Pitfalls and Challenges of Consenting to Genetic Research Studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Milo Rasouly H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6224793 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Pitfalls and Challenges of Consenting to Genetic Research Studies.
Milo Rasouly Hila H Marasa Maddalena M
Kidney international reports 20180822 6
Similar Datasets
Project description:The molecular mechanisms underlying the development of bone metastases in breast cancer remain unclear. Disseminated tumour cells (DTCs) in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients are commonly identified, even in early stage disease, but their potential to initiate metastases is not known. The mechanism whereby DTCs become overt metastatic tumour cells (MTCs) is therefore, an area of considerable interest. This study explored the analysable yield of genetic material from human biopsy samples in order to describe differences in gene expression between DTCs and bone MTCs. Thirteen breast cancer patients with bone metastases underwent a CT-guided bone metastasis biopsy and a bone marrow biopsy. Tumour cells were enriched and gene expression profiling was conducted to identify differentially expressed genes. The analysable yield of sufficient RNA for microarray analysis was 60% from bone metastasis biopsies and 80% from bone marrow biopsies. A signature of 133 candidate genes differentially expressed between DTCs and MTCs was identified. Several genes relevant to breast cancer metastasis to bone (osteopontin, CTGF, parathyroid hormone receptor, EGFR) were significantly overexpressed in MTCs as compared to DTCs. Biopsies of bone metastases and bone marrow rarely yield enough tissue for robust molecular biology studies using clinical samples. The findings obtained however are interesting and seem to overlap with the bone metastasis gene expression signature described in murine xenograft models. Larger biopsy specimens or improved RNA extraction techniques may improve analysable yield and feasibility of these techniques. Gene expression profiling was utilized to compare DTCs obtained from bone marrow aspirates (A) to MTCs isolated from Computed Tomography (C) guided biopsies of bone metastases.
2012-07-05 | E-GEOD-14776 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:The molecular mechanisms underlying the development of bone metastases in breast cancer remain unclear. Disseminated tumour cells (DTCs) in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients are commonly identified, even in early stage disease, but their potential to initiate metastases is not known. The mechanism whereby DTCs become overt metastatic tumour cells (MTCs) is therefore, an area of considerable interest. This study explored the analysable yield of genetic material from human biopsy samples in order to describe differences in gene expression between DTCs and bone MTCs. Thirteen breast cancer patients with bone metastases underwent a CT-guided bone metastasis biopsy and a bone marrow biopsy. Tumour cells were enriched and gene expression profiling was conducted to identify differentially expressed genes. The analysable yield of sufficient RNA for microarray analysis was 60% from bone metastasis biopsies and 80% from bone marrow biopsies. A signature of 133 candidate genes differentially expressed between DTCs and MTCs was identified. Several genes relevant to breast cancer metastasis to bone (osteopontin, CTGF, parathyroid hormone receptor, EGFR) were significantly overexpressed in MTCs as compared to DTCs. Biopsies of bone metastases and bone marrow rarely yield enough tissue for robust molecular biology studies using clinical samples. The findings obtained however are interesting and seem to overlap with the bone metastasis gene expression signature described in murine xenograft models. Larger biopsy specimens or improved RNA extraction techniques may improve analysable yield and feasibility of these techniques.
2012-07-06 | GSE14776 | GEO
Project description:The purpose of comparative effectiveness research (CER) is to improve health outcomes by developing and disseminating evidence-based information about which currently available interventions and practices are most effective for patients. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the hallmark of scientific proof, and have been used to compare interventions used in variable ways by different clinicians (comparative effectiveness RCTs, CER-RCTs). But such CER-RCTs have at times generated controversy. Usually the background for the CER-RCT is a range of "standard therapy" or "standard of care." This may have been adopted on observational data alone, or pilot data. At times, such prior data may derive from populations that differ from the population in which the widely variable standard approach is being applied. We believe that controversies related to these CER-RCTs result from confusing "accepted" therapies and "rigorously evaluated therapies." We first define evidence-based medicine and consider how well neonatology conforms to that definition. We then contrast the approach of testing new therapies and those already existing and widely adopted, as in CER-RCTs. We next examine a central challenge in incorporating the control arm within CER-RCTs and aspects of the "titrated" trial. We finally briefly consider some ethical issues that have arisen, and discuss the wide range of neonatology practices that could be tested by CER-RCTs or alternative CER-based strategies that might inform practice. Throughout, we emphasize the lack of awareness of the lay community, and indeed many researchers or commentators, in appreciating the wide variation of standard of care. There is a corresponding need to identify the best uses of available resources that will lead to the best outcomes for our patients. We conclude that CER-RCTs are an essential methodology in modern neonatology to address many unanswered questions and test unproven therapies in newborn care.
| S-EPMC5222533 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledUnderstanding the genetic basis of human variations in pain is critical to elucidating the molecular basis of pain sensitivity, variable responses to analgesic drugs, and, ultimately, to individualized treatment of pain and improved public health. With the help of recently accumulated knowledge and advanced technologies, pain researchers hope to gain insight into genetic mechanisms of pain and eventually apply this knowledge to pain treatment.PerspectiveWe critically reviewed the published literature to examine the strength of evidence supporting genetic influences on clinical and human experimental pain. Based on this evidence and the experience of false associations that have occurred in other related disciplines, we provide recommendations for avoiding pitfalls in pain genetic research.
| S-EPMC2999357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundElectronic approaches are becoming more widely used to obtain informed consent for research participation. Electronic consent (e-consent) provides an accessible and versatile approach to the consenting process, which can be enhanced with audio-visual and interactive features to improve participant engagement and comprehension of study procedures. Best practice guidance underpinned by ethical principles is required to ensure effective implementation of e-consent for use in research.AimTo identify the key considerations for successful and ethical implementation of e-consent in the recruitment of participants to research projects which are conducted remotely.MethodsElectronic database searches of CINAHL, Medline, Embase, DARE, HTA, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, NHS Evidence, and hand-searches of reference lists were performed. Primary research studies of adult (≥ 18 years old) research participants using e-consent, published in English language, peer-reviewed journals between 2010-2020 were eligible for inclusion.ResultsOf the initial 665 identified studies, 18 met the inclusion criteria: 6 cohort studies, 5 qualitative studies, 4 randomised control trials, 2 mixed-methods studies and one case-control study. Critical appraisal of included studies using Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tools suggested a low to moderate risk of bias in most studies (n = 15). Key practice recommendations for researchers using e-consent were identified around five primary themes: 1) accessibility and user-friendliness of e-consent, 2) user engagement and comprehension, 3) customisability to participant preferences and demographics, 4) data security and 5) impact on research teams.ConclusionE-consenting approaches are generally well received by participants, with most studies reporting user-friendly interfaces and sufficient participant comprehension of consenting documentation.Implications for practiceE-consent may facilitate remotely-conducted research by offering a feasible and robust alternative to face-to-face consenting approaches, however paper-based options should still be offered, based on participant preference. Customising e-consenting platforms may improve accessibility for individuals with specific needs, and increase engagement with study information. Research teams must offer prospective participants opportunities to discuss study information in real-time.
| S-EPMC7487205 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The interpretation of genetic testing results is subject to error. This observational study illustrates examples of pitfalls and challenges in interpretation of genetic testing results as reported by genetics professionals. We surveyed genetics professionals to describe interpretation challenges, the types of variants that were involved, and the reported clinical impact of misconception of a test result. Case studies were then collected from a select group to further explore potential causes of misunderstanding. A total of 83% of survey respondents were aware of at least one instance of genetic test misinterpretation. Both professionals with and without formal training in genetics were challenged by test reports, and variants of unknown significance were most frequently involved. Case submissions revealed that interpretation pitfalls extend beyond variant classification analyses. Inferred challenges in case submissions include lack of genetic counseling, unclear wording of reports, and suboptimal communication among providers. Respondents and case submitters noted that incorrect interpretation can trigger unnecessary follow-up tests and improperly alter clinical management. Further research is needed to validate and quantify large-scale data regarding challenges of genetic results interpretation.
| S-EPMC8489659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The development of mouse genetic tools has made a significant contribution to the understanding of skeletal and hematopoietic stem cell niches in bone marrow (BM). However, many experimental designs (e.g., selections of marker genes, target vector constructions, and choices of reporter murine strains) have unavoidable technological limitations and bias, which lead to experimental discrepancies, data reproducibility issues, and frequent data misinterpretation. Consequently, there are a number of conflicting views relating to fundamental biological questions, including origins and locations of skeletal and hematopoietic stem cells in the BM. In this report, we systematically unravel complicated data interpretations via comprehensive analyses of technological benefits, pitfalls, and challenges in frequently used mouse models and discuss their translational relevance to human stem cell biology. Particularly, we emphasize the important roles of using large human genomic data-informatics in facilitating genetic analyses of mouse models and resolving existing controversies in mouse and human BM stem cell biology.
| S-EPMC5829346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The molecular mechanisms underlying the development of bone metastases in breast cancer remain unclear. Disseminated tumour cells (DTCs) in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients are commonly identified, even in early stage disease, but their potential to initiate metastases is not known. The mechanism whereby DTCs become overt metastatic tumour cells (MTCs) is therefore, an area of considerable interest. This study explored the analysable yield of genetic material from human biopsy samples in order to describe differences in gene expression between DTCs and bone MTCs. Thirteen breast cancer patients with bone metastases underwent a CT-guided bone metastasis biopsy and a bone marrow biopsy. Tumour cells were enriched and gene expression profiling was conducted to identify differentially expressed genes. The analysable yield of sufficient RNA for microarray analysis was 60% from bone metastasis biopsies and 80% from bone marrow biopsies. A signature of 133 candidate genes differentially expressed between DTCs and MTCs was identified. Several genes relevant to breast cancer metastasis to bone (osteopontin, CTGF, parathyroid hormone receptor, EGFR) were significantly overexpressed in MTCs as compared to DTCs. Biopsies of bone metastases and bone marrow rarely yield enough tissue for robust molecular biology studies using clinical samples. The findings obtained however are interesting and seem to overlap with the bone metastasis gene expression signature described in murine xenograft models. Larger biopsy specimens or improved RNA extraction techniques may improve analysable yield and feasibility of these techniques. Gene expression profiling was utilized to compare DTCs obtained from bone marrow aspirates (A) to MTCs isolated from Computed Tomography (C) guided biopsies of bone metastases.
| S-ECPF-GEOD-14776 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeSocial media may be particularly valuable in research in rare genetic diseases because of the low numbers of patients and the rare disease community's robust online presence. The goal of this systematic review was to understand how social media is currently used in rare disease research and the characteristics of the participants in these studies.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of six databases to identify studies published in English between January 2004 and November 2020, of which 120 met inclusion criteria.ResultsMost studies were observational (n = 114, 95.0%) and cross-sectional (n = 107, 89.2%), and more than half (n = 69, 57.5%) utilized only surveys. Only 101 rare diseases were included across all studies. Participant demographics, when reported, were predominantly female (70.1% ± 22.5%) and white (85.0% ± 11.0%) adult patients and caregivers.ConclusionDespite its potential benefits in rare disease research, the use of social media is still methodologically limited and the participants reached may not be representative of the rare disease population by gender, race, age, or rare disease type. As scholars explore using social media for rare disease research, careful attention should be paid to representativeness when studying this diverse patient community.
| S-EPMC8720387 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConsenting for retrospective medical records-based research (MR) and leftover tissue-based research (TR) continues to be controversial. Our objective was to survey Saudis attending outpatient clinics at a tertiary care hospital on their personal preference and perceptions of norm and current practice in relation to consenting for MR and TR.MethodsWe surveyed 528 Saudis attending clinics at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia to explore their preferences and perceptions of norm and current practice. The respondents selected one of 7 options from each of 6 questionnaires.ResultsRespondents' mean (SD) age was 33 (11) years, 42% were males, 56% were patients, 84% had ≥ secondary school education, and 10% had previously volunteered for research. Respectively, 40% and 49% perceived that the norm is to conduct MR and TR without consent and 38% and 37% with general or proposal-specific consent; the rest objected to such research. There was significant difference in the distribution of choices according to health status (patients vs. companions) for MR (adjusted Kruskal-Wallis test P = 0.03) but not to age group, gender, education level, or previous participation in research (unadjusted P = 0.02 - 0.59). The distributions of perceptions of current practice and norm were similar (unadjusted Marginal Homogeneity test P = 0.44 for MR and P = 0.89 for TR), whereas the distributions of preferences and perceptions of norm were different (adjusted P = 0.09 for MR and P = 0.02 for TR). The distributions of perceptions of norm, preferences, and perceptions of current practice for MR were significantly different from those of TR (adjusted P < 0.009 for all).ConclusionsWe conclude that: 1) there is a considerable diversity among Saudi views regarding consenting for retrospective research which may be related to health status, 2) the distribution of perceptions of norm was similar to the distribution of perceptions of current practice but different from that of preferences, and 3) MR and TR are perceived differently in regard to consenting.
| S-EPMC2974743 | biostudies-literature