resources, construction of a Common Data Element Portal, and establishment of trans-National Institutes of Health working groups to address technical and implementation topics. The National Institutes of Health is seeking to lower the barriers to Common Data Element use through greater awareness and encourage the culture change necessary for their uptake and use. As National Institutes of Health, other agencies, professional societies, patient registries, and advocacy groups continue efforts to develop and promote the responsible use of Common Data Elements, particularly if linked to accepted data standards and terminologies, continued engagement with and feedback from the research community will remain important.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , Common Data Elements , Information Dissemination , Data Collection , Humans , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , United StatesABSTRACT
There is a growing concern in the ethics literature and among policy makers that de-identification or coding of personal data and biospecimens is not sufficient for protecting research subjects from privacy invasions and possible breaches of confidentiality due to the possibility of unauthorized re-identification. At the same time, there is a need in medical science to be able to identify individual patients. In particular for rare disease research there is a special and well-documented need for research collaboration so that data and biosamples from multiple independent studies can be shared across borders. In this article, we identify the needs and arguments related to de-identification and re-identification of patients and research subjects and suggest how the different needs may be balanced within a framework of using unique encrypted identifiers.
Subject(s)
Genetic Privacy/ethics , Genetic Testing/ethics , International Cooperation , Rare Diseases/genetics , Biomedical Research/ethics , Biomedical Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Biomedical Research/methods , Genetic Privacy/legislation & jurisprudence , Genetic Testing/legislation & jurisprudence , Genetic Testing/methods , Humans , Rare Diseases/diagnosisABSTRACT
The main goal of the NIH/NCATS GRDR® program is to serve as a central web-based global data repository to integrate de-identified patient clinical data from rare disease registries, and other data sources, in a standardized manner, to be available to researchers for conducting various biomedical studies, including clinical trials and to support analyses within and across diseases. The aim of the program is to advance research for many rare diseases. One of the first tasks toward achieving this goal was the development of a set of Common Data Elements (CDEs), which are controlled terminologies that represent collected data. A list of 75 CDEs was developed by a national committee and was validated and implemented during a period of 2 year proof of concept. Access to GRDR CDEs is freely available at: https://grdr.ncats.nih.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=5. The GRDR CDEs have been the cornerstone of the GRDR repository, as well as of several other national and international patient registries. The establishment of the GRDR program has elevated the issue of data standardization and interoperability for rare disease patient registries, to international attention, resulting in a global dialog and significant change in the mindset of registry developers, patient advocacy groups, and other national and international organizations.
Subject(s)
Common Data Elements/standards , Databases, Factual/standards , Rare Diseases/epidemiology , Rare Diseases/therapy , Biomedical Research/methods , Data Collection/methods , HumansABSTRACT
There is a growing international agreement on the need to provide greater access to research data and bio-specimen collections to optimize their long-term value and exploit their potential for health discovery and validation. This is especially evident for rare disease research. Currently, the rising value of data and bio-specimen collections does not correspond with an equal increase in data/sample-sharing and data/sample access. Contradictory legal and ethical frameworks across national borders are obstacles to effective sharing: more specifically, the absence of an integrated model proves to be a major logistical obstruction. The Charter intends to amend the obstacle by providing both the ethical foundations on which data sharing should be based, as well as a general Material and Data Transfer Agreement (MTA/DTA). This Charter is the result of a careful negotiation of different stakeholders' interest and is built on earlier consensus documents and position statements, which provided the general international legal framework. Further to this, the Charter provides tools that may help accelerate sharing. The Charter has been formulated to serve as an enabling tool for effective and transparent data and bio-specimen sharing and the general MTA/DTA constitutes a mechanism to ensure uniformity of access across projects and countries, and may be regarded as a consistent basic agreement for addressing data and material sharing globally. The Charter is forward looking in terms of emerging issues from the perspective of a multi-stakeholder group, and where possible, provides strategies that may address these issues.
Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks/legislation & jurisprudence , Contracts , Information Dissemination/legislation & jurisprudence , International Cooperation/legislation & jurisprudence , Biological Specimen Banks/organization & administration , Europe , Information Dissemination/ethicsABSTRACT
Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a relatively common genetic disorder associated with high risk of coronary heart disease that is preventable by early diagnosis and treatment. In a previous article, we reviewed the evidence for clinical management, models of care and health economic evaluations. The present commentary emphasises that collective action is needed to strengthen our approaches to evidence-based care, including better diagnosis and access to effective therapies. We detail how contemporary innovations in inter-operable, web-based, open-source and secure registries can provide the supporting infrastructure to: (i) address a current gap in the flow of data for measuring the quality of healthcare; (ii) support basic research through provision of high-quality, de-identified aggregate data; (iii) enable equitable access to clinical trials; and (iv) support efforts to disseminate evidence for best practice and information for care services. We describe how these aspects of enabling infrastructure will be incorporated into the development of a National FH Registry for Australasia, and proffer that a coordinated response to FH would be enhanced through a global network of inter-operable registries.
Subject(s)
Coronary Disease/prevention & control , Evidence-Based Practice/standards , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/drug therapy , Quality Assurance, Health Care/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Australia , Coronary Disease/etiology , Evidence-Based Practice/methods , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/complications , Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II/genetics , Information Dissemination/methods , Internationality , New Zealand , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Secondary PreventionSubject(s)
Guideline Adherence , Informed Consent/standards , Patient Advocacy , Rare Diseases , Registries/standards , HumansABSTRACT
A December 2010 meeting, "Down Syndrome: National Conference on Patient Registries, Research Databases, and Biobanks," was jointly sponsored by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, MD, and the Global Down Syndrome Foundation (GDSF)/Linda Crnic Institute for Down Syndrome based in Denver, CO. Approximately 70 attendees and organizers from various advocacy groups, federal agencies (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and various NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices), members of industry, clinicians, and researchers from various academic institutions were greeted by Drs. Yvonne Maddox, Deputy Director of NICHD, and Edward McCabe, Executive Director of the Linda Crnic Institute for Down Syndrome. They charged the participants to focus on the separate issues of contact registries, research databases, and biobanks through both podium presentations and breakout session discussions. Among the breakout groups for each of the major sessions, participants were asked to generate responses to questions posed by the organizers concerning these three research resources as they related to Down syndrome and then to report back to the group at large with a summary of their discussions. This report represents a synthesis of the discussions and suggested approaches formulated by the group as a whole.
Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks/statistics & numerical data , Biomedical Research/statistics & numerical data , Databases as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Down Syndrome/epidemiology , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Humans , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Human biospecimens are subject to a number of different collection, processing, and storage factors that can significantly alter their molecular composition and consistency. These biospecimen preanalytical factors, in turn, influence experimental outcomes and the ability to reproduce scientific results. Currently, the extent and type of information specific to the biospecimen preanalytical conditions reported in scientific publications and regulatory submissions varies widely. To improve the quality of research utilizing human tissues, it is critical that information regarding the handling of biospecimens be reported in a thorough, accurate, and standardized manner. The Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality recommendations outlined herein are intended to apply to any study in which human biospecimens are used. The purpose of reporting these details is to supply others, from researchers to regulators, with more consistent and standardized information to better evaluate, interpret, compare, and reproduce the experimental results. The Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality guidelines are proposed as an important and timely resource tool to strengthen communication and publications around biospecimen-related research and help reassure patient contributors and the advocacy community that the contributions are valued and respected.
ABSTRACT
Human biospecimens are subject to a number of different collection, processing, and storage factors that can significantly alter their molecular composition and consistency. These biospecimen preanalytical factors, in turn, influence experimental outcomes and the ability to reproduce scientific results. Currently, the extent and type of information specific to the biospecimen preanalytical conditions reported in scientific publications and regulatory submissions varies widely. To improve the quality of research utilizing human tissues, it is critical that information regarding the handling of biospecimens be reported in a thorough, accurate, and standardized manner. The Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality (BRISQ) recommendations outlined herein are intended to apply to any study in which human biospecimens are used. The purpose of reporting these details is to supply others, from researchers to regulators, with more consistent and standardized information to better evaluate, interpret, compare, and reproduce the experimental results. The BRISQ guidelines are proposed as an important and timely resource tool to strengthen communication and publications around biospecimen-related research and help reassure patient contributors and the advocacy community that the contributions are valued and respected.
Subject(s)
Research/standards , Specimen Handling , Humans , Quality ControlABSTRACT
Human biospecimens are subjected to collection, processing, and storage that can significantly alter their molecular composition and consistency. These biospecimen preanalytical factors, in turn, influence experimental outcomes and the ability to reproduce scientific results. Currently, the extent and type of information specific to the biospecimen preanalytical conditions reported in scientific publications and regulatory submissions varies widely. To improve the quality of research that uses human tissues, it is crucial that information on the handling of biospecimens be reported in a thorough, accurate, and standardized manner. The Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality (BRISQ) recommendations outlined herein are intended to apply to any study in which human biospecimens are used. The purpose of reporting these details is to supply others, from researchers to regulators, with more consistent and standardized information to better evaluate, interpret, compare, and reproduce the experimental results. The BRISQ guidelines are proposed as an important and timely resource tool to strengthen communication and publications on biospecimen-related research and to help reassure patient contributors and the advocacy community that their contributions are valued and respected.
Subject(s)
Biological Specimen Banks/standards , Specimen Handling/standards , Biomedical Research/standards , Humans , Quality Control , Reference StandardsABSTRACT
A movement to create a global patient registry for as many as 7,000 rare diseases was launched at a workshop, "Advancing Rare Disease Research: The Intersection of Patient Registries, Biospecimen Repositories, and Clinical Data." http://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/PATIENT_REGISTRIES_WORKSHOP/. The workshop was sponsored by the Office of Rare Diseases Research (ORDR). The focus was the building of an infrastructure for an internet-based global registry linking to biorepositories. Such a registry would serve the patients, investigators, and drug companies. To aid researchers the participants suggested the creation of a centralized database of biorepositories for rare biospecimens (RD-HUB)http://biospecimens.ordr.info.nih.gov/ that could be linked to the registry. Over two days of presentations and breakout sessions, several hundred attendees discussed government rules and regulations concerning privacy and patients' rights and the nature and scope of data to be entered into a central registry as well as concerns about how to validate patient and clinician-entered data to ensure data accuracy. Mechanisms for aggregating data from existing registries were also discussed. The attendees identified registry best practices, model coding systems, international systems for recruiting patients into clinical trials and novel ways of using the internet directly to invite participation in research. They also speculated about who would bear ultimate responsibility for the informatics in the registry and who would have access to the information. Hurdles associated with biospecimen collection and how to overcome them were detailed. The development of the recommendations was, in itself, an indication of the commitment of the rare disease community as never before.