Cargando…

Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review

Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tschigg, Katharina, Consoli, Luca, Biasiotto, Roberta, Mascalzoni, Deborah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35705790
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y
_version_ 1784781503213862912
author Tschigg, Katharina
Consoli, Luca
Biasiotto, Roberta
Mascalzoni, Deborah
author_facet Tschigg, Katharina
Consoli, Luca
Biasiotto, Roberta
Mascalzoni, Deborah
author_sort Tschigg, Katharina
collection PubMed
description Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and governance frameworks do not apply to all aspects of genotype-driven research approaches. The recall strategies disclose or withhold personal genotypic information with uncertain clinical utility. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to identify peculiar, explicit and implicit ethical, legal, and societal/social implications (ELSI) of RbG study designs. We conducted a systematic literature search of three electronic databases from November 2020 to February 2021. We investigated qualitative and quantitative research methods used to report ELSI aspects in RbG research. Congruent with other research findings, we identified a lack of qualitative research investigating the particular ELSI challenges with RbG. We included and analysed the content of twenty-five publications. We found a consensus on RbG posing significant ethical issues, dilemmas, barriers, concerns and societal challenges. However, we found that the approaches to disclosure and study-specific recall and communication strategies employed consent models and Return of Research Results (RoRR) policies varied considerably. Furthermore, we identified a high heterogeneity in perspectives of participants and experts about ELSI of study-specific RbG policies. Therefore, further fine-mapping through qualitative and empirical research is needed to draw conclusions and re-fine ELSI frameworks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9437022
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94370222022-09-03 Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review Tschigg, Katharina Consoli, Luca Biasiotto, Roberta Mascalzoni, Deborah Eur J Hum Genet Review Article Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and governance frameworks do not apply to all aspects of genotype-driven research approaches. The recall strategies disclose or withhold personal genotypic information with uncertain clinical utility. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to identify peculiar, explicit and implicit ethical, legal, and societal/social implications (ELSI) of RbG study designs. We conducted a systematic literature search of three electronic databases from November 2020 to February 2021. We investigated qualitative and quantitative research methods used to report ELSI aspects in RbG research. Congruent with other research findings, we identified a lack of qualitative research investigating the particular ELSI challenges with RbG. We included and analysed the content of twenty-five publications. We found a consensus on RbG posing significant ethical issues, dilemmas, barriers, concerns and societal challenges. However, we found that the approaches to disclosure and study-specific recall and communication strategies employed consent models and Return of Research Results (RoRR) policies varied considerably. Furthermore, we identified a high heterogeneity in perspectives of participants and experts about ELSI of study-specific RbG policies. Therefore, further fine-mapping through qualitative and empirical research is needed to draw conclusions and re-fine ELSI frameworks. Springer International Publishing 2022-06-15 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9437022/ /pubmed/35705790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review Article
Tschigg, Katharina
Consoli, Luca
Biasiotto, Roberta
Mascalzoni, Deborah
Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title_full Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title_fullStr Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title_short Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
title_sort ethical, legal and social/societal implications (elsi) of recall-by-genotype (rbg) and genotype-driven-research (gdr) approaches: a scoping review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35705790
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y
work_keys_str_mv AT tschiggkatharina ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview
AT consoliluca ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview
AT biasiottoroberta ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview
AT mascalzonideborah ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview