Purpose definition as a crucial step for determining the legal basis under the GDPR: implications for scientific research.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union, which became applicable in 2018, contains a new accountability principle. Under this principle, controllers (ie parties determining the purposes and the means of the processing of personal data) are responsible for ensuring and demonstrating the overall compliance with the GDPR. However, interpretive uncertainties of the GDPR mean that controllers must exercise considerable judgement in designing and implementing an appropriate compliance strategy, making GDPR compliance both complex and resource-intensive. In this article, we provide conceptual clarity around GDPR compliance with respect to one core aspect of the law: the determination and relevance of the purpose of personal data processing. We derive from the GDPR's text concrete requirements for purpose specification, which we subsequently apply to the area of secondary use of personal data for scientific research. We offer guidance for correctly specifying purposes of data processing under different research scenarios. To illustrate the practical necessity of purpose specification for GDPR compliance, we then show how our proposed approach can enable controllers to meet their compliance obligations, using the example of the overarching GDPR principle of lawfulness to highlight the relevance of purpose specification for the identification of a suitable legal basis.

Data sharing in neurodegenerative disease research: challenges and learnings from the innovative medicines initiative public-private partnership model.

Efficient data sharing is hampered by an array of organizational, ethical, behavioral, and technical challenges, slowing research progress and reducing the utility of data generated by clinical research studies on neurodegenerative diseases. There is a particular need to address differences between public and private sector environments for research and data sharing, which have varying standards, expectations, motivations, and interests. The Neuronet data sharing Working Group was set up to understand the existing barriers to data sharing in public-private partnership projects, and to provide guidance to overcome these barriers, by convening data sharing experts from diverse projects in the IMI neurodegeneration portfolio. In this policy and practice review, we outline the challenges and learnings of the WG, providing the neurodegeneration community with examples of good practices and recommendations on how to overcome obstacles to data sharing. These obstacles span organizational issues linked to the unique structure of cross-sectoral, collaborative research initiatives, to technical issues that affect the storage, structure and annotations of individual datasets. We also identify sociotechnical hurdles, such as academic recognition and reward systems that disincentivise data sharing, and legal challenges linked to heightened perceptions of data privacy risk, compounded by a lack of clear guidance on GDPR compliance mechanisms for public-private research. Focusing on real-world, neuroimaging and digital biomarker data, we highlight particular challenges and learnings for data sharing, such as data management planning, development of ethical codes of conduct, and harmonization of protocols and curation processes. Cross-cutting solutions and enablers include the principles of transparency, standardization and co-design - from open, accessible metadata catalogs that enhance findability of data, to measures that increase visibility and trust in data reuse.

Public attitudes towards the genetic testing in Georgia.

The aim of this study is to assess attitudes towards genetic testing in Georgian public. We used a Likert-scale written questionnaire. The survey was completed by 480 respondents. A majority of respondents (75.3%) curious about predictive genetic testing and 40.6% of participants preferred to be tested only for disorders that are treatable or preventable. Approximately 65% of the participants would like to test their newborn children for late-onset disorders and undergo preconception carrier screening (73%). In addition, the majority (59%) of our respondents were not worried that genetic testing would further stigmatize people with disabilities. These results indicate that the respondents surveyed in our study may have placed particularly high importance on the availability of genetic testing and greatly valued access to genomic information.

Interest in expanded carrier screening among individuals and couples in the general population: systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Through carrier screening, prospective parents can acquire information about whether they have an increased risk of conceiving a child affected with an autosomal recessive or X-linked condition. Within the last decade, advances in genomic technologies have facilitated a shift from condition-directed carrier screening to expanded carrier screening (ECS). Following the introduction of ECS, several studies have been performed to gauge the interest in this new technology among individuals and couples in the general population. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence from empirical studies that assess the interest in ECS among individuals and couples in the general population. As the availability and accessibility of ECS grow, more couples who are a priori not at risk based on their personal or family history will be presented with the choice to accept or decline such an offer. Their attitudes and beliefs, as well as the perceived usefulness of this screening modality, will likely determine whether ECS is to become a widespread reproductive genetic test. SEARCH METHODS: Four databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library) were systematically searched to identify English language studies performed between January 2009 and January 2019 using the following search terms: carrier screening, carrier testing, attitudes, intention, interest, views, opinions, perspectives and uptake. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported on intentions to undergo a (hypothetical) ECS test, uptake of an actual ECS offer or both. Two researchers performed a multistep selection process independently for validation purposes. OUTCOMES: Twelve empirical studies performed between 2015 and 2019 were included for analysis. The studies originated from the USA (n = 6), the Netherlands (n = 3), Belgium (n = 1), Sweden (n = 1) and Australia (n = 1). The sample size of the studies varied from 80 to 1669. In the included studies, 32%-76% of respondents were interested in a (hypothetical) ECS test, while uptake rates for actual ECS offers ranged from 8% to 50%. The highest overall uptake was observed when ECS was offered to pregnant women (50%). By contrast, studies focusing on the preconception population reported lower overall uptake rates (8-34%) with the exception of one study where women were counseled preconception in preparation for IVF (68.7%). WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Our findings suggest that there may be discrepancies between prospective parents' reported intentions to undergo ECS and their actual uptake, particularly during the preconception period. As ECS is a new and relatively unknown test for most future parents, the awareness and comprehension within the general population could be rather limited. Adequate pre- and post-test counseling services should be made available to couples offered ECS to ensure informed reproductive decision-making, together with guidelines for primary health care professionals. Due to restricted nature of the samples and methods of the underlying primary studies, some of the reported results might not be transferable to a broader population. More research is needed to see if the observed trends also apply to a broader and more diverse population.

How does carrier status for recessive disorders influence reproductive decisions? A systematic review of the literature.

Introduction: Carrier screening for recessive disorders is undertaken by prospective parents to inform their reproductive decisions. With the growing availability of affordable and comprehensive expanded carrier screening (ECS), it is expected that carrier screening will become a standard practice in the future. However, the impact of positive carrier screening results on the reproductive decisions of at-risk couples (ARCs) remains underexplored.Areas covered: We performed a systematic literature review to identify peer-reviewed publications describing the reproductive decisions of ARCs. Our search identified 19 relevant publications spanning the period 1994-2018. By synthesizing available evidence, we found that most ARCs chose to prevent the birth of an affected child and the decision to utilize preventive reproductive options was strongly influenced by the clinical nature of a disorder. However, there was also some heterogeneity in reproductive decisions within the same recessive disorders, suggesting that choices of ARCs can be influenced by factors other than the clinical nature of a disorder.Expert opinion: ECS is becoming increasingly common, which will result in the routine identification of many ARCs. Reproductive decision-making by ARCs is a complex and emotionally challenging process, highlighting the critical role of genetic counseling in the care for these potentially vulnerable patients.

Do athletes have a right to access data in their Athlete Biological Passport?

The Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) refers to the collection of data related to an individual athlete. The ABP contains the Haematological Module and the Steroidal Module, which are used for the longitudinal monitoring of variables in blood and urine, respectively. Based on changes in these variables, a statistical model detects outliers which indicate doping use and guide further targeted testing of the athlete. Presently, athletes can access their data of the Haematological Module in the Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS). However, granting athletes access to this data has been a matter of debate within the anti-doping community. This article investigates whether an athlete has a right to access the contents of their ABP profile. We approached this discussion by comparing the nature of ABP data with that of forensic and medical data and touched on important concerns with ABP data disclosure to athletes such as potentially allowing for the development of alternative doping techniques to circumvent detection; and making athletes vulnerable to pressure by the media to publicly release their data. Furthermore, given that ABP data may contain medically relevant information that can be used to diagnose disease, athletes may over-interpret its medical significance and wrongly see it as a free health check. We argue that safeguarding the integrity of the ABP system must be seen as the most essential element and thus a departure from immediate data disclosure is necessary. Two different strategies for delayed data disclosure are proposed which diminish the chances of ABP data being misused to refine doping techniques.

Expanded carrier screening for monogenic disorders: where are we now?

BACKGROUND: Expanded carrier screening (ECS), which can identify carriers of a large number of recessive disorders in the general population, has grown in popularity and is now widely accessible to prospective parents. This article presents a comprehensive overview of the characteristics of currently available ECS tests. METHODS: To identify relevant ECS providers, we employed a multi-step approach, which included online searching, review of the recent literature, and consultations with researchers familiar with the current landscape of ECS. RESULTS: As of January 2017, there were 16 providers of ECS tests: 13 commercial companies, 2 medical hospitals, and 1 academic diagnostic laboratory. We observed drastic differences in the characteristics of ECS tests, with the number of conditions ranging from 41 to 1792. Only three conditions (cystic fibrosis, maple syrup urine disease 1b, and Niemann-Pick disease) were screened for by all providers. Where the same disease gene was included by multiple providers, substantial differences existed in the mutations screened and/or variant interpretation/reporting strategies. CONCLUSION: Given the importance of carrier screening results in reproductive decision-making, the observed heterogeneity across ECS panels is concerning. Efforts should be made to ensure that clear and concrete criteria are in place to guide the development of ECS panels. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A systematic analysis of online marketing materials used by providers of expanded carrier screening.

PURPOSE: Expanded carrier screening (ECS) for a large number of recessive disorders is available to prospective parents through commercial providers. This study aimed to analyze the content of marketing materials on ECS providers' websites. METHODS: To identify providers of ECS tests, we undertook a comprehensive online search, reviewed recent academic literature on commercial carrier screening, and consulted with colleagues familiar with the current ECS landscape. The identified websites were archived in April 2017, and inductive content analysis was performed on website text, brochures and educational materials, and video transcripts. RESULTS: We identified 18 ECS providers, including 16 commercial genetic testing companies. Providers typically described ECS as an important family planning tool. The content differed in both the tone used to promote ECS and the accuracy and completeness of the test information provided. We found that most providers offered complimentary genetic counseling to their consumers, although this was often optional, limited to the posttest context, and, in some cases, appeared to be available only to test-positive individuals. CONCLUSION: The quality of ECS providers' websites could be improved by offering more complete and accurate information about ECS and their tests. Providers should also ensure that all carrier couples receive posttest genetic counseling to inform their subsequent reproductive decision making.

Responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.271.

Pre- and post-testing counseling considerations for the provision of expanded carrier screening: exploration of European geneticists' views.

BACKGROUND: Carrier screening is generally performed with the aim of identifying healthy couples at risk of having a child affected with a monogenic disorder to provide them with reproductive options. Expanded carrier screening (ECS), which provides the opportunity for multiple conditions to be screened in one test, offers a more cost-effective and comprehensive option than screening for single disorders. However, implementation of ECS at a population level would have implications for genetic counseling practice. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with sixteen European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening to explore their views on the implementation of ECS in the clinical setting. RESULTS: Using inductive content analysis, we identified content categories relevant to the pre- and post-test settings. Participants believed ECS would ideally be targeted at couples before pregnancy. There was some disagreement regarding the acceptability of performing ECS in individuals, with several participants actively opposing individual-based screening. In addition, participants discussed the importance of ensuring informed and voluntary participation in ECS, recommending measures to minimize external pressure on prospective parents to undergo testing. A need for adequate counseling to foster informed, autonomous reproductive decision-making and provide support for couples found to be at risk was emphasized. CONCLUSIONS: Practical challenges in optimizing pre-test education and post-test counseling should not be underestimated and they should be carefully addressed before implementing ECS in the clinical setting.

Growing complexity of (expanded) carrier screening: Direct-to-consumer, physician-mediated, and clinic-based offers.

Since the introduction of out-of-hospital health-related genetic tests more than a decade ago, the landscape of genetic testing services has grown in complexity. Although initially most genetic tests for health purposes were offered as direct-to-consumer services, that is, without the mediation of a medical professional, currently many commercial providers require that their tests be ordered by a licensed physician. At the same time, some commercially developed health-related genetic tests are gaining support from the professional medical community and are finding their way into clinical practice. Therefore, we differentiated between three types of genetic testing offers: direct-to-consumer, physician-mediated, and clinic-based genetic testing. Expanded carrier screening tests for recessive disorders are currently available through all the three models of genetic testing. Herein, we review the present landscape of expanded carrier screening offers by highlighting the distinct issues associated with each of the three types of genetic testing.

Public Views on Genetics and Genetic Testing: A Survey of the General Public in Belgium.

AIMS: To explore the views of the Belgian public on various topics surrounding genetics and genetic testing (GT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A written questionnaire was administered to visitors of the annual cartoon festival in Knokke-Heist, Belgium, during the summer of 2014. The main theme of the festival was challenges and progress in human genetics and it was attended by more than 100,000 visitors. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 1182 respondents, resulting in a demographically diverse sample with a mean age of 48.5 years. Our respondents expressed moderate interest in predictive GT, with 39.1% willing to learn about their predisposition to diseases through GT and 49.5% indicating interest in getting tested exclusively for treatable/preventable diseases. We observed higher interest in GT for reproductive purposes, such as preconception screening for recessive disorders (53.8%) and prenatal GT (60.7%). A substantial minority (46.4%) of the respondents were worried that GT could further stigmatize people with disabilities, while 39.7% believed that carrier screening for recessive diseases would lead to an inferior image of people affected by them. CONCLUSION: Paying due attention to the attitudes, beliefs, and concerns of the general public is important to ensure ethically sound and socially acceptable implementation of new genetic technologies.

Attitudes of European Geneticists Regarding Expanded Carrier Screening.

OBJECTIVE: To explore attitudes of clinical and molecular geneticists about the implementation of multi-disease or expanded carrier screening (ECS) for monogenic recessive disorders. DESIGN: Qualitative; semistructured interviews. SETTING: In person or via Skype. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. PARTICIPANTS: European clinical and molecular geneticists with expertise in carrier screening (N = 16). METHODS: Inductive content analysis was used to identify common content categories in the data. RESULTS: Participants recognized important benefits of ECS, but they also identified major challenges, including limited benefit of ECS for most couples in the general population, lack of knowledge on carrier screening among nongenetic health care providers and the general public, potential negative implications of ECS for society, and limited economic resources. Participants favored an evidence-based approach to the implementation of population-wide ECS and were reluctant to actively offer ECS in the absence of demonstrable benefits. However, there was a consensus among the participants that ECS should be made available to couples who request the test. In addition, they believed ECS could be routinely offered to all people who use assisted reproduction. CONCLUSION: Although a limited ECS offer is practical, it also raises concerns over equality in access to screening. A comprehensive risk-benefit analysis is needed to determine the desirability of systematic population-wide ECS.

Participation of Children in Medical Decision-Making: Challenges and Potential Solutions.

Participation in healthcare decision-making is considered to be an important right of minors, and is highlighted in both international legislation and public policies. However, despite the legal recognition of children's rights to participation, and also the benefits that children experience by their involvement, there is evidence that legislation is not always translated into healthcare practice. There are a number of factors that may impact on the ability of the child to be involved in decisions regarding their medical care. Some of these factors relate to the child, including their capacity to be actively involved in these decisions. Others relate to the family situation, sociocultural context, or the underlying beliefs and practices of the healthcare provider involved. In spite of these challenges to including children in decisions regarding their clinical care, we argue that it is an important factor in their treatment. The extent to which children should participate in this process should be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking all of the potential barriers into account.

Responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening.

This document of the European Society of Human Genetics contains recommendations regarding responsible implementation of expanded carrier screening. Carrier screening is defined here as the detection of carrier status of recessive diseases in couples or persons who do not have an a priori increased risk of being a carrier based on their or their partners' personal or family history. Expanded carrier screening offers carrier screening for multiple autosomal and X-linked recessive disorders, facilitated by new genetic testing technologies, and allows testing of individuals regardless of ancestry or geographic origin. Carrier screening aims to identify couples who have an increased risk of having an affected child in order to facilitate informed reproductive decision making. In previous decades, carrier screening was typically performed for one or few relatively common recessive disorders associated with significant morbidity, reduced life-expectancy and often because of a considerable higher carrier frequency in a specific population for certain diseases. New genetic testing technologies enable the expansion of screening to multiple conditions, genes or sequence variants. Expanded carrier screening panels that have been introduced to date have been advertised and offered to health care professionals and the public on a commercial basis. This document discusses the challenges that expanded carrier screening might pose in the context of the lessons learnt from decades of population-based carrier screening and in the context of existing screening criteria. It aims to contribute to the public and professional discussion and to arrive at better clinical and laboratory practice guidelines.

Designing expanded carrier screening panels: results of a qualitative study with European geneticists.

AIM: To explore the views of clinical and molecular geneticists on the inclusion of disorders and specific pathogenic mutations into expanded carrier screening (ECS) tests for reproductive purposes. MATERIALS & METHODS: In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 European geneticists between April and September 2014. RESULTS: All participants supported carrier screening for severe, childhood-onset autosomal recessive disorders with known natural history. Some participants were also in favor of screening for late-onset and X-linked disorders. Regarding selection of specific pathogenic mutations, our participants argued that ECS should include highly penetrant pathogenic mutations with known genotype-phenotype associations. CONCLUSION: This study highlights main challenges surrounding the development of ECS panels and offers suggestions for future research in this rapidly advancing field.